Frances Bula header image 2

Revised Marine Gateway gets approval, casino design predicted to bring new look, 60 W Cordova okayed

July 30th, 2010 · 37 Comments

Slow to post on this Wednesday urban design panel meeting — so many other things to do!

But for those following these issues closely

1. A revised Marine Gateway plan did get unanimous approval from the urban design panel. Still a long way to go though — public hearings, info meetings in September and development permit board still to come. And even though the panel approved it, some people made the kind of observations that make me glad I don’t have to sit in a room having my work reviewed. (Some comments: office tower still reminiscent of Fairview Slopes 1970s, main residential tower still tentative, not bold enough, cantilevered tower still feels oppressive, etc.)

The basics, though: the Busby firm did make some changes to the large residential tower to make it seem less bulky — it’s been narrowed in both its width and length and the number of steps increased from five to seven in this slant-stacked tower (think Lego blocks arranged to form a diagonal). That meant removing 90 of the 120 rental units that were going to be part of the STIR program.

That means, PCI head Andrew Grant told me when I asked, that the project will have to provide other community benefits since the density of the 450 market units was there to help pay the subsidy needed to build the rental units. There may be some dickering there yet, with staff trying to up the number of rental units and reduce the number of market units — or maybe not. There hasn’t been a warm reception from neighbourhoods to density for rental, so staff may opt to get a different kind of community benefit out of the project.

The pathway through the project has also been given a wide opening on Marine to make it more obvious that people should enter there. That means about 15,000 less square feet of retail space.

Otherwise, the project has the same unusual look and shape as the first version — definitely something new and different for Vancouver.

2. Next up were the plans for the casino/entertainment complex plus two hotels that will be built around BCPlace (with proceeds from the sale of the land to help pay for the roof). As several panel members noted, this is definitely going to bring a different look to Vancouver.

No tower and podium, no 1970s Fairview slopes. One hotel — meant to be the one for the younger, hipper people who only come to lose a single paycheque, as opposed to their house — is currently shown as looking kind of Daliesque — bent and curved and clad in recycled copper that frames each window in what looks like artfully rusted metal. (Excuse my non-architect descriptions.) The other hotel is more Marriott-like, glass, though with a V-dip in the top.

At the base between the hotels, where the casino is, the lower section has be angled roof planes and, if the model is to be believed, canopies of copper-coloured metal strings and other futuristic Las Vegas-like elements.

Architect James Cheng led off the panel discussion by saying, approvingly I think, that it will change Vancouver urbanism and Jane Durante described it as “eccentric” and something that’s “going to loosen some ideas of what’s acceptable.” Apparently it got about 6-4 support. (After three hours, I bailed.)

Finally, the 60 West Cordova project — Ian Gillespie’s no parking, no frills, no speculators building planned for the empty lot just east of Woodward’s — got a hearty okay, with some commenting that other downtown projects should also be approved without parking.

Now — waiting for any of these projects to actually get built. The city has had about one development permit board meeting in the last seven months because so few projects seem to make it to that stage.

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Larry

    It is appalling that the roof of BC Place is considered a public benefit in this case. Who is benefitting? Over-paid atheletes and owners? Is the stadium ever made available for children’s or amateur sports’ use at a cost that a family or average income owner can afford?

    Facilities for professional sports are a fact of western life but they need to pay their own way – neighbourhoods should not be made to take the density and growth with the related demand on local amenities, and get nothing in return, while the owners and millionaire atheletes just get richer.

  • Jo-Anne Pringle

    Myself and other Marpole Resident’s attended the UDP on Wednesday – we were all quite surprised and disappointed to hear Busby offer as his second reason for choosing to reduce more rental units than market units, the idea that the Marpole community did not want so many rentals – his first reason he offered to the UDP was that rental units provide lower profitability. At our Neighbourhood Meeting on June 28th at the Marpole-Oakridge Community Centre we were very strong in raising to the 5 Councillors in attendance our concern over the lack of inclusion of renters in the City’s public process (ie: renters don’t qualify to receive notification for Open Houses) – we also brought up a serious concern about the liklihood of one of the nearby affordable rental complexes being redeveloped when the adjacent parcel located on the N.E. Corner of Marine Drive is redeveloped. The Marpole Area Resident’s Alliance is comprised of both home owners and residents who rent their homes – we view our community as one – and have not seperated ourselves into owners versus renters. Before I owned my home, I was a renter and in a city where the cost of purchasing a home is so high the need for more rental accomodation is likley at it’s greatest point. Marpole is already a mix of single family homes, duplexes, townhomes, multi-plexes, 3 level walk up rental units and one taller tower of strictly rental units – the idea of rental units in this area is not new and the idea of suggesting that the community does not want rentals at Marine Gateway is…well…not the first reason that Busby offered.

  • SV

    @Larry-your point is good but the athletes who play at BC Place are rarely make 6 figures, let alone millions.

  • Tessa

    I have to agree with Jo-Anne Pringle. The loss of rental units is really disappointing and I hope that the city pushes the developer to put it back. Frankly, the first option was better, except with the changes to the retail level.

    Still, it would be nice to have a picture of the new rendering. Any available?

  • Tessa

    Nevermind, found it: http://marinegateway.ca/

  • Darren

    @Larry:

    Facilities for professional sports aren’t only a fact of western life – they are everywhere in the world. Of course many people have no interest in sports, but that doesn’t mean that having professional sports teams in a city isn’t a benefit. Many, many people care passionately about professional sports and consider them absolutely integral to their cities. I couldn’t care less about opera, orchestras or ballets, but I recognize that such things are important to many people. I don’t agree with tax dollars going towards ultra-profitable teams and their highly-paid stars, but the football and soccer teams that will play under the roof are neither, as SV notes.

    As for your question about the affordability of renting the fields, I don’t know the numbers but I played soccer there many times as a kid, and also played in an overnight UBC recreational softball tournament there a bunch of times. It’s just a guess, but I suspect that as with most public facilities the rental fee for non-profit groups is very low compared with what for-profit groups pay. Otherwise, I don’t think events like the ones I have been a part of would be possible.

  • mezzanine

    @ Larry, in addition to sports at BC place, many trade shows also display there, like the home and garden show, eat vancouver and the auto show.

    Large public events like the sun run and marathon also use BC place for staging and programming.

  • Michael Geller

    Frances, I’m encouraged to read that the new casino is ‘Daliesque’. Having just visited the Dali triangle and seen some of his work, I think a dose of Dali might do Vancouver good. Here are a few photos of some of what I found. http://www.gellersworldtravel.blogspot.com

    In an earlier post you will also find some photos of Singapore’s latest casino project with the park and swimming pool in the sky. While I don’t expect our project to be as fantastic, I do hope it becomes something special, since the community benefit that we are getting….isn’t.

  • Urbanismo

    Michael, thanqxz for the Dali stuff: very appropriate, as his work is ascribed to the 1930’s surrealist movement, when discussing the latest exposé of this Marpole surrealism: although the latter lacks the comparative grace and creative symbolism.

    Fredericton NB has an impressive Dali collection thanqxz to the late Lord Beaverbrook.

    Tessa, thanqxz for the link.

    Jo-anne your community should not have to defend itself against such an inept and, to say the least, inappropriate imposition.

    Beware the colourful presentation: hardly Dali-esque! The finished product never turns out the way of the pretty pictures:
    http://www.theyorkshirelad.ca/6urbandesign/2010.pdf

    Frances, “Now — waiting for any of these projects to actually get built. The city has had about one development permit board meeting in the last seven months because so few projects seem to make it to that stage.

    Sometimes an economic break can be a blessing: it tends to shuffle the players.

  • Bill McCreery

    Interesting comments.

    There were some positive improvements in the Gateway context info & project data info provided. Thank you to the City & the proponents. There were also some positive design improvements & a reduction in FSR.

    However,the important development @ the DP mtg. re: Gateway was PCI’s deletion of all but 32 units of rental. About half of that deleted floor space went to increasing the condo square footage, thereby significantly increasing the overall upfront profitability of the proposal. The other half of the +/-100,000 sf reduction was in the retail space to create the grade level plaza [a positive move]. The net $ longer term effect will probably be a wash.

    There are 2 significant outcomes stemming form that proposal which must be resolved:

    1] 1 of the reasons used to justify the significant 6.84 FSR density & +/-350′ height was the inclusion of STIR units. There are also all the other STIR projects throughout the City as similar precedents. How much will the allowable density now have to be reduced to offset that change? Certainly more than the current proposed +/-10%. What is the methodology used to determine what such bonusing or lack is appropriate? In the Maxine’s precedent 2.90 FSR bonus was granted to achieve +/-30% STIR. We had @ Gateway +/-14% STIR. Now +/-3% is proposed.

    I suspect a 4.64 FSR would be one the Marpole community could accept. We’ll have to hear from them in the course of time.

    Since the FSRs for the 2 projects are similar one might compare them. On this basis Gateway must be reduced by 2.2 FSR not the proposed 1.0. The resulting 4.64 FSR is one which would result in a much more compatible project in the Marpole community. It would also be +/- equivalent to my gut feel [in the absence of real numbers from the City] of what the proposed densities are for the immediately adjacent properties are based on the massing models shown on Wednesday. This would treat all the affected property owners equitably which the City must do in its regulatory role.

    2] It appears both PCI & Westbank @ St. John’s are re-examining the viability of the STIR programme & finding it does not make financial sense. My analysis has told me the same & I have been saying these developers would be prudent to take this 2nd look. I’m glad for their own good & for the good of the affected neighbourhoods that they now are. The bottom line is STIR units, using the present programme methodology, will not be able to achieve the +/-54% higher than market rental rate required to make them viable.

  • Bill McCreery

    Editing error above.

    The “I suspect a 4.64 FSR would be one the Marpole community could accept. We’ll have to hear from them in the course of time.” should be read following “treat all the affected property owners equitably which the City must do in its regulatory role.” below.

  • gmgw

    It’s really quite bemusing to see the term “Daliesque” being bandied about in descriptions of the new casino. Students of art history will recall that, while Dali is to this day the only Surrealist the vast majority of the public could name, he himself came to be roundly despised by his fellow Surrealists for his utterly shameless self-promotion and greed for wealth. Dali was actually formally expelled from the Surrealist group in 1934 after a “trial” instigated by the Group’s ideological head, Andre Breton. Breton, a Marxist, accused Dali of having sympathies to the then newly-in-power German Nazi party, and while Dali denied this, he refused to denounce Fascism, claiming to be apolitical. And indeed, while prominent Surrealists such as Luis Bunuel along with tens of thousands of other leftists, were forced to flee Spain several years later in the wake of the Civil War that brought Franco to power (the same war in which Dali’s one-time close friend, the great poet Garcia Lorca, was, like many other Spaniards, brutally murdered by the Fascists). Dali maintained a lifelong cordial relationship with the Fascist party, which enabled him to live out his life in considerable comfort in his palatial villa near Cadaques.

    Breton knew what he was about when he altered Dali’s name and thenceforth referred to him as “Avida Dollars”. Dali still stands as the 20th century’s prime example of an artist who compromised whatever political or artistic ideals he may once have claimed to possess in pursuit of the almighty dollar– millions of which Dali accumulated over the years in return for cozying up to the wealthy and powerful he once claimed to despise.

    What more appropriate artistic role model could be found for the Vancouver development industry? The fact that in this case Dali’s name is being invoked in praise of a major casino proposal is merely the icing on an extremely foul cake full of irony. “Avida Dollars”, indeed.
    gmgw

  • The Fourth Horseman

    Great comments, gmgw.

    How is it that we can find anything praisworthy to say about A CASINO!? Design esthetics be damned! (and they certainly seem to be, regardless).

    This and the “improved” (this is alittle joke, yes?) Gateway project are the best we got??

    Vancouver— a pretty girl, without any wit or wisdom about her. A sweet young thing, being taken advatage of by grifters, charlatans and snake oil salesmen who are looking to build cheap, sell dear–in all facets of her development. Aided and abetted by various levels of governement for the fees and fervently prayed for revenues these crap projects might generate and wink, wink, nudge, nudge, a few more dollars into election coffers.

    A city relegated to 2nd or 3rd tier status–or should I say—trying to punch far above her weight, when she so clearly lacks a good foundation to build on. Her future, built on a chimera and some whispered promise from the guy who is gonna leave town the next day. PT Barnum was right.

    Casinos and 1 bedroom condos. Hmmm. Curious. Shurely, no coincidence? Sayonara, families! Hast la vista, commercial enterprise of any significance —we’ll send you out to Surrey, or anywhere but here! Welcome, the huddled masses of global multi-millionaires, yearning to buy a couple of condos as an investment or as a hedge against problems elsewhere.

    Welcome, the new breed of gambler, who will have what will likely be a kitcshy exterior/interior to greet him as he makes his miserable way to the tables. That is, if the place will have many bodies in it at all, if the province’s online gaming program gets all the bugs out—then a WHOLE NEW generation of ‘gamers’ . And why risk the possibility of actually being stopped at a bricks and mortar place if you have self excluded? Come, you can lose just as much online, with far less hassle. Ask the kids, they know how to stay plugged in for hours!

    The Vancouver economy, such as it is, built on shoddy, small, living (?) spaces, craps, a seemingly disengaged/dishevelled BOT, many well paid bureaucrats at all levels who just do as they are told, and bike lanes.

    Are you feeling proud yet, Vancouverites?

  • jesse

    I don’t get how a supposed rental shortage in Vancouver is being bandied about: when I compare rental rates of Vancouver to Toronto, Vancouver seems reasonable. If there were a true shortage of rental units I would expect significantly higher rents and rent rises at or near the control limit, both of which are not happening.

    If investors are supposedly buying these units up left right and centre, it sounds like rental units are indeed being built.

  • Bill McCreery

    @ 4 horses.
    “improved”.

    A good deal of what you comment on has some validity. However, we do live in a democracy & as such follow due process. The projects you criticize, perhaps validly, are being processed & are evolving through that process. The body that can change the rules of the game is Council, along with a bit of help from the economy & market preferences. If you wish to make the far-ranging changes you allude to above you need to focus your efforts to these.

  • Urbanismo

    Great comments, gmgw. Horse shit 4th gee gee. It wasn’t long ago he was railing about bicycle saddles on the Burrard Bridge.

    Dali was a sell-out? Of course he was! So were all of them: purveyors of collector’s items then and now. I’ll bet Damian Hurst and his now rotting-out sheep, up to is eyeballs in law suites, rues his fleeting fame.

    Didn’t Victor Vasserelly briefly flit across the screen with cheap silk screen prints for “thu peepul”. His stuff was bid out of the ball park just like the rest. Was Vic a Nazi too? Corb was!

    Didn’t we, just a few weeks ago, seriously waste ourselves on moving the ridiculous VAG. VAG the largest holder of Jeff Wall: wooden, staged, high-maintenance, soon to be forgotten technological gizmos and the other thing, by the other guy, in the W lobby!

    When will we acknowledge Vancouver is a FAILED CITY http://members.shaw.ca/urbanismo/thu.future/vancouver.failed.html and follow the links, read the whole damn thing, before you go back to your knitting.

    Thu “grifters, charlatans and snake oil salesmen” are laughing all the way to the bank reading this stuff.

    Thanq god for the blogs they say: were else can the hoy poloi vent so harmlessly? Blogging is just one of many venues, seen by said “grifters” etc, as a god send for people otherwise transfixed by the six foot plasma screen.

    Yunno the likes of gmgw sort of rear up for a few minutes, tutt tutt their whole hearted indignation, then slide back to sipping tea with the ladies.

    There are many things tragically wrong with a people who settle for a few words at “thu public hearing while quietly standing by while their neighbourhood is raped by statutes, and good intentions, supposedly there to protect it.

    Don’t be taken in by the colours! Don’t be taken in by the shoppers allowed on private property so long as they dress clean and spend, spend and spend!

    As for Bill Mc, his blatant political posturing, awaiting the main chance, is so patently transparent I would expect even his back room éminence grise to counsel , like cool it man, you’re so obvious!

  • The Fourth Horseman

    Urb,

    I think we are on common ground. While wecan talk “democratci processes” till the cows dance on home I am asking the question:

    What do we want Vancouver to look/ be/ feel/ like?

    That is not so much a process as, you will pardon the expresssion, a vision.

    With this apprent ad hoc approach to building the rest of the city, we run the risk of losing much of the flavour of Vancouver. I am not talking about the West Side–include Main Street and Fraser into the mix. Do you think those funky stores will last much longer with the kind of buildings that are going up at 7th and Main and are likey to spread up that street? Or that the Indo Canadian shops will likely last? Everything held hostage to incredibly ugly, tall, cheap looking towers of glass (we don’t have the talent to build anything else here, apparently).

    Where are the plazas? Where are the pedestrian areas? Where will the sun be seen from inside the jungle of towers?

    If you didn’t know we had mountains and a seawall, which I think are the very things that define us, you would think we lived in Cleveland (with apologies to those who live there). Go sit in David lam park, face north and let me know how “Vancouver” it all feels…

  • The Fourth Horseman

    And I forgot to include the DTES, as well.

    http://www.citycaucus.com/2010/08/desperate-dtes-businesses-write-open-letter-to-politicos

  • Bill Lee

    [ OMG, Fabula’s “Urban Wonks Calendar” on the left rail is empty for August. Surely we can fill it with something, even suburban events–quick, what’s on in New West, Bby, Rmd, Abbotsford? ]

    Someone questioned the size of the (almost)-parking-less rabbit-hutches of the 60 West Cordova monstrosity. There is parking if you see the lower levels, but not intended for all-nighters (you wanna bet?)

    And the roof shot was posted with the floor plan of the condos, and the tree amenities that are such a highlight feature of the roof of fake-Woodwards (Not). This had scale notes for the tiles of the patios and you could use a ruler to make scale measurements of the suites.

    http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/developmentservices/devapps/66wcordova/rooflscape.pdf

    Going back through the ‘bread crumbs’ allows you to see the permitted papers from the city planning office, including the Gastown HA-2 Guidelines criteria that are now thrown out by an overpowering tower and no place for the Porsche.

    http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/developmentservices/devapps/66wcordova/

    I see that Henriquez is also to be ;irresponsible’ for the west-side Yups new drinking venue for The Filth of The Cultch as they are cutely calling their Disneyfied ex-church they took to the ground and recreated with steel beams and titivation to approximate the 100 year-old church.
    The New York theatuh, may not be ready for their glamour weddings and receptions as they use the VAG for, but it was both a movie and a vaudeville theatre, used for many years by the Vancouver Little Theatre, in the days before the Playghouse took all the money.

    http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/rezoning/applications/639commercial/index.htm

    It would have been far more useful to restore the Avon/Pantages at 152 East Hastings near Main. http://www.heritagevancouver.org/topten/2010/topten2010_07.html

    Now we will have the swells going ‘slummikng’ uptown to Harlem(The Drive) and being knocked over by buses and cars as they stagger drunkenly off the narrow sidewalk across the street to their limos. All the while illuminted by an inappropriate large loge lighting.

    The Drive hated The Fringe festival, because there is no off-street parking in the area, and everyone of the Kits/Kerrisdale slummers drove one to a car to their theatre rendevous in an SUV, the traffic was blocked for weeks and the SUVs took all afternoon and evening parking from those coming home from work.
    Can anyone just live quietly in Vancouver?

    And why do they need to sterilize Grandview Park under the pretext of a year-long improvment?

  • Glissando Remmy

    The Borrowed Thought of The Day

    “Da Da Dali goodbye, Da Da Dali don’t sigh
    Your soft alarm clocks quake me
    So boil your beans and meet me at Perignon Station
    Crutch me Dali again, lobster telephone friend
    Stay in your seat, watch what you eat
    If you don’t get a dead mule then you’ll know I’m in heat
    Da Da Dali hello, Da Da Dali you’re just another Onionhead”
    Todd Rundgren: Da Da Dali

    Urbanismo,

    A pleasure to read. As always. And the only one in here that makes sense, or maybe, says it how it is.

    Michael,
    Nice spread on Dali residences. Thanks. Brings back memories of almost 12 years. Read your words on Barcelona. I transited through the city (well, I spent four days in 2008) on my way to Constantinople, the City of Spice. Not to be missed in your travels!

    The problem I always have with going back to these places …I’m afraid of the moment when I’ll have to leave. Only to return back to Vancouver, The City of …Smells.

    Lucky you!
    You’ve missed the Big Stink of last week.
    The COV’s plutocrats wouldn’t admit to it, but apparently it was a matter of overflow. Some Vision doctrine flushed the wrong way.

    We live in Vancouver and this keeps us busy.

  • Urbanismo

    Thanqxz Glissie

  • Bill McCreery

    @ Roger Kemble, 16.
    Apparently you know what I don’t about my intentions. You apparently don’t know me very well. Whatever my motivations or future actions, what I say in comments here are what I think. I can also be convinced to alter my opinion if I hear persuasive arguments. Whatever you may think of my take on things I can assure you I get feedback from perspectives very different from your own as well.

    Although I occasionally read pertinent, stimulating comments on this & other blogs, some of what I read consists of personal attacks [by that I mean not on me — so far], 4 letter words & an unsettling degree of bitterness & negativity. In my view this detracts from the essence of the discussions leaving one to wonder whether it is worth spending further time & effort. To bad really, I enjoy what intellectual stimulation there is. And, there are some good ideas put forward amidst all the less savory drivel.

    When you knew me in the early 70’s Roger I was a young idealist just out of university. The City @ the time was @ a not dissimilar crossroad to where we are today. I put up, got elected &, I think, helped make Vancouver a better City. I have had nothing much to do with politics since then, I had to make a living.

    Last November when Vision went through their apparent budget crisis & decided to close Bloedel & the Childrens’ Farmyard I decided once again to get off my backside & do something. And, the more I have gotten into what Vision have been doing the more concerned I have become about the overall direction they are trying to take the City.

    What have I done recently so far? Working actively & constructively with other like minded people it looks like we have succeeded in saving Bloedel. I have not given up on the Farmyard & am still working on keeping that important Vancouver institution, which it was for me & my son. I’ve done these things in a non-partisan way, trying to work co-operatively with Vision Commissioners.

    On the partisan side I have joined the Non Partisan Association & tried unsuccessfully to make the organization more effective in today’s context. I respect the decision of the members votes not to change & am working actively with others within the NPA to make the organization better in other ways. The political reality in Vancouver is to be effective you must work within an established political party if you want to accomplish something meaningful. @ this point in my life & given the time frame imperative making it necessary to stop Vision now not in 6 years, that is the only realistic option.

    It will become clearer as we progress further but we are making progress. Good things start with small steps.

    There remain many exciting, creative opportunities to do things better in Vancouver right now which might even be small steps to help achieve a more sustainable lifestyle. Someone has to step up to the plate. So far I’m doing, & saying, what I see as necessary to help achieve those goals. If that is to obvious, so be it. But, what I say is what I mean irrespective of whether I may or may not have any interest in political office.

    Do I want to run for office in 2011? No. I can’t really afford it. I would rather have a better private life, not have to put up with criticisms which are often off-base & misinformed &, just plain enjoy life. On the other side, what Vision are doing, in my view, is terribly damaging to this City. If better people step up [why don’t you?] believe me, be my guest. I’ve been there, I know what’s involved. It’s hard work & not particularly satisfying when that is not fully appreciated by the public.

  • Urbanismo

    @ Bill McCreery 22

    Although I occasionally read pertinent, stimulating comments on this & other blogs, some of what I read consists of personal attacks [by that I mean not on me — so far], 4 letter words & an unsettling degree of bitterness & negativity. In my view this detracts from the essence of the discussions leaving one to wonder whether it is worth spending further time & effort. To bad really, I enjoy what intellectual stimulation there is. And, there are some good ideas put forward amidst all the less savory drivel.

    Yes Bill, there are personal attacks and there are four letter words: that style of communication was liberated by the likes of Henry Miller and James Joyce who were among the first literature giants to introduce the style to common usage. IMO they helped shed the prurient shackles of Victorianism: for the better!

    As for “an unsettling degree of bitterness & negativity yes there is that too and probably justified amongst those who are not as fortuneate as you and I.

    Mid July I spend a few days looking at Vancouver thru the lens of my camera and what I saw was both joyous (the weather was gorgeous) and bitter (vulgar architecture and homelessness).

    If you have time may I suggest you peruse my little photographic diary http://members.shaw.ca/rogerkemble/4.down.town/athletes.village/athletes.village.html

    You will need to be patient. Be sure to follow the links: you may find it enlightening as did I. And it may disabuse you of what you seem to thinq is “bitterness & negativity“.

    There remain many exciting, creative opportunities to do things better in Vancouver right now which might even be small steps to help achieve a more sustainable lifestyle. Someone has to step up to the plate. So far I’m doing, & saying, what I see as necessary to help achieve those goals.” Yes, yes, bravo and as they say where I come from you wont “break eggs with sticks” by being nice to everyone.

    Indeed if it is still necessary to “ to do things better in Vancouver” perhaps you should take another look at your NPA people who have been around longer than I and surely are culpable far beyond your support!

  • Urbanismo

    @ Bill Mc . . .

    Here, the more comprehensive photo diary . . .

    http://members.shaw.ca/urbanismo/thu.future/vancouver.failed.html

  • Lewis N. Villegas

    “When you knew me in the early 70′s Roger I was a young idealist just out of university. The City @ the time was @ a not dissimilar crossroad to where we are today.”

    —Bill McCreary

    I agree we are once more at the cross-roads, and that we are suffering in the city today—and in the municipalities at its periphery—a bad run of events. But, I disagree with Urbie that ours is a “failed city”. I invest too much faith in the human spirit to accept that.

    The planning—and I don’t mean the planners or the DoP, a faithful bunch of public servants—has failed us, and it was bound to be so. Suburbanism has run its course. We will not stop building suburbs anytime soon, however, the wealth and vigour of our economy and the society it supports no longer depends on the future of the shopping centre and the sprawling suburb. We have turned a corner, and we have come face to face with a very old problem: how to build good urbanism.
    There was a short respite, and a moment of euphoria, as we went hell-bent into throwing up towers in the downtown side of the old CPR grant.

    However, in Vancouver the hi-rise urbanism of downtown and False Creek is out of character with the extant fabric of our neighbourhoods. What is the best way forward? Wedge the downtown towers into the neighbourhoods, and risk tears in their social fabric and physical structure? Or, find tried and true methods to achieve high density with human-scaled products?

    As it was made crystal clear during our ‘Olympic Summer’, technical matters like getting the transportation right, are primary concerns in getting the urbanism right.

    Probably the most important message I read in Bill’s post is the idea that we have to work across political platforms. Let’s not get too divided in professional silo’s, corporate objectives, or political stripes. The consensus we need to build from the ground up has to be all inclusive. A tent big enough for us all, and with sufficient room to hold some divergent views.

  • Living in the West End

    Frances, “Now — waiting for any of these projects to actually get built. The city has had about one development permit board meeting in the last seven months because so few projects seem to make it to that stage.”
    The DVB becomes redundant when a project is rezoned through the CD-1 process. The Director of Planning issues the Development Permit without DVB involvement. Should the DVB become involved before the Public Hearing is scheduled, absolutely yes in my opinion. Then we might have a real objective look at a project and CAC’s it could give to the community rather than the political farce so aptly described by the Mayor a few weeks ago.

  • Frances Bula

    @Living. This is news to me. Any project that goes through UDP then has to go through development permit, as far as I know. Certainly, every panel I have been at makes specific references to conditions that might be added at the later development permit board stage. I stand to be corrected if I’m wrong.

  • Urbanismo

    @ Lewis . . . “A tent big enough for us all, and with sufficient room to hold some divergent views.

    Oh jeeezless, I’m gonna get myself into trouble so here goes . . . “sufficient room to hold divergent views” good luck with that . . .

    You don’t agree with failed well here http://members.shaw.ca/urbanismo/thu.future/vancouver.failed.html are my considered reasons, resting on threatening historic neighbourhoods: i.e. imposing Marine Gateway on the easterly boundary of Marpole: a project way, way out of character and probably about to become a financial flop!

    Vancouver, ever since it was declared executive city has failed to provide opportunities for our up-and-comers, to say nothing about encouraging off-shoring real estate, and we are about to pay the price.

    The current hysteria building underground TX, the Canada Line, is way out of proportion to the need and indeed with land-lift along the way threatening to turn established residential into six storey, junk stucco condo sprawl.

    Taxi drivers are right to complain. We take a cab from Montmartre to CDG, or San Telmo to EZE, so what’s so special about YVR?

    Anyway, I hope the real estate bubble hasn’t burst, it’s the only game in town, but it appears it has.

    And that may be our opportunity to re-jigg the civic modus operandi and seek out your new paradigm.

    Lewis “A tent big enough for all of us . . . “. I don’t see that working! In following the blogs my perception is most people are only interested in personal gratification: lap pools, skating rinks or how long it takes to cycle wherever!

    Public urban space just doesn’t appear, from this conversation, to be a turn-on!

    Yet, unbeknownst to most public urban space is vital to the health of the city: see Pigeon park, But it wont come without breaking eggs with sticks. Forget the big tent!

    If condos owners expect lap pools, SS refrigerator doors and electric fire places no wonder we have priced ourselves out of the market: over pricing comes incrementally, not huge lumps.

    You and I have had this off before, but professionally I have no problem with towers so long as we build them as composites . . .

    http://www.theyorkshirelad.ca/New.Nanaimo.Center/pudpn/Comparisons.pdf . . .

    The composite, with atrium, has the advantage of addressing street level scale, privacy, residential diversity and tenancy, among other amenities.

    But hey according to the bloggers here they have too many personal requirements to be bothered with huh . . . “thu big tent>/I>” . . . so . . .

    Dios bendice sin embargo . . .

  • Living in the West End

    1215 Bidwell’s DP will be issued by the Director of Planning without an open meeting of the DPB. To do so would be a reopening of the Public Hearing process after Council has approved a project. Use a CD-1, get to Public Hearing and you skip the DPB. Director of Planning can deal with minor architectural issues only not form of development. The Dec 15th minutes for 1215 Bidwell say the DP can be issued by the Director of Planning OR the DPB.

  • Living in the West End

    Fencing erected around St. John’s Church at Comox and Broughton today which will prevent community gardeners from maintaining the site and families from using the lawn and paths. Developer says nothing happening till fall so why prevent the community from enjoying the greenspace. All just before:
    Event Title: West End Cultural Celebration
    Date(s): Saturday Aug 07, 2010
    Time: 11:00 AM – 3:00 PM
    Location: 1019 Broughton Street, Vancouver
    Contact: Organization: Gordon Neighbourhood House

  • Living in the West End

    A picture of the fence put up today by Westbank/Peterson at Comox and Broughton.
    http://twitpic.com/2bwivh

  • Urbanismo

    @ Lewis . . . “A tent big enough for us all, and with sufficient room to hold some divergent views.

    Oh jeeezless, I’m gonna get myself into trouble so here goes . . . “sufficient room to hold divergent views” good luck with that . . .

    You don’t agree with failed: so be it. My considered reasons, resting on threatening historic neighbourhoods here: i.e. imposing Marine Gateway on the easterly boundary of Marpole: a project way, way out of character and probably about to become a financial flop!

    Vancouver, ever since it was declared executive city has failed to provide opportunities for our up-and-comers, to say nothing about encouraging off-shoring real estate, and we are about to pay the price.

    The current hysteria building underground TX, the Canada Line, is way out of proportion to the need and indeed with land-lift along the way threatening to turn established residential into six storey, junk stucco condo sprawl.

    Taxi drivers are right to complain. We take a cab from Montmartre to CDG, or San Telmo to EZE, so what’s so special about YVR?

    Anyway, I hope the real estate bubble hasn’t burst, it’s the only game in town, but it appears it has.

    And that may be our opportunity to re-jigg the civic modus operandi and seek out your new paradigm.

    Lewis “A tent big enough for all of us . . . “. I don’t see that working! In following the blogs my perception is most people are only interested in personal gratification: lap pools, skating rinks or how long it takes to cycle wherever!

    Public urban space just doesn’t appear, from this conversation, to be a turn-on!

    Yet, unbeknownst to most public urban space is vital to the health of the city: see Pigeon park, But it wont come without breaking eggs with sticks. Forget the big tent!

    If condos owners expect lap pools, SS refrigerator doors and electric fire places no wonder we have priced ourselves out of the market: over pricing comes incrementally, not huge lumps.

    You and I have had this off before, but professionally I have no problem with towers so long as we build them as composites . . .

    http://www.theyorkshirelad.ca/New.Nanaimo.Center/pudpn/Comparisons.pdf . . .

    The composite, with atrium, has the advantage of addressing street level scale, privacy, residential diversity and tenancy, among other amenities.

    But hey according to the bloggers here they have too many personal requirements to be bothered with huh . . . “thu big tent>/I>” . . . so . . .

    Dios bendice sin embargo . . .

  • Lewis N. Villegas

    I agree with “failed” and I admire and appreciate the depth of the analysis you present that nonetheless avoids vitriol.

    I was doing some community consultation projects up in the Gold Country of BC and a local man, raised in Ashcroft, remarked about the tent metaphor when he hear it:

    “Better to have him inside the tent pissing out, than outside pissing in.”

    I would sensor the indecency in the quote, except that this turns out to be a remark by Lynden B. Johnson about J. Edgar Hoover. So, what I took to be knowledge arising from local lore in our Gold Country, turns out to have a kind of historical fig leaf to protect it.

    Alas, the historical fig leaf is not working for places like the HAHR sites…

    “Lewis “A tent big enough for all of us . . . “. I don’t see that working! In following the blogs my perception is most people are only interested in personal gratification: lap pools, skating rinks or how long it takes to cycle wherever!”

    —Urbanismo

    If you follow my sense about it, most people have not been shown “good” urbanism, much less been given an option to have a say on it.

    Add to your list of boondoggles the conditions on our arterials today. I like to use Knight Street because the opportunity to lessen its blight was not recognized at the time of the completion of the bridge in the 1970’s. But any of the Vancouver arterials will do.

    Most lots fronting arterials today are still single family bungalows. These are now exposed to the gases, particulates, and noise of some 50 to 60,000 v.p.d. (vehicles per day). The means for their protection remain the decorations of the Bartholomew Plan: rose bushes, rhododendrons, and garden gates.

    Do you think that the neighbours have ever been given a chance? Has anyone ever even thought about their plight, much less given them a viable option?

    So, I am prepared to assert that if properly consulted, NIMBYism falls away. I have seen it happen. I have had standing ovations at the presentation of community plans; and received personal thanks from directors of planning, or just regular ol’ folks in the community.

    But never when when the present planning paradigm was in place.

  • Bill McCreery

    Thank you Urb & Lewis, more interesting ideas & perspectives [I’m about to check your link]. I was not directing my discouraged comments to either of you, rather more generally, including other blogs.

    I share an interest is exploring more fully many of the sentiments & alternatives you put forward over time. I hope there will be an opportunity to do so in the future. The ? is how do we get to the point of being able to do so & how do we go about it, particularly with added the complexities of a good public dialogue. There could be challenging times ahead & a fun, creative process to boot.

    You’re right a ‘bigger tent’ [with its own set of problems] & ‘working across political platforms’ are a good start & essential ingredients not only for change but, a more homogeneous City.

  • Lewis N. Villegas

    “I share an interest is exploring more fully many of the sentiments & alternatives you put forward over time. I hope there will be an opportunity to do so in the future. The ? is how do we get to the point of being able to do so & how do we go about it, particularly with added the complexities of a good public dialogue. There could be challenging times ahead & a fun, creative process to boot.”

    —Bill McCreary

    Bill, if you are a fan of “Faulty Towers” as I am, I have to tell you the bad news: one of our ‘point men’ is in BARCELONA right now so we are in a kind of hiatus (recall that Basel Faulty always excused his waiter’s transgressions by saying, “He’s from Barcelona”).

    Here’s the gig [I would answer ‘yes’ to all of these questions]…

    Can we do charrette-based planning as part of neighbourhood visioning at City Hall? Can we use Tax Increment Financing to pay for the costs? Can we shift the planning paradigm by injecting urban design into the planning process? Can we use the timeless principles of urbanism to forge consensus visions of place? Can we present a consensus based vision of place, and have it received with welcoming arms from the public at large—you know, with a standing ovation? Will we save time, money and resources by doing it right the first time, rather than buying into an endless loop of do-overs? Is the future of our neibourhoods something concrete and measurable that we can get a grip on, or is it dreamy and insubstantial stuff that is ever morphing into something else? Does living in a house today fronting an arterial “suck”, and is there anything we can do about it by engaging the timeless principles of urban design? Do we need to design neighbourhoods and transportation systems at the same time? Are neighbourhoods made of fee-simple title holders different from neihbourhoods made up of strata title holders?

  • Bill McCreery

    Off for weekend. You’re right, lets continue discussion on return of Mr.G. Should be interesting.

  • Bill Lee

    Cheap Condo Experiment Fails to Live up to Hype
    Planner finds result of Vancouver project ’embarrassing’ as buyers flip for profits.
    By Ian Holliday, 08 May 2014, TheTyee.ca
    http://thetyee.ca/News/2014/05/08/60-West-Cordova-Condo-Experiment/

    [ PHOTO Even to residents who’ve stayed at 60 West Cordova since it opened in 2012, the building now seems like little more than another condo project in a gentrifying area.]

    When one of Vancouver’s most prolific developers proposed 60 West Cordova on the edge of the Downtown Eastside in 2010, he promised it would be a bold new experiment in housing affordability.

    The units would be priced as low as possible and sold only to those who lived, worked, or volunteered in the neighbourhood. Buyers would have to agree to live in their units and promise not to sell for at least a year — a strategy meant to discourage investors.

    But some of the early buyers who got a great deal cashed out shortly after the one-year limit, turning profits as high as $74,000 on their “affordable” units. Others have begun renting out their units. According to data gathered at the BC Assessment office in March, 16 per cent of the condos in the building are no longer owner-occupied.

    Even to those who stayed, 60 West Cordova now seems like little more than another condo project in a gentrifying area.

    “If I were to come in now and buy the apartment that I’m in now from somebody else, I wouldn’t find it that affordable,” said Sylvia Lim, a resident who bought her unit when the building opened in 2012. “I would sort of see it as being on the average price range for most one-bedroom condos in the area.”

    Nathan Edelson, a former planner for the Downtown Eastside, said he admires the experimental nature of 60 West Cordova, but sees the end result as “embarrassing” because the developer failed to plan for the second generation of buyers in the building.

    “They were trying something,” Edelson said. “To try to bring [costs] down toward $250,000, that’s a pretty big achievement in itself. How to keep them down was the critical issue, and they didn’t quite get there. But the next one, I suspect, will. It’ll have to.”

    Assessed values climb

    When developer Ian Gillespie’s firm Westbank proposed the project, it took a number of measures to ensure that it would be able to sell the units at rates affordable to people making less than $40,000 per year. Measures included lobbying the city to reduce its parking requirement to only 19 spaces for the 108-unit building, spending minimally on marketing, furnishing units with lower-cost fixtures, and partnering with Vancity credit union to offer flexible financing for buyers.

    There are 12 non-market units in the building — four managed by Habitat for Humanity and eight by PHS Community Services. Prices for the 96 market-rate units started at $219,900, and nearly three-quarters of the units were originally sold for less than $300,000.

    Lim said she chose to buy at 60 West Cordova because it was affordable. It would have cost her the same amount to rent in the area as she ended up paying for her mortgage, she said.

    “I think it made sense,” Lim said. “The price range for this building was quite reasonable.”

    In 2013, five of the building’s market-rate units were resold for prices ranging from $306,000 to $330,000, netting an average profit of almost $56,000 for those sellers.

    “Two or three sales of that sort would really make a difference on the affordability [of a building],” Edelson said.

    Indeed, these sales have triggered a shift in assessed values at 60 West Cordova. For 2014, nearly-three quarters of the units are valued at more than $300,000.
    +————
    [ INFOGRAPHIC BAR Graph Prices at 60 West Cordova
    “Rapid Rise in prices at 60 West Cordova”
    Blue = sold units in the Woodwards building
    Red = sold units at 60 West Cordova
    Purple = units at 60 West Cordova if sold at their current list prices
    Y-axis Percent increase between purchas and sale
    X-axis Property location [ colors of bar greaphs, footer note of which floor }
    Graph by Ian Holliday. Sources include BC Assessment data on recent sales, local MLS listings, and Brian Higgins of Prompton Real Estate Services, Inc. ]
    +————
    In an email, Westbank spokeswoman Jill Killeen said this shift was predictable. The developer’s goal for the market-rate condos was to attract first-time home buyers and keep out “flippers” and investors, she said.

    “It should be expected that assessed values are higher than the original purchase price because the homes were purposely sold for less than market value as that was the goal of the project,” she said.

    Because of this potential for rapid increases in values, Edelson said he would prefer not to see the city invest in affordable homeownership — as it did by reducing its parking requirement for the 60 West Cordova project — unless there’s a mechanism to keep prices down. Such a model is in place for the building’s non-market units.

    First-time buyers priced out

    Though prices for the market units at 60 West Cordova have increased, real estate agent Brian Higgins remains a fan of the project. He said he sees a sense of community among residents that gives the building “a unique feel” compared to other condo projects in the area.

    Higgins sold a seventh-floor condo in the building earlier this year for $320,000, an increase of more than $88,000 over the unit’s original sale price.

    The project has been a good opportunity for first-time buyers, he said, noting there are other new buildings in the area where units are selling in the $200,000-range, providing similar opportunities to those found at 60 West Cordova in 2012.

    While the building remains on the low end of the Vancouver condo market, some of those first-time buyers it was originally constructed for have already been priced out. A pair of units currently on the market for $310,000 and $339,500 originally sold for $221,000 and $250,000, respectively.

    A third unit, originally sold for $281,000, is currently listed for $369,900. If sold for their asking prices, those units would only be affordable — defined as costing 30 percent or less of a person’s total income — to people making $60,000 or more per year.

    The market-rate condos at 60 West Cordova are still mostly cheaper than their counterparts in the nearby Woodwards building — also a Westbank project — but their values have been rising more quickly.

    A sampling of six Woodwards condos that sold in 2013 for prices in the $350,000 range showed sellers making profits comparable to those found in the 60 West Cordova sales. The difference is that Woodwards units have been appreciating for four years now, compared to two for 60 West Cordova.

    As the city plans to add more than 8,000 “affordable homeownership” units over the course of the recently approved Downtown Eastside local area plan, it will need to look at ways to prevent the price spikes seen at 60 West Cordova, Edelson said.

    Affordable homeownership is a model that only works if there are restrictions in place to keep prices low for future generations of buyers, he said.

    “The real thing is, when you sell the unit, what are you selling it for?” Edelson said. “It’s good that you have to wait at least a year, but beyond that, what is [the price]?… The mechanism around resale is the critical one.”

    Ian Holliday is completing a practicum at The Tyee. A version of this story was first published on The Thunderbird.