BC Place - Site 10C | 129.3m | 45 fl | Proposed - Page 3

Spr0ckets · #41 Posted **Dec 2, 2017, 9:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by s211

The Canadian real estate market is still by far dominated by the imperial measurement system. Pretty much the only time you see metric is in response to governmental requirements, like Fed leases.

Technically it's the Construction Industry that's responsible for that, since the Imperial system us pretty much standard in Architecture and Construction (in practice, anyway. Official design documentation and permit applications, particularly to the city tend to be converted to Metric per Government requirements). The Real Estate Industry just (mostly) follows suite since that's the 'language' their collaborating colleagues in construction use.

And the reason this persists is because the Canadian Construction Industry largely shares a lot in common, and in common usage (suppliers, standards, unitized measurements and nominal proportions, etc...)with their southern cousins and colleagues in the US.

The irony (or odd thing) of that situation though is that in the US, NASA, (parts of) the US military and the USGS (Geological Survey), by policy use the Metric system (for various reasons ranging from the impracticality of the Imperial system in their area - like in Space, for example - to having to work with international realm where practically every other country uses Metric).

So for the sectors in which measurements and calculations are most critical, they use the metric system, whereas the rest of society uses the antiquated Imperial system, which makes the US one of only 3 countries in the planet where it's the official system of measurement.

It's also a generational issue,......in Canada, anyway.

s211 · #42 Posted **Dec 2, 2017, 11:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

It's also a generational issue,......in Canada, anyway.

Not in the commercial real estate realm. It's cross-generational, trust me. I've been in the game almost 30 years and there is zero push from anyone serious to lead the charge to metric.

Spr0ckets · #43 Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 2:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by s211

Not in the commercial real estate realm. It's cross-generational, trust me. I've been in the game almost 30 years and there is zero push from anyone serious to lead the charge to metric.

When I said it's generational, I meant that if you go to almost any school or university in Canada, they teach future architects, designers and engineers in Metric system and using the metric system way of calculating things.

And yet this is always with the understanding that once they graduate and get into the job market, they're almost certainly going to be joining firms (run by older generation architects and engineers) who work in the Imperial system.

Even the professors in universities (who oftentimes are working and practicing architects and engineers) pretty much make that point clear to you as you're learning your trade.

The momentum to change to metric system is held back by a generational reluctance to do so. (Along with the other factors I mentioned; proximity to the US being the biggest one. I'd be curious as to what they use in Mexico.
My guess would be metric system, but I'm unfamiliar with how they work.)

EastVanMark · #44 Posted **Dec 4, 2017, 7:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prometheus

Restauranteurs and retailers (especially cool, creative, ambitious, independent ones) covet high ceilings and funky spaces with a sense of grandeur. Go to Gastown, Chinatown, Railtown, Hastings Street and survey the independent businesses (and their customers) on what physical aspect of their interior spaces they value the most. It's the double (even triple) high ceilings. Vancouver was just a pioneer town when those commercial districts were being built but that generation understood that attractive, interesting and inspiring urban spaces require a degree of height and grandeur far beyond the scale of one's own mundane living room. Due to their adherence to the timeless principles of great urban architecture and design, it is the pre-war generations which have left North American cities with their most attractive, funkiest and sought-after urban streets and spaces.

If "human scale" means low ceilings and uninspiring, cramped, generic spaces, then this new district will not succeed at attracting cool, independent businesses or creating an impressive, exciting entertainment/hospitality destination buzzing with patrons from all over the city.

Thanks for summarizing that in a much better way than I was trying to. And you absolutely captured the history behind such concepts brilliantly.

Jebby · #45 Posted **Dec 4, 2017, 10:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

(Along with the other factors I mentioned; proximity to the US being the biggest one. I'd be curious as to what they use in Mexico.
My guess would be metric system, but I'm unfamiliar with how they work.)

Everything is metric here in real estate, although rents for prime real estate are usually quoted in US dollars.

Vin · #46 Posted **Dec 4, 2017, 10:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

This! It's like these posters want more Cactus Clubs...

Hmm, you already have your sleepy corner of OV with the limited number of low-ceiling restaurants, banks, dental clinics and nail spas. For the downtown entertainment district, leave it to the big boys who want to see something more exciting and vibrant. To desire high-ceiling pubs and restaurants is nothing out of the ordinary for such a neighbourhood. If Cactus Club wants to move in, then so be it.

FYI, the more exciting venues of OV are actually high-ceiling craft beer houses in prewar warehouses, and not the new uninspiring CRUs that pop up in this generally unexciting neighbourhood.

Feathered Friend · #47 Posted **Jul 16, 2018, 12:00 AM**

https://council.vancouver.ca/2018061...ments/rr2c.pdf

If the original proposal is rejected, and this stubby tower comes to pass, there is only a couple members that have the right to complain, as they were the only ones who wrote in. Spending hours/ days / months crying for more height, but not taking a minute to write an email to City Council saying "I support the height/massing of this building" is ridiculous.

VancouverOfTheFuture · #48 Posted **Jul 16, 2018, 12:16 AM**

they don't have to bow to council though, do they? they are a Provincial Crown Corporation and should not be subject to municipal byaws.

osirisboy · #49 Posted **Jul 16, 2018, 12:26 AM**

What it really should be is the floorplates of the shorter tower and the height of the taller one

jlousa · #50 Posted **Jul 16, 2018, 3:17 AM**

You are right they do not need civic approval, but the provincial government usually obeys the good neighbour policy and asks for permission. And given the current provincial government I'd say they would be a lot less likely to infringe on the policy then the old BC Liberals would've.

VancouverOfTheFuture · #51 Posted **Jul 16, 2018, 7:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

You are right they do not need civic approval, but the provincial government usually obeys the good neighbour policy and asks for permission. And given the current provincial government I'd say they would be a lot less likely to infringe on the policy then the old BC Liberals would've.

shame, they should build what they want and what is the most economical. the only developer in the city that can build what it wants, yet chooses not to. wasted opportunity i think.

Metro-One · #52 Posted **Jul 16, 2018, 11:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

https://council.vancouver.ca/2018061...ments/rr2c.pdf

If the original proposal is rejected, and this stubby tower comes to pass, there is only a couple members that have the right to complain, as they were the only ones who wrote in. Spending hours/ days / months crying for more height, but not taking a minute to write an email to City Council saying "I support the height/massing of this building" is ridiculous.

I know, its frustrating.

I have the same feeling towards the Langley LRT.

Almost everyone on here supports Skytrain, I have contacted a couple politicians in Langley voicing my preference for Skytrain over LRT, but it seems that almost no one else on here takes a minute out of their day to do the same.

Instead they will just bitch on here after it is too late.

SFUVancouver · #53 Posted **Jul 16, 2018, 11:58 AM**

"Slacktivism" is a cancer on our society. Objecting in comments sections, creating a hashtag, retweeting stories: these things don't change policy or move the public consensus dial a single degree.

Vin · #54 Posted **Jul 16, 2018, 7:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

https://council.vancouver.ca/2018061...ments/rr2c.pdf

If the original proposal is rejected, and this stubby tower comes to pass, there is only a couple members that have the right to complain, as they were the only ones who wrote in. Spending hours/ days / months crying for more height, but not taking a minute to write an email to City Council saying "I support the height/massing of this building" is ridiculous.

We all know that it is the general fear of height mentality that is dictating building policies. Do you know how many building heights were shaved off despite having letters written and community sessions attended?

And you would blame it on forumers rather than the so-called "professionals" working for the City if this building height is shaved off too?

VancouverOfTheFuture · #55 Posted **Jul 17, 2018, 12:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Almost everyone on here supports Skytrain, I have contacted a couple politicians in Langley voicing my preference for Skytrain over LRT, but it seems that almost no one else on here takes a minute out of their day to do the same.

Instead they will just bitch on here after it is too late.

i think people get discouraged when all this feedback is just ignored. an example is with the surrey mayor saying there are public consultations, but if you are against LRT don't bother coming we aren't interested.

there is a point where people don't bother talking because no one listens, and then there is a point where people push back because no one listens. but in-between those 2 points, there is this middle where we are now.

Feathered Friend · #56 Posted **Jul 17, 2018, 5:15 AM**

City staff are certainly not to blame. They proposed the height increases in the area plan, and allowed the proposal to move forward to a public hearing, literally what more could they do.

Who else is left to blame, except those who stay quiet when it matters. Those opposed sure didn't, submitting over 100 letters and petition with over 600 signatures.

Many opposed to new buildings continue to push against them. As a result, they're the only ones heard, and usually succeed in getting height / homes knocked off. Staff allow these buildings to get this far for a reason, it's just a shame no one is willing to stand up to support them.

osirisboy · #57 Posted **Jul 17, 2018, 8:57 AM**

No sorry I don't agree completely with that. It doesn't all fall on people not voicing their support for higher buildings. The city should know full well it's always the angry pissed off busy bodies that come out 90% of the time. They shouldn't take it to mean that same ratio should be applied to the whole city

The city needs to stick to their plan and policies

WarrenC12 · #58 Posted **Jul 17, 2018, 3:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by osirisboy

No sorry I don't agree completely with that. It doesn't all fall on people not voicing their support for higher buildings. The city should know full well it's always the angry pissed off busy bodies that come out 90% of the time. They shouldn't take it to mean that same ratio should be applied to the whole city

The city needs to stick to their plan and policies

Except when you don't agree with them, and then you accuse the city of not consulting, or ignoring consultation. You can't have it both ways.

dreambrother808 · #59 Posted **Jul 17, 2018, 4:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

"Slacktivism" is a cancer on our society. Objecting in comments sections, creating a hashtag, retweeting stories: these things don't change policy or move the public consensus dial a single degree.

True but we’re probably also underestimating the degree to which many or even most people don’t care either way.

LeftCoaster · #60 Posted **Jul 17, 2018, 7:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vin

We all know that it is the general fear of height mentality that is dictating building policies. Do you know how many building heights were shaved off despite having letters written and community sessions attended?

And you would blame it on forumers rather than the so-called "professionals" working for the City if this building height is shaved off too?

You have a complete lack of understanding on how these things work.

Staff recommended these heights, the only reason they are potentially getting pushed down is because people like you don't actively support anything, you just whine on the internet.

Here's why your voice, and everyone's on this forum matter:

- Staff is employed by Council.
- Council is beholden to voters.
- Voters have so far told staff and council they don't support tall towers here.
- Tall towers will likely not proceed.

If you did something rather than piss and moan on this forum the city might change... But you wont because you are just a whiny 15 year old.