Downtown Vancouver Updates - Page 680

urbancanadian · #**13581** Posted **May 29, 2016, 7:59 AM**

Yeah pines can look quite nice, as long as they're properly manicured.

The new park along the Rio Manzaneres in Madrid incorporates a lot of pines along the route. Here are some pics of mine (not the best) from April:

urbancanadian · #**13582** Posted **May 29, 2016, 8:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

Renderings from VancouverMarket.ca:

http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2016/05/25/westbank-planning-214-rental-units-for-gastown-site/

Here is the development application page, with two more renderings:

http://development.vancouver.ca/33wcordova/index.htm

In case you can't tell, it's two different tones of brick. Overall I think it looks like it will be a quality, somewhat timeless building. The only spandrel is on the lower floors, which I'd like to see replaced with curtain wall. It's only a few floors, but I think high quality glass should be used to maintain a clean look, and keep eyes focused on the heritage portion.

Also, I really wish they'd keep the facades on both sides of the development, since it's so unique. And like I said earlier, I'm really nervous about the height since the square will be in perpetual darkness, even in the summer.

Also looking forward to what the City has in mind for rejuvinating the square.

urbancanadian · #**13583** Posted **May 30, 2016, 3:47 AM**

Final design for the park at Richards & Smithe: http://former.vancouver.ca/parks/board/2...andRichards-FinalDesignPlan-20160530.pdf

New nighttime view:

mcminsen · #**13584** Posted **May 30, 2016, 5:01 AM**

I was intrigued today when I walked by the Cordovan at 547 East Cordova Street today, just east of Oppenheimer Park in the downtown east side. I couldn't find any posts about it so here are some pics and info.

Cordovan

source: https://www.buzzbuzzhome.com/cordovan

source: http://www.vancouverisawesome.com/2013/10/16/building-blocks-cordovan-at-557-east-cordova-street/

May 29 '16, my pics

Jebby · #**13585** Posted **May 30, 2016, 5:09 AM**

Looks really good.

mcminsen · #**13586** Posted **May 30, 2016, 6:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcminsen

A couple of pics from the back lane behind the Ormidale on Hastings.

May 10 '16, my pics

May 29 '16, my pics

s211 · #**13587** Posted **May 30, 2016, 3:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbancanadian

Final design for the park at Richards & Smithe: http://former.vancouver.ca/parks/board/2...andRichards-FinalDesignPlan-20160530.pdf

ooo ooo ooo look at me!!! I'm a High Line Park wannabee.

Pathetic. Good luck policing that.

SFUVancouver · #**13588** Posted **May 30, 2016, 7:29 PM**

I like it a lot. Fear, uncertainty, and doubt shouldn't stand in the way of experimenting with innovative urban parks. I'm not a fan of Yaletown Park, for example, but I'm glad that they tried something different and when the opportunity comes to make some changes to it, I hope that they tone down the hardscaping and put in a public "porch" (for lack of a better term) with tables that chairs that can be moved around and configured as people choose.

Back to the Richards and Smithe park proposal, I'm not too concerned about nefarious things happening there. There will be a lot of people in the neighbourhood, good sight lines into the interior from multiple angles, lighting, and general CPTED principles on display. The only places that I think might prove problematic are the areas immediately beneath the bridge structure; I think those might attract street people during downpours. But I can accept that uncertainty and think that this will be a great addition to the downtown core and an exciting precedent for doing something different in our public spaces.

mcminsen · #**13589** Posted **May 30, 2016, 8:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbancanadian

Final design for the park at Richards & Smithe: http://former.vancouver.ca/parks/board/2...andRichards-FinalDesignPlan-20160530.pdf

Thanks! What stood out for me was the construction timeline (my bolding below).

***********

"Phase 4 - Board Approvals
Figure 2: Revised Final Design
- 8 of 16 -
Figure 2 below illustrate the modifications made to the final design that reflect community requests to improve safety, aesthetics and social vibrancy.
Since the final open house, the design team have been working closely to finalize the park
design and prepare documents necessary to seek approval from the Park Board. If the final design is approved, the team will move forward to the next phases of the project and resolve the details and technical design with the intention of developing drawings and specifications that will be tendered for construction in early 2017. The aspirational goal is to begin construction by the spring of 2017 and open the park in the fall of 2018.
In order to achieve this goal, the design team will need to rapidly advance the design and coordinate with other initiatives taking place adjacent to the site."

s211 · #**13590** Posted **May 30, 2016, 9:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

I like it a lot. Fear, uncertainty, and doubt shouldn't stand in the way of experimenting with innovative urban parks.

You can go experiment any where you want, but not with my tax money. There's enough tax money wasted on follies and fantasies already.

quobobo · #**13591** Posted **May 30, 2016, 9:24 PM**

I was on the fence about the park, but I enthusiastically support anything that makes people who say "not with my tax money" angry.

Jebby · #**13592** Posted **May 30, 2016, 9:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by quobobo

I was on the fence about the park, but I enthusiastically support anything that makes people who say "not with my tax money" angry.

What an asinine comment.

trofirhen · #**13593** Posted **May 30, 2016, 9:59 PM**

For some reason it makes me think of a day-care centre.

VancouverOfTheFuture · #**13594** Posted **May 31, 2016, 2:13 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by quobobo

I was on the fence about the park, but I enthusiastically support anything that makes people who say "not with my tax money" angry.

why? because we should let politicians use tax dollars as they see fit with no oversight or a questioning mind?

i just hope that there is TONS of LED lighting under those bridges/paths/high-line. if the city uses LED's for that, it would keep away the bums from camping. the LED lights seem to really keep the area cleaner then the yellow/orange ones.

WarrenC12 · #**13595** Posted **May 31, 2016, 3:03 AM**

I like the concept. I think you can easily make the spaces below the bridge "unwelcome" during rain by making them porous.

retro_orange · #**13596** Posted **May 31, 2016, 4:42 AM**

deleted

retro_orange · #**13597** Posted **May 31, 2016, 4:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I like the concept. I think you can easily make the spaces below the bridge "unwelcome" during rain by making them porous.

I think it looks pretty cool, like a 1980's club

but it does look like it will be high maintenance over the years keeping the light systems functional, everything painted, clean and tidy. Could go downhill easily if not kept up to a high standard. I could totally see Jem and the Holograms having a concert here.

pic from post: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=7457035&postcount=13583

mcminsen · #**13598** Posted **May 31, 2016, 6:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcminsen

Thanks! What stood out for me was the construction timeline (my bolding below).

***********

"Phase 4 - Board Approvals
Figure 2: Revised Final Design
- 8 of 16 -
Figure 2 below illustrate the modifications made to the final design that reflect community requests to improve safety, aesthetics and social vibrancy.
Since the final open house, the design team have been working closely to finalize the park
design and prepare documents necessary to seek approval from the Park Board. If the final design is approved, the team will move forward to the next phases of the project and resolve the details and technical design with the intention of developing drawings and specifications that will be tendered for construction in early 2017. The aspirational goal is to begin construction by the spring of 2017 and open the park in the fall of 2018.
In order to achieve this goal, the design team will need to rapidly advance the design and coordinate with other initiatives taking place adjacent to the site."

I live about a two minute walk away. I'm going to guess that it will be closer to three more years before I can go over and enjoy the new park.

May 30 '16, my pic

s211 · #**13599** Posted **May 31, 2016, 3:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcminsen

I live about a two minute walk away. I'm going to guess that it will be closer to three more years before I can go over and enjoy the new park.

Yup. If you read closely, the quote says their timeline is an "aspirational goal", i.e. that gives them cart blanche to miss deadlines.

mcminsen · #**13600** Posted **Jun 2, 2016, 4:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rocketeer

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcminsen

From Change.org (my bolding):

New motion before council regarding Burrard Bridge fencing

"Re-examination of Fencing on the Burrard Bridge  

MOVER: Councillor Affleck 

SECONDER: Councillor Ball   

WHEREAS...

...THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT Vancouver City Council direct staff to re-examine the plan to add fencing to the Burrard Bridge as part of the Burrard Bridge Upgrades and North Intersection Improvements project, including a re-examination of design options that would be less visually intrusive and destructive to the heritage aesthetics of the bridge and to views from the bridge, as well as a re-examination of the effectiveness of fencing as a suicide prevention measure within the broader context of suicide prevention and mental health strategies."

PETITION UPDATE
Vision rejects motion to discuss barriers
The VanPoli Group

"JUN 1, 2016 — Councillor George Affleck's motion to discuss the barriers was rejected by the Vision dominated council on the basis that the motion was invalid because Councillor Affleck had previously voted against the barriers and so a new motion about the same barriers could not be heard… "