Downtown Vancouver Updates

[jlousa]

In theory yes as you need a demo permit to knock down the structure and they could refuse to issue it.

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by jlousa

In theory yes as you need a demo permit to knock down the structure and they could refuse to issue it.

Right although if demoing the tower doesn't break any laws/bylaws etc the city can't just refuse to issue a demo permit. or could they? And if so could the owner not take them to court?

I certainly don't know anything about the legalities. I was just wondering

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

Right although if demoing the tower doesn't break any laws/bylaws etc the city can't just refuse to issue a demo permit. or could they? And if so could the owner not take them to court?

I certainly don't know anything about the legalities. I was just wondering

I'm sure they could be fined by the city, but if they start demolition there probably isn't anything more the City can do. They would just have to damage the building enough to make it structurally unsafe, which is not hard to do.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Graham_Yvr

Nothing has been decided yet. It hasn't even been in front of city council. Stop crying before you're hurt! This city has a real issue with the environmental impact of demolition. Where's all that concrete going to go??? Don't count on this going through.

We see things come across here all the time, and very rarely does one move forward in the same form as presented. In fact only Vancouver House comes to mind.

I may be wrong, but it's far too early to call this a done deal.

This isn't the 1970s when the tower was built. Everything that can be recycled will be recycled and that's almost 100% of the concrete and steel.

[WarrenC12]

My prediction:

Vision allows the demo: people complain.
Vision doesn't allow the demo: people complain.

[Graham_Yvr]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

This isn't the 1970s when the tower was built. Everything that can be recycled will be recycled and that's almost 100% of the concrete and steel.

Whipper, this city's council doesn't see it that way. Take the Central Post Office for example. They insisted on multiple towers being build on top of the existing concrete bunker type building to avoid all the concrete/rebar/junk going......anywhere. By the way, I'm aware it's 2016.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

My prediction:

Vision allows the demo: people complain.
Vision doesn't allow the demo: people complain.

You make it sound way too simplistic.

I've never seen people complaining about Vision not allowing a demo if they're justified to do so. If they do allow the demo of the Empire Landmark hotel and then insist that the developer replace it with something tall and iconic, I'm sure no one will complain.

[Bcasey25raptor]

Originally Posted by Vin

Vancouver's not even in the top-10 list. Why I'm not at all surprised by this.....

http://www.metropolismag.com/September-2...ndex.php?&cparticle=2&siarticle=1#Berlin

Portland Oregon in the top 10 but Vancouver isn't?

What garbage.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Bcasey25raptor

Portland Oregon in the top 10 but Vancouver isn't?

What garbage.

Who knows, perhaps they weigh a lot on stuff like homelessness, number of zombie-like people on the streets, and, like you so eloquently put, amount of garbage visible to the eye.

[Denscity]

Originally Posted by Vin

Who knows, perhaps they weigh a lot on stuff like homelessness, number of zombie-like people on the streets, and, like you so eloquently put, amount of garbage visible to the eye.

Haha sounds like Portland.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Denscity

Haha sounds like Portland.

I don't know, Portland's homelessness seems more spread out: doesn't feel as concentrated as what's happening in Vancouver. In East Hastings, and now many parts of downtown's Granville Street, even many folks who do have subsidized shelters are also frequently high on something and look like zombies. An epidemic unique only to this part of the world. It's very shameful.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

If a property owner wants to demolish a structure on their property can the city legally stop them?, outside of heritage, issue etc.

Well I guess not giving them permission to build something new would be one method?

[trofirhen]

I wouldn't mind seeing something like the Los Angeles Bonaventure on that site, provided ther is space enough:


http://www.romanticbug.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/The-Westine-Bonaventure-Hotel-LA.jpg

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by Vin

I don't know, Portland's homelessness seems more spread out: doesn't feel as concentrated as what's happening in Vancouver. In East Hastings, and now many parts of downtown's Granville Street, even many folks who do have subsidized shelters are also frequently high on something and look like zombies. An epidemic unique only to this part of the world. It's very shameful.

Yes. Honestly I'm disgusted at how irresponsible our government is at addressing the social issues at the heart of the addiction/homelessness problem. Giving people a home only gives them a warm place to continue their concurrent disorders but does not address the real societal and mental health issues.

[Bankview]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

Yes. Honestly I'm disgusted at how irresponsible our government is at addressing the social issues at the heart of the addiction/homelessness problem. Giving people a home only gives them a warm place to continue their concurrent disorders but does not address the real societal and mental health issues.

Do you propose we treat their concurrent disorders by leaving them in shelters and on the street? Housing is the key to treatment, or at the very least, the key to stability. Stability provides a floor that an individual can be reached from and hopefully, eventually, brought to a place where they can grapple with their conditions.

I say this as a person who has struggled with my own serious concurrent mental health and addiction issues. I've also been homeless and have received invaluable support from the overburdened and underfunded social infrastructure apparatus that exists in this city and owe my life to the work they did - and continue to do.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by Bankview

Do you propose we treat their concurrent disorders by leaving them in shelters and on the street? Housing is the key to treatment, or at the very least, the key to stability. Stability provides a floor that an individual can be reached from and hopefully, eventually, brought to a place where they can grapple with their conditions.

I say this as a person who has struggled with my own serious concurrent mental health and addiction issues. I've also been homeless and have received invaluable support from the overburdened and underfunded social infrastructure apparatus that exists in this city and owe my life to the work they did - and continue to do.

What we need are proper inpatient facilities that have the funds to keep people until they are healthy, building what are basically apartment buildings with an office that sooner or later becomes SEVERELY UNDERFUNDED with only a SKELETON CREW of staff will only continue these problems. There are more homeless in Vancouver than ever before yet we have more housing for them than ever before. We need to take mental health issues for the whole thing, not just an extension of our housing boom.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Bankview

Do you propose we treat their concurrent disorders by leaving them in shelters and on the street? Housing is the key to treatment, or at the very least, the key to stability. Stability provides a floor that an individual can be reached from and hopefully, eventually, brought to a place where they can grapple with their conditions.

I say this as a person who has struggled with my own serious concurrent mental health and addiction issues. I've also been homeless and have received invaluable support from the overburdened and underfunded social infrastructure apparatus that exists in this city and owe my life to the work they did - and continue to do.

He never said that they should be left in shelters and on the street. I think retro_orange is asking for more resources devoted to those issues, not less.

[red-paladin]

A render of the 1345 Davie Street project, from: https://changingcitybook.com/2016/09/27/1345-davie-street/

[connect2source]

Nice massing and scale for Davie and Broughton, should complement The Jervis nicely and the two buildings being replaced are non-descriptive for the most part.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

Yes. Honestly I'm disgusted at how irresponsible our government is at addressing the social issues at the heart of the addiction/homelessness problem. Giving people a home only gives them a warm place to continue their concurrent disorders but does not address the real societal and mental health issues.

If you're so disgusted about the government's inaction, what are you, personally, doing about the issue? Don't wait for others to take care of the poor, the homeless, and the ill.


Edit: Don't take this personally, I'm not trying to attack you. I just think it's something that people need to think about in general.