[Burnaby] Gilmore Place | 214.8m | 64fl | Phase 1 Completed

[logan5]

You have strange definition of urban. Queen Street and St. Denis are not urban either according to you. I guess there’s really no point trying to convince you.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by logan5

Is this the tallest confirmed in Metro so far? Just realized we've broken the 700' barrier!

I saw that too!

215.8m = 701.35ft

Nice.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I saw that too!

215.8m = 701.35ft

Nice.

Pretty sure it is 214.8 m (705 ft)

[officedweller]

Just quoting the Vancouver Sun @ 215.8m.

[Migrant_Coconut]

It's an odd location - Gilmore's known for heavy flooding.

[GilmoreStation]

it's a prime site connected to a skytrain station

[TheTerminalCity]

Originally Posted by Vin

Mt Pleasant only seems urban because of a century of build-up and proximity to downtown Vancouver. But it is heading in a very slow direction towards being more urban. Most of the buildings along Main and Kingsway are still wood-shacks. City policies and nimbiyism are also not helping in enticing developers to come in droves to build around here. In fact, many of the newer buildings are not at all impressive, and can be described as suburban. Small commercial buildings line the streets with suburban SFHs sitting right behind them. This is kinda sad as the area has so much potential being so close to downtown Vancouver but there had been many wasted opportunities.

By contrast, Mt Pleasant grew by over 24% between the last two censuses (26k-->33k people). "But that's just Olympic Village!" A lot probably is...and all the new buildings going up near Kingsway and Broadway behind those "wood shacks". Evan, Wohlsein, Shine, Midtown Central, Duke, Citti, Ellsworth completed in recent years, the Independent slowly making its way, the Catalyst social housing, Elenore, 2nd/Main, Bravo, Grand, Midtown Fraser, Midtown Modern all under construction. Three more applications down the hill between 7th and 2nd. New Hootsuite HQ broke ground and all the small office buildings on the slopes.

Do I think the Mt. Pleasant Plan could've been more ambitious? Sure. But just because its not malls and towers doesn't mean its not 'urban'.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by GilmoreStation

it's a prime site connected to a skytrain station

So are Renfrew, Brentwood and Holdom.

[e-clam9]

Originally Posted by Vin

Metrotown and Brentwood, as well as Coquitlam centre and Surrey Town Centre, are starting to develop cross streets of retail, commercial and residential buildings to create a more downtown-like node.

I can only agreed with Metrotown and Surrey Central downtown. Brentwood and Coquitlam center still have a some way to catch up with the first two. IMHO.

[Geof]

Originally Posted by TheTerminalCity

just because its not malls and towers doesn't mean its not 'urban'.

I would go further: a place only being malls and towers prevents it being urban. Jane Jacobs argued that buildings of different types and ages were important for vibrant city life. If all the buildings are new and master-planned, then they are only suitable for a narrow subset of uses. That's why we get so many nail salons, dentists, and chain restaurants in new development, but rarely the quirky little businesses that don't make a ton of money but add charm and interest.

This is why it takes time - rather a lot of it - for a neighbourhood to really develop urban character. I live in Brentwood, so I wish it were otherwise. I take solace in the fact that the area is experiencing scatter-shot development, with older buildings cheek-by-jowl with new master plans, and some key spots not yet redeveloped (Carter GM), so that in the long run hopefully there will be variety in ages and types.

[squeezied]

Originally Posted by TheTerminalCity

But just because its not malls and towers doesn't mean its not 'urban'.

Vin logic... malls and tall towers = urban and good. Everything else is calamity.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by squeezied

Vin logic... malls and tall towers = urban and good. Everything else is calamity.

squeezied logic...malls and tall towers = calamity

[Vin]

Originally Posted by TheTerminalCity

By contrast, Mt Pleasant grew by over 24% between the last two censuses (26k-->33k people). "But that's just Olympic Village!" A lot probably is...and all the new buildings going up near Kingsway and Broadway behind those "wood shacks". Evan, Wohlsein, Shine, Midtown Central, Duke, Citti, Ellsworth completed in recent years, the Independent slowly making its way, the Catalyst social housing, Elenore, 2nd/Main, Bravo, Grand, Midtown Fraser, Midtown Modern all under construction. Three more applications down the hill between 7th and 2nd. New Hootsuite HQ broke ground and all the small office buildings on the slopes.

Do I think the Mt. Pleasant Plan could've been more ambitious? Sure. But just because its not malls and towers doesn't mean its not 'urban'.

Don't disagree with you, and I never said Mt Pleasant isn't urban. The last 10 years had been fairly good as we are seeing quite a few mid-density type housing coming into the Mt Pleasant neighbourhood, but I also don't disagree with you that this area could have done much much more, and that's what I was alluding to. Mind you that for its geography, Mt Pleasant should've developed way more than any of the suburb neighbourhoods, but it certainly hasn't.

As for what you say regarding malls and towers not being urban. Sure, but you can't expect the suburbs to build wood shacks do you? It's just that malls and towers are able to allow high density residences, commercial/retail spaces to come onto a relatively small lot really quickly, and it is economical for developers to do so.

DTES is also very urban, but nothing has changed much in this urban decay, and it won't change much for decades to come. Same applies for other Vancouver neighbourhoods if the same old formula is applied to how we see development in this city.

Originally Posted by Geof

I would go further: a place only being malls and towers prevents it being urban. Jane Jacobs argued that buildings of different types and ages were important for vibrant city life. If all the buildings are new and master-planned, then they are only suitable for a narrow subset of uses. That's why we get so many nail salons, dentists, and chain restaurants in new development, but rarely the quirky little businesses that don't make a ton of money but add charm and interest.

This is why it takes time - rather a lot of it - for a neighbourhood to really develop urban character. I live in Brentwood, so I wish it were otherwise. I take solace in the fact that the area is experiencing scatter-shot development, with older buildings cheek-by-jowl with new master plans, and some key spots not yet redeveloped (Carter GM), so that in the long run hopefully there will be variety in ages and types.

You have to start somewhere right? In time Gilmore buildings will get older, and more various forms will be built in and around it, creating that urban fabric. Like I've said many times, it's the direction the city is going that impresses me, and not necessarily what it is now. And now Brentwood area will get the tallest skyscraper in BC! That's gotta count for something.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Just quoting the Vancouver Sun @ 215.8m.

Oh I wasn’t insinuating anything against you.

But that is some lazy reporting given that 215.8 m = 708 ft.

Not 701 ft.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Geof

I would go further: a place only being malls and towers prevents it being urban. Jane Jacobs argued that buildings of different types and ages were important for vibrant city life. If all the buildings are new and master-planned, then they are only suitable for a narrow subset of uses. That's why we get so many nail salons, dentists, and chain restaurants in new development, but rarely the quirky little businesses that don't make a ton of money but add charm and interest.

This is why it takes time - rather a lot of it - for a neighbourhood to really develop urban character. I live in Brentwood, so I wish it were otherwise. I take solace in the fact that the area is experiencing scatter-shot development, with older buildings cheek-by-jowl with new master plans, and some key spots not yet redeveloped (Carter GM), so that in the long run hopefully there will be variety in ages and types.

Agreed, I've been there a couple times.

Ditto Marine Gateway. Four blocks of empty modern highrises.... surrounded by suburbs, car dealerships and industrial filler. Both it and Brentwood are practically lifeless; I have every confidence that they'll grow into proper town centres, but it'll take some time. It's definitely not as simple as dropping towers into an area and going "ta-da, urbanism!!"

[vanman]

Marine Gateway is empty now? You guys are on glue.

You should see how packed the residential elevators get sometimes, especially when one goes down for maintenance.

As for Northwest across the street, the majority of balconies that I can see have — on their balconies, a pretty good indicator of occuppied units.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by vanman

Marine Gateway is empty now? You guys are on glue.

You should see how packed the residential elevators get sometimes, especially when one goes down for maintenance.

As for Northwest across the street, the majority of balconies that I can see have — on their balconies, a pretty good indicator of occuppied units.

Some of these guys would rather that these newer neighbourhoods with skyscrapers and malls be reverted back to mouldy walk-ups, wood shacks and industrial warehouses.

Marine Gateway is one of very few examples of how we successfully densify a former no-go-zone. However, I think OCP is restricting its growth: highrise development and retail/commercial buildings should be allowed beyond the intersection to go several blocks in all directions. Problem with our planners is that they think small.

[vanman]

Originally Posted by Vin

Some of these guys would rather that these newer neighbourhoods with skyscrapers and malls be reverted back to mouldy walk-ups, wood shacks and industrial warehouses.

Marine Gateway is one of very few examples of how we successfully densify a former no-go-zone. However, I think OCP is restricting its growth: highrise development and retail/commercial buildings should be allowed beyond the intersection to go several blocks in all directions. Problem with our planners is that they think small.

I've lived at Marine Gateway since before any of the retail opened and before many of the residents moved in. I know what it was like when it was actually dead. It's been fascinating to watch everything come to life over the years.

There are some things I would change at MG if I could. Mainly including visitor parking and a pick up and drop off zone for residents (port cochere). Overall though I agree that it has been largely successful. Because of the seemless transit integration wave after wave of pedestrians flow through the retail spine all day long. It's not as busy as Metrotown but it certainly is not dead most of the day.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by vanman

I've lived at Marine Gateway since before any of the retail opened and before many of the residents moved in. I know what it was like when it was actually dead. It's been fascinating to watch everything come to life over the years.

There are some things I would change at MG if I could. Mainly including visitor parking and a pick up and drop off zone for residents (port cochere). Overall though I agree that it has been largely successful. Because of the seemless transit integration wave after wave of pedestrians flow through the retail spine all day long. It's not as busy as Metrotown but it certainly is not dead most of the day.

Well that's my point. Some people are acting like Marine, Brentwood etc ARE as busy as Metrotown. I believe you when you say most homes are occupied, but commercially those areas are just not "there" yet. Sorry if you felt like I was attacking your 'hood.

Maybe it was the wrong time of day for me? Went to see a movie on a Tuesday a few months ago, early evening; A&W and T&T were busy, but most other stores and the streetfront itself had around a dozen or so people total - same as the last time I went for a movie in 2016. Definitely better than it was during the Olympics, but IMO not by much.

[SpongeG]

it's for residents mainly, its not a destination, the movie theatre will be one and most people go in the evening when it's going to be/appear dead.

It's busier during the daytime.