General Vancouver Updates - Page 260

NewWester · #**5181** Posted **Feb 17, 2016, 11:44 PM**

It's also, like, the city's main hospital where scale and integrated services within a single building improves function/health outcomes. Size here is more than aesthetics or maximizing density. Therefore, it's a special case that I don't think translates to like condos or general office space. Suggesting that it's reflective of normal development would be like asking why there aren't condos on the waterfront in the port.

officedweller · #**5182** Posted **Feb 17, 2016, 11:49 PM**

Article from todays Sun on the Denny's sale and other Broadway properties.

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/com...dway/11723866/story.html?__lsa=11aa-c75b

Apparently Yuan Heng paid "only" $300 per sq ft for the Mercedes Benz site.

jlousa · #**5183** Posted **Feb 18, 2016, 12:03 AM**

*l* FYI, the FSR on the JP Pavillion is lower then the BlueSky project going up at Broadway and Oak. Just to point out again that height does not equal density

logan5 · #**5184** Posted **Feb 18, 2016, 12:15 AM**

Are you saying there's no correlation between height and FSR?

Vin · #**5185** Posted **Feb 18, 2016, 12:18 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jebby

Isn't it owned by the Province (though one of it's agencies)? If so, it wouldn't have to pass city zoning laws such as is the case at BC Place. Or am I completely wrong...?

Not sure about that. But awesome that it is built to this height, allowing more wards to go into the hospital, and being the most prominent structure on the south shore. The higher hospital rooms also come with nice views of the city and mountains.

Vin · #**5186** Posted **Feb 18, 2016, 12:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

*l* FYI, the FSR on the JP Pavillion is lower then the BlueSky project going up at Broadway and Oak. Just to point out again that height does not equal density

JP Pavillion buildable site was probably a large one, and the tower only occupies a small part of the site. The FSR tends to appear lower.

However, for the Denny's lot, a short tower will definitely have a lower FSR than a much taller one as the lot would definitely be completely built on (it isn't a large site). Similarly, the Bluesky building structure completely occupies the entire lot, and will definitely have a higher FSR if it reaches the height of the JP Pavillion tower.

Height does equal density if the same conditions apply.

officedweller · #**5187** Posted **Feb 18, 2016, 12:41 AM**

Municipalities derive their powers from the Province, so the Province is not bound by municipal laws (however, it usually complies, cooperates or participates in some respect) (i.e. zoning process for casino at BC Place , Convention Centre expansion or agreeing to mitigation measures for the big video screen at Terry Fox Plaza.)

But on the other hand, there's construction of SkyTrain in the alley parallel to Commercial Drive in the 1980s without City approval and expansion of Hwy 1 through Burnaby without Burnaby's approval or cooperation.

Jebby · #**5188** Posted **Feb 18, 2016, 3:47 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

Municipalities derive their powers from the Province, so the Province is not bound by municipal laws (however, it usually complies, cooperates or participates in some respect) (i.e. zoning process for casino at BC Place , Convention Centre expansion or agreeing to mitigation measures for the big video screen at Terry Fox Plaza.)

But on the other hand, there's construction of SkyTrain in the alley parallel to Commercial Drive in the 1980s without City approval and expansion of Hwy 1 through Burnaby without Burnaby's approval or cooperation.

What I'm curious, are any provincial entities/entities legally required by provincial law to follow city zoning regulations?

officedweller · #**5189** Posted **Feb 18, 2016, 4:18 AM**

I think it's a bit of a gray area.

Even for Robson Square, PavCo is going through the City's zoning processes for the north plaza and the UBC canopies.
But I highly doubt that PavCo sought City approval for the BC Place renovation (i.e. they did not for the Terry Fox Plaza video screen, and I highly doubt the City would have approved of the Northern Lights Display).

There also aren't many purpose-built Provincial buildings built these days - government just tends to lease space from other landlords.

officedweller · #**5190** Posted **Feb 18, 2016, 11:49 PM**

630 East Broadway
@ Carolina

http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2016/02/18/50-unit-building-planned-for-mount-pleasant/

DP Info here:

http://former.vancouver.ca/commsvcs/developmentservices/devapps/pc630ebroadway/index.htm

http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2016/02/18/50-unit-building-planned-for-mount-pleasant/

*********

Burrard & West 3rd Site Sells in $15MM Deal

Strip mall on Burrard with the Starbucks has been sold.

http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2016/02/18/burrard-west-3rd-site-sells-in-15mm-deal/

jollyburger · #**5191** Posted **Feb 19, 2016, 10:16 PM**

Someone already post this?

Quote:

The Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations, which already co-own a chunk of former federal lands in West Point Grey – the Jericho lands – are hoping to expand their holdings by adding adjoining provincial land.

The B.C. government has received a letter of intent from the three First Nations to buy 38.8 acres of provincial Crown land next to the existing federal Jericho lands.

https://www.biv.com/article/2016/2/three-lm-first-nations-make-offer-provincial-jeric/

officedweller · #**5192** Posted **Feb 19, 2016, 11:52 PM**

Thanks - I don't think anyone has posted it.

The game changer for that site is if it gets a station on the Broadway subway.

********

The GBL designed project at King Edward & Kingsway may look pretty good - it'll be clad in dark gray brick - pics at GBL twitter:

https://twitter.com/GBLArchitects

officedweller · #**5193** Posted **Feb 20, 2016, 12:12 AM**

More Canvas pics from GBL twitter:

Feb 18, 2016

https://twitter.com/GBLArchitects

vanman · #**5194** Posted **Feb 20, 2016, 2:10 AM**

Thanks for all the GBL updates OD.

Broadway certainly has a fascination with spiralling rooftop stairs.

squeezied · #**5195** Posted **Feb 20, 2016, 2:21 AM**

Not a fan of the random bright coloured panels. It just looks really cheap and tacky to me. Reminds me of the 'groovy' stuff in the '70s that haven't exactly aged too well.

hollywoodnorth · #**5196** Posted **Feb 21, 2016, 8:39 AM**

Café Politics: East Vancouver's historic Cedar Cove port district undergoing change

A final report by a citizen's assembly has recommended residential towers of up to 20 storeys in Cedar Cove on the north side of Hastings at Clark.

http://www.metronews.ca/features/vancouv...ove-port-district-undergoing-change.html

officedweller · #**5197** Posted **Feb 21, 2016, 11:47 AM**

Hmm - precursor to a Hastings SkyTrain line?

jlousa · #**5198** Posted **Feb 21, 2016, 6:19 PM**

Feel this is another mistake by the City. In that area they should've let north of Hastings a industrial. We will now see yet another chuck of job creation land slowly disappear. Should've limited residential to south o Hastings.

logan5 · #**5199** Posted **Feb 21, 2016, 6:50 PM**

Quote:

The city wants to retain the affordable housing apartment blocks in Cedar Cove, Pask says, as well as retain heritage buildings, if possible. But Pask says: “The industrial land will stay used as industrial – that's not being changed.”

So how much development are they contemplating here? The area is all industrial, with a some affordable apartments. That doesn't leave much room for new development.

jollyburger · #**5200** Posted **Feb 21, 2016, 10:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

Feel this is another mistake by the City. In that area they should've let north of Hastings a industrial. We will now see yet another chuck of job creation land slowly disappear. Should've limited residential to south o Hastings.

Even if they don't takeover large swaths of land it will make an immediate impact on industrial land prices jumping up like around Mount Pleasant when they opened the doors to more office "industrial".