Downtown Vancouver Updates - Page 1010

uzi · #**20181** Posted **Dec 9, 2021, 3:57 PM**

Del.

Changing City · #**20182** Posted **Dec 11, 2021, 5:46 AM**

There's a big gap on Granville Street as Bonnis demolish all the buildings that they developed on the 900 block in the 2000s. Whether that means we'll see their development, or just a vacant lot like their 600 Robson proposal remains to be seen.

officedweller · #**20183** Posted **Dec 14, 2021, 10:54 AM**

1640-1650 Alberni Street

Vancouver City Council approves 43-storey tower designed by Burj Khalifa architect

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1640...tower-approved

rofina · #**20184** Posted **Dec 14, 2021, 4:12 PM**

I like that tower a surprising amount for essentially being a suburban tower, with a half dozen corner cut outs.

It looks luxurious despite its simplicity.

idunno · #**20185** Posted **Dec 14, 2021, 5:10 PM**

With the quality of the architects, one can hope it matches the quality of the other towers going up in this area.

officedweller · #**20186** Posted **Dec 15, 2021, 4:25 AM**

It has a nice rhythm to it.
It's not "different on each side" so it's a change for Vancouver!

cganuelas1995 · #**20187** Posted **Dec 17, 2021, 5:45 PM**

The rent is too damn high

GenWhy? · #**20188** Posted **Dec 17, 2021, 6:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

The rent is too damn high

Rental market see, rental market do. The $36 million "gift" to the City ain't bad.

cganuelas1995 · #**20189** Posted **Dec 17, 2021, 6:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Rental market see, rental market do. The $36 million "gift" to the City ain't bad.

You mean that tax hike?

Changing City · #**20190** Posted **Dec 17, 2021, 6:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

You mean that tax hike?

So you don't understand how CACs work in Vancouver? Nobody is making the developer build more than the zoning allows, it's their choice to build more, and when they bought the site they calculated how much in CAC they could offer the City to be allowed to build a 14+ FSR tower, based on how much they'll charge for the condos. If they didn't pay the CAC, the condos wouldn't cost less, and the rents wouldn't be any lower - but the developers would be $36m richer, (and the West End wouldn't get a new library, for example).

cganuelas1995 · #**20191** Posted **Dec 17, 2021, 8:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Changing City

So you don't understand how CACs work in Vancouver? Nobody is making the developer build more than the zoning allows, it's their choice to build more, and when they bought the site they calculated how much in CAC they could offer the City to be allowed to build a 14+ FSR tower, based on how much they'll charge for the condos. If they didn't pay the CAC, the condos wouldn't cost less, and the rents wouldn't be any lower - but the developers would be $36m richer, (and the West End wouldn't get a new library, for example).

Never heard of that.

Vin · #**20192** Posted **Dec 17, 2021, 9:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Changing City

So you don't understand how CACs work in Vancouver? Nobody is making the developer build more than the zoning allows, it's their choice to build more, and when they bought the site they calculated how much in CAC they could offer the City to be allowed to build a 14+ FSR tower, based on how much they'll charge for the condos. If they didn't pay the CAC, the condos wouldn't cost less, and the rents wouldn't be any lower - but the developers would be $36m richer, (and the West End wouldn't get a new library, for example).

The developers would just save the large projects to be built in the suburb municipalities, as is evidently the case, and only build the much smaller and cheaper woodframes in Vancouver, with each unit costing even more than the nicer concrete building suites in other municipalities.

In the meantime, and again as evidently is the case, the City of Vancouver is still unable to afford building any new facilities for any of the neighbourhoods in Vancouver including downtown, while the more forward-looking suburb municipalities are building all the swanky recreational and community centres.

As a matter of fact, the City of Vancouver needs all the tax hikes to cover its basic services, which are subpar at best.

GenWhy? · #**20193** Posted **Dec 17, 2021, 9:42 PM**

You're, right, Vin, the emphasis has been placed more heavily on housing through CAC's, etc rather than swimming pools in the past.

cganuelas1995 · #**20194** Posted **Dec 18, 2021, 12:36 AM**

So what are some solutions to the rent being so damn high?

s211 · #**20195** Posted **Dec 18, 2021, 8:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

So what are some solutions to the rent being so damn high?

Well, the city's got a crush on Berlin at the moment. Berlin's proposal to nationalize the rental stock has got all the Castro-wannabies in the City all atwitter.

Jimbo604 · #**20196** Posted **Dec 24, 2021, 5:39 PM**

807 Robson St

Photo Source first two pics: March 2020 Urban YVR Article
Photo source last pic: me

Not much change here since demolition. Pile of rocks is still there though.

Edit: might as well have made this into a ground level parking lot in the meantime if the delay was going to be this long.

Jimbo604 · #**20197** Posted **Dec 24, 2021, 5:44 PM**

Photo source: me

No signs of changes at Pender and Richards for some time either. Beside the Bangtown hair salon.

Might as well have left it as one of our most classic downtown ground level parking lots if the delay was going to be this long so we could have enjoyed the lot longer.

Jimbo604 · #**20198** Posted **Dec 24, 2021, 5:51 PM**

Source: https://shapeyourcity.ca/450-w-georgia-st

Photo source last two pics: me

Meanwhile over at Georgia and Richards no sign of any changes at 450 W Georgia. UDP/Council have so many revisions for other projects meanwhile this uninspired box got approved by council last June. Link: COV Project Page.

Ironically located right next door to buildings with architectural note: Library Square, Amazon/Post Office, 400 W Georgia rotating office and Telus building.

Oh well at least the two smaller buildings to the south will be incorporated into this development and reclaiming the unused density there. And 23 storeys of office space and the urbanism plus jobs that go along with that, but bah-humbug boring box.

WarrenC12 · #**20199** Posted **Dec 24, 2021, 6:26 PM**

807 Robson looks cool. I agree the "demolition then wait" approach sucks.

djh · #**20200** Posted **Dec 24, 2021, 10:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

807 Robson looks cool. I agree the "demolition then wait" approach sucks.

Yeah, I've always wondered about the rationale for this. Is there a tax break for having the property empty pre-Development phase? Or perhaps the developer can claim no/lower taxes on the site, since it no longer can be used for business as it is technically "under development ".

It really does seem a shame, in these examples and many others, that perfectly healthy businesses have to be evicted and then their location sits empty for years. Wouldn't it be beneficial to offer month-to-month leases for the un-demo'd locations, at reduced rates for whosoever is willing to take those terms?