Marine Drive Gateway | 102.1m, 77.7m, 63.4m | 35flr, 26flr, 14flr | Completed - Page 52

vanman · #**1021** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 8:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

Nice view, vanman!

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Congratulations on the new home, Vanman. Thanks for the photos, too.

Thanks guys!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jebby

Have they removed that temporary roof they built over the station? If not, it might be a good idea to keep it and glass it over completely to insulate the sound from the station.

The temporary roof is still there. That probably wouldn't be a bad idea.

vanman · #**1022** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 8:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hollywoodnorth

T&T opened today at MDG

And it was a madhouse. Was hard to move especially around the fresh produce area and deli.

I can already foresee the underground parking getting congested at peak times. I really wish there was a separate private parking entrance/exit and set of ramps for residents instead of having to share everything.

whatnext · #**1023** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 8:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jebby

What an absurd comment. In most of the world's urban areas (especially in Europe, Asia, and Latin America) apartment living is the norm.

It's not absurd, that's been the North American dream for some time now. Up until recently we've been able to offer it here. Unfortunately we've let things get off kilter here and that avenue is not open to many people.

Again I refer to my expereince looking at condos this summer - I can't tell you how many two bedrooms I looked at were young families basically giving up on trying to raise a family in a Vancouver condo. With one child they could sort of make it work, with two most were just throwing in the towel and moving to the 'burbs. Three bed condos sound nice, but again they're just too expensive now. And then we have our beloved Vision Vancouver permitting the destruction fo family sized rentals like Marine Gardens in favour of yet another highrise like W1.

Marshal · #**1024** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 9:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

The "norm" Jebby doesn't make such a statement by itself "absurd". Increasing (housing) density (and limiting access to private social spaces) does and can have a "dark side" socially in terms of promoting public health (mental and physical) concerns.

Many scholarly research papers have argued that the (negative) social impacts of high density housing are inconclusive. They however all acknowledge that high density/hish rise housing TENDS to limit easy access to the outdoor receational spaces needed by the young and old for physical health related recreational exercise alongside the interpersonal/mental health benefits of the easier social interaction opportunities that the potentially friendlier environment of lower density housing TENDS to offer.

I think you need to supply some references for that. I would guess that it varies quite a bit depending on the culture, quality of the housing itself, and the nature of the particular locale.

Caliplanner1 · #**1025** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 10:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marshal

I think you need to supply some references for that. I would guess that it varies quite a bit depending on the culture, quality of the housing itself, and the nature of the particular locale.

Marshal, we are both academics/scholars from tertiary settings. I didn't really want to bore this forum with related scholarly website sources. Which statement exactly would you like verifying reference for......is it the one asserting that easier access to open spaces for recreation (within highly dense first world urban societies) can be a health benefit for those in need of exercise? Think obesity here as a generalized example........

http://www.rph.org.nz/content/d893f45e-9d35-4906-bde7-c4912036c97e.cmr

Check pages 11 and 12 of the above local government document.

Vin · #**1026** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 11:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

It's not absurd, that's been the North American dream for some time now. Up until recently we've been able to offer it here. Unfortunately we've let things get off kilter here and that avenue is not open to many people.

Again I refer to my expereince looking at condos this summer - I can't tell you how many two bedrooms I looked at were young families basically giving up on trying to raise a family in a Vancouver condo. With one child they could sort of make it work, with two most were just throwing in the towel and moving to the 'burbs. Three bed condos sound nice, but again they're just too expensive now. And then we have our beloved Vision Vancouver permitting the destruction fo family sized rentals like Marine Gardens in favour of yet another highrise like W1.

North American dream? You mean urban sprawl? Sure, build the city all the way to Hope. Better still, pull down some hills and mountains and build all over the place, complete with strip malls, drive-thrus and huge open parking lots. After that, you can take in the severe traffic congestions and L.A.-style smog. That's the American dream for you, and it's the reality.

Having more higher density 3-bedroom condo/rental units can be done, but the Cities do need to have a hand in this for it to be achieved. The current stock of low density "cheap" housing (basically modern-day slums) is just isn't enough to accommodate the population we have in the Lower Mainland. New structures need to replace them.

Caliplanner1 · #**1027** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 11:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vin

North American dream? You mean urban sprawl? Sure, build the city all the way to Hope. Better still, pull down some hills and mountains and build all over the place, complete with strip malls, drive-thrus and huge open parking lots. After that, you can take in the severe traffic congestions and L.A.-style smog. That's the American dream for you, and it's the reality.

Having more higher density 3-bedroom condo/rental units can be done, but the Cities do need to have a hand in this for it to be achieved. The current stock of low density "cheap" housing (basically modern-day slums) is just isn't enough to accommodate the population we have in the Lower Mainland. New structures need to replace them.

Town houses and/or lower condo buildings with lots of green spacing around them for recreation use could help......if the developer greed factor can be contained.

Klazu · #**1028** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 11:32 PM**

In Helsinki the city was for a long time mandating developers to build a certain percentage of 3-bedroom units with a minimum square footage. The number were pretty high and it led to an overstock of units that people cannot afford (as the city is very un-affordable due to lack of units being built), but that's still a positive problem to have.

I think developers should be forced to build more 1500 sqft 3-bedroom units, as that is what a family really needs. These 800 sqft 2-bedroom units are useless for families (and most other people).

red-paladin · #**1029** Posted **Dec 19, 2015, 7:10 AM**

Let's get back to the topic of the thread please.

Marshal · #**1030** Posted **Dec 19, 2015, 8:25 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

Marshal, we are both academics/scholars from tertiary settings. I didn't really want to bore this forum with related scholarly website sources. Which statement exactly would you like verifying reference for......is it the one asserting that easier access to open spaces for recreation (within highly dense first world urban societies) can be a health benefit for those in need of exercise? Think obesity here as a generalized example........

Sorry red-paladin, but:
"we are both academics/scholars from tertiary settings"
We are both what? from What?

Caliplanner1 · #**1031** Posted **Dec 19, 2015, 4:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marshal

Sorry red-paladin, but:
"we are both academics/scholars from tertiary settings"
We are both what? from What?

TourOdeon · #**1032** Posted **Dec 19, 2015, 8:51 PM**

How much was the starting price for this project during pre-sale? The cheapest 465sqft studio is listed for $379,000! Yikes!

The strata fee is also very high at $0.48/sqft... What kind of amenities does it come with?

mcminsen · #**1033** Posted **Dec 19, 2015, 9:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TourOdeon

How much was the starting price for this project during pre-sale? The cheapest 465sqft studio is listed for $379,000! Yikes!

The strata fee is also very high at $0.48/sqft... What kind of amenities does it come with?

For comparison, my strata fees in a 15 year old downtown building are almost exactly the same rate ($0.48/sqft). We have a few amenities (but not a pool) and a healthy contingency fund. I wonder if the new strata is required to start building up a contingency fund. Maybe that's why the fees seem high.

TourOdeon · #**1034** Posted **Dec 19, 2015, 11:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcminsen

For comparison, my strata fees in a 15 year old downtown building are almost exactly the same rate ($0.48/sqft). We have a few amenities (but not a pool) and a healthy contingency fund. I wonder if the new strata is required to start building up a contingency fund. Maybe that's why the fees seem high.

According to Mike Stewart's website, the starting price was $262,000 back in 2011. I also found out that all 46 rental units have been leased out successfully through a single auction event.

SFUVancouver · #**1035** Posted **Dec 20, 2015, 11:14 PM**

CityDweller and I did a site visit today; photos to follow soon-ish. The commercial "high street" looks great. Definitely think that this one is going to be a real winner.

trofirhen · #**1036** Posted **Dec 21, 2015, 12:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

CityDweller and I did a site visit today; photos to follow soon-ish. The commercial "high street" looks great. Definitely think that this one is going to be a real winner.

Any pictures?

Klazu · #**1037** Posted **Dec 21, 2015, 4:14 AM**

He said "photos to follow soon-ish"....

trofirhen · #**1038** Posted **Dec 21, 2015, 5:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Klazu

He said "photos to follow soonish"....

ooops, yes; Excuse me, please. I look forward to seeing them. Thank you.

Vin · #**1039** Posted **Dec 21, 2015, 6:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

CityDweller and I did a site visit today; photos to follow soon-ish. The commercial "high street" looks great. Definitely think that this one is going to be a real winner.

That "high street" concept and this development would work very very well at Main Street station. I hope they have something like this in the works there. I really like this concept of development in Marine Drive/Cambie neighbourhood, but I sure hope the City isn't allowing this project here only because it wants tourists/visitors riding the skytrain from the airport to have a better impression of the city after crossing the bridge.

vanman · #**1040** Posted **Dec 22, 2015, 10:32 PM**

Vancitybuzz did a write up about the T&T opening with a few pics.
http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2015/12/tt-supermarket-opens-at-marine-gateway-in-south-vancouver/