Frances Bula header image 2

Oakridge public hearing will see opponents, supporters line up over $1.5-billion mini-city of apartment towers

February 20th, 2014 · 165 Comments

Aaaand here we go to another fun public hearing. Council voted to send this on its way to a few nights of meetings.

Vancouver gears up for fractious debate over future of Oakridge mall

A massive redevelopment of Vancouver’s oldest mall – one that will remake a largely single-family neighbourhood in the centre of the city – is expected to take a major step toward reality this week.

Councillors will decide Tuesday on whether to send the project to a public hearing.

The planners for Oakridge Centre envision transforming the 12-hectare site into a mixed-use village, with 2,900 new apartment units (290 of them subsidized social housing, 290 market rental), a nine-acre park with a mini-lake that will sit on the roof of the mall and a main-street-style retail strip. The project will also include a community centre, a library, a daycare, a seniors’ centre and more retail and office space.

“For me as a planner, this is the right location for a significant amount of density,” said Vancouver’s general manager of planning, Brian Jackson, who has recommended the project go to a public hearing. “It’s at a crossroads of the city, one that’s been identified as one of the major retail and commercial hubs.”

The project’s developers, Ivanhoe Cambridge, a Quebec-based credit union, and local developer Westbank Projects Corporation have been asked to put in an unprecedented $148-million in community amenities. That’s significantly up from the $90-million talked about a year ago after the plan was first presented to council. As well, the developers have to pay $46-million in developer levies and $8-million toward the city’s public-art fund.

That bump has meant more social-housing and market-rental units in the project than outlined last year, a bigger community centre, and a larger, more accessible rooftop park.

“The public benefits have been increased dramatically,” said project architect Gregory Henriquez. “I think it’s an exceptional piece of city-making. And if we’re going to save the planet, other parts of the city have to densify besides downtown.”

In an effort to sell the project, the developers have had a public-outreach team camped out at the Oakridge mall most Saturdays over the past year to talk to passersby, reaching more than 30,000 people.

But the $1.5-billion project has also generated dedicated bands of opponents aghast at such a dramatic change to a suburban-feeling neighbourhood in the city. The Oakridge opponents are among the many groups that have formed in recent years, unhappy about the increased development pressure – and the city planning to increase population density – they’re feeling like builders have run out of available room in the downtown.

Those groups will be lining up to object to the new Oakridge plan at the anticipated public hearing beginning in March, said Allan Buium of the Riley-South Cambie community committee, as he once again looked over the Oakridge model on display at the mall last weekend.

“They have not improved anything. And this is too much – we’re on our way to being Metrotown,” said Mr. Buium. Like many, he said one of the main problems is that, even though the project is being sold as a transit-oriented development, the transit line it’s built on is already jammed.

Development consultant Gary Pooni said current overcrowding on the Canada Line and increased traffic congestion were the two main concerns people brought up repeatedly.

Mr. Pooni said the majority of people who have looked at the model and plans are excited about what they see.

“They love having the mall as an actual amenity for people. It becomes a place to do more than just shop. People do think it’s a good place for density. But traffic and the Canada Line – those are the two biggest questions we have.”

That kind of reaction was on display among the non-aligned, casual visitors who dropped by last weekend.

Wan Rahardja, looking over the model with a toddler in his arms, was mostly approving.

“I think it’s quite exciting. This mall is quite limited.”

Senior Penny O’Donnell was just relieved to see that the seniors’ centre had been moved from a second-floor spot to ground level in the new version. She did wonder, though, “what they’ll do with all the people.”

And Richmond resident Brett Tolley, who has seen massive development around the Canada Line in his municipality as well, was gloomily resigned.

“It’s Vancouver in 2014, I guess. It’s typical overdensification, with as many condos as they can jam in. There seems to be no thought to transportation or planning.”

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Roger Kemble

    Jay @ #148 Vancouver proper: one new school . . .

    http://www.vsb.bc.ca/schools

    . . . not yet materialized is proposed for International Village!

    Metro experiencing some new construction not because of +pop but because of out migration.

    Nevertheless, lots of renos and some demolitions.

    Couples are having families later now: once in their twenties, now in their forties! This may give the appearance of lots of kids!

    Wikipedia states Statscan’s barefaced pop facts:

    2006 578,041 +5.9%
    2011 603,502 +4.4%

    Do the math: a rise of Vancouver pop approx. +0.9% annually, or virtual stagnation. Metro is, proportionally, the same.

    There is reason to believe 2016 numbers will reflect.

  • rph

    In my neighbourhood census figures show a decline in population. This despite sf detached 2-3 bedroom homes being torn down and replaced by large 5 bedroom mega houses.

    Those homes I guess are either empty, or house less people than the previous 2-3 bedroom rancher or bungalow did.

    Which again raises questions about how green is it,to have large mega houses accommodating so few people.

    Maybe the better solution is to zone row houses and low level townhomes rather than continue to build castles for the rich, that the rich can hardly be bothered to live in.

  • Chris Keam

    “Contrast to Mt. Pleasant or Commercial Drive. Buzzing streets until late at night, thriving businesses, wide mix of low and upscale housing.”

    Is this because of the housing mix or the fact that both streets have numerous bars and restaurants lining the busiest blocks?

    Also, my personal impression as a Mt Pleasant resident (CrossTown actually) is that Main gets many of its evening dinner and drinks patrons from the young singles and couples in the new developments and existing apartments rather than the families inhabiting the single family homes in surrounding blocks. I’m hard-pressed to think of any largely-single family home neighbourhood in Vancouver that isn’t pretty dead at night.

  • Threadkiller

    @CK, #152: ” I’m hard-pressed to think of any largely-single family home neighbourhood in Vancouver that isn’t pretty dead at night.”

    …Hence their considerable appeal to many of us who are not fortunate enough to live in one (I grew up in one, but that was long ago…).

  • Jay

    @Roger Kemble –

    “Wikipedia states Statscan’s barefaced pop facts:

    2006 578,041 +5.9%
    2011 603,502 +4.4%

    Do the math: a rise of Vancouver pop approx. +0.9% annually, or virtual stagnation. Metro is, proportionally, the same.”

    I presume most people know that the rest of Metro is growing much faster than the CoV.

    Just in case…

    StatsCan barefaced pop facts for Metro Vancouver:

    2006 2 116 581 +6.5%
    2011 2 313 328 +9.3%

    http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/dp-pd/hlt-fst/pd-pl/Table-Tableau.cfm?LANG=Eng&T=303&SR=1&S=51&O=A&RPP=9999&PR=0&CMA=933

  • Roger Kemble

    I presume most people know that the rest of Metro is growing much faster than the CoV.

    Not so! I am not sure what we are trying to prove here Jay @ #154.

    Metro is a far wider area and, of course absorbs more pop. Do the math. You will be disappointed.

    City pop/Metro pop = stagnation.

    I hope you do not have skin in the City/Metro pop game unless you are prepared to wait one hundred years!

  • Dr. Frankentower

    “The growth hormone for this city comes in the form of migration.”

    No, no, no.

    How many times do I have to correct you, Jay?

    The engine that drives new construction in the City is investor demand and global capital looking for a safe haven.

    And we are meeting the majority of that demand with high-density condo towers, of which 15-20% will sit empty.

    This isn’t city building.

    *
    “Main gets many of its patrons from the young singles and couples in the new developments and existing apartments rather than the families inhabiting the single family homes in surrounding blocks.”

    Well, sure, but also, the vast majority of big old SF houses in the area have also densified — they have basement suites or have been reno’d into mini-stratas with 4-5 units. Plus, as a family man, who also knows other families in the area, I can tell you that we ALL patronize the area’s shops and bars and restaurants. What, are you ageist, sonny boy?

    But the point is: Mt. Pleasant and Commercial demonstrate how a variety of building forms can densify a neighbourhood within the current zoning capacity.

    The steroid-like effect of towers are not wanted or needed in these neighbourhoods.

    *

    As for the changes in rents, speculation, and rezoning applications in MP — again, yes this has all been creeping up for about a decade. But there’s been a definite spike since the Rize was approved, and a couple of business moves already. Pretty much everything North of the community centre is in play right now, including tower applications.

    *
    I have to admit, Jay, Richard, Keam etc. your earnestness in defense of these policies is exhausting, and it speaks volumes about why Vision is seen by many to be both very destructive, and also very successful, as a civic party.

    But it makes me yearn for the days of Condo Hype.

    My how unsophisticated we’ve become in a few short years…

  • Jay

    “The engine that drives new construction in the City is investor demand and global capital looking for a safe haven.

    And we are meeting the majority of that demand with high-density condo towers, of which 15-20% will sit empty.”

    From the Andrew Yan study on empty units in Vancouver –

    “In the city of Vancouver, the rate of those kinds of dwellings stood at 7.7 per cent overall… In the city of Toronto, the rate was 5.4 per cent; in Calgary, 5 per cent.”

    Even Calgary has a 5% rate of empty units. You say 15 to 20 % will sit empty, but that is clearly not true.

  • Bill

    @Jay #157

    You didn’t include the complete quote:

    “In the city of Vancouver, the rate of those kinds of dwellings stood at 7.7 per cent overall, with some parts of the downtown as high as 23 per cent. In the city of Toronto, the rate was 5.4 per cent; in Calgary, 5 per cent.”

    I would expect that most high density condos are in fact downtown and the 15-20% may not be out of line.

  • teririch

    Another day…another lawsuit: Via Metro reporter, Emily Jackson:

    emily jackson‏@theemilyjackson·6 hrs

    Anddd Mt. Pleasant just sued the city over view cones. Soon I won’t be able to keep track of all these

  • Chris Keam

    Dr Frankentower:

    Are you sitting down? I hope so. This may come as a shock. Simply commenting in a way that doesn’t jibe 100% with your p.o.v. isn’t a tacit approval of any policy or party. I simply offered an observation based on residency in the Main St and surrounding areas for most of the 20-plus years I’ve lived in Vancouver.

    You know what’s also quite exhausting you poor anonymous poster? Being labelled as an apologist for anything simply because it suits the preconceptions of folks who can’t be bothered to contact individuals with their freakin’ phone and email contact info a google search away, to ascertain if their assumptions are the least bit correct. Frankly, if you are so keen on ensuring all viewpoints are heard and respectful dialogue is an essential part of building a city for all, you might consider your own comments and the jumping to conclusions mindset they seem to present.

    thanks,

    CK

  • Waltyss

    Q. How do we know an election is in the offing? A. Another loopy lawsuit has been filed by someone who says their view of the mountains has been interfered with. Boo hoo.
    Q. How many of these lawsuits have been or will be successful. Well, in a no brainer, an interim injunction was granted until the whole matter can be heard relating to 6 community centres.
    It’s important to remember that any idiot or group of idiots with $200 burning a hole in his/her or their pockets can commence a lawsuit. Most if not all will disappear after November 15.

  • teririch

    And the waters are churning with Oakridge residents:

    @GregorsGreenBK·
    20 hrs

    Angry residents prepare for Oakridge Centre fight http://shar.es/R11kt via @sharethis

    Broken park promises undermine trust. #vanpoli

  • teririch

    @Dr. Frankentower #157

    I’ve just returned from Toronto and the condo build is in over drive there.

    A great portion of the towers going up are just ugly – boxy, cookie cutter, ghetto looking. In many places, the entire land mass is used and there is no green space of any sorts.

    Toronto is one of those cities I am always happy to return from.

  • Dr. Frankentower

    Chris Keam @161

    Ok, valid point, I shouldn’t make political assumptions. I certainly can’t blame you for vehemently trying to disassociate yourself from Vision.