Is this all in “a statement” ?
Is Mr. Roberton actually making sounds, speaking to the public, etc.
Can we hear it on radio?

Has Mr. (Pottymouth) come unhinged and handlers like Meggs and Quinlan (and City Manager) making things up for him?

I read this as City Manager said “we are going to do this, and you are going to say this”

So now it is “Waldorf Productions” that is being helped, sorta, not the Hotel site.
And as Gregor played in a band at the Biltmore Hotel is that getting special deals too?
What about the former Eldorado Hotel?

And the historic hotels of downtown who used to have bands?

The midnight story by Madame Bula and Mickelburgh

“New owners say they have no plans to tear down the Waldorf”
ROD MICKLEBURGH and FRANCES BULA
VANCOUVER — The Globe and Mail
Published Thursday, Jan. 10 2013, 11:45 PM EST
Last updated Thursday, Jan. 10 2013, 11:51 PM EST
…”Sources say city staff are already scrambling to figure out possible solutions to the chaotic situation.”…
…”One possibility would see the current operators return to the hotel and continue to run its existing operations, which include an art gallery, nightclub, bar and restaurant, along with space for cultural events. That would require some pressure from the city, an informal agreement on the site’s future, and an end to the animosity between Waldorf Productions and the property’s landlord.
A more likely scenario would preserve the Waldorf as a heritage building and future arts venue under new operators, while allowing development on the property’s large parking lots.”

Now about W2 at Woodwards monstrosity.

And what about the VAG benefit?
Is Broadway going to keep the Hollywood?
Can the Park be turned into a Repertory Cinema just up the street from The Hall?

Thought of The Day

“The ‘Vancouver+Stupid’ themed T-shirts with the slogan “ICH BIN EIN STUPIDER” sales, must be going throw the roof…”

And of course I’m addressing that thought to the crowd that continue to believe the words that come out of Vancouver Mayor’s mouth.
My educated conclusion is…
“Much Ado About Nothing.”

Waldorf is a business. Whatever its use there will always be a contract between a landlord and a lessee. If the conditions of the contract are not fulfilled, the contract is broken, the lease is terminated . Period.
All the above conditions have been met.
I understand the hipsters cohabiting in that space thought that they were too sexy for their shirts, but in the end when monies are involved… tough, eh.
Here’s the funny part though, da Mayor and his Vision pals are crying crocodile tears, saying that the City, which is “me and you money”, are
looking for solutions…
Eff me Rhonda, if that’s not grand!
How come when a city owned ‘community hub’ broke the deed, aka W2Woodwards, they did not run looking for solutions trying to save it?
Double standards?

Add to that the VIAwesome and Marcella Munro’s pish and the stone soup is complete.
The whole village is out.

Could it be because Solterra purchased a full table at last year Vision Vancouver fund raising?
And now, it is in damage control, political mitigation, effing adaptation time?
You be the judge.

In the end, here’s the thang, much ado about nothing, Solterra, if they are really smart, and after a short behind the doors convo with the savior Mayor and his band of merry Vision music-ants will grant them a generous relaxation/ heritage density transfer or the one time only 200 enclosed balconies codicil, they’ll think of something, so the building will be saved, the business use lease will be renewed for 99 years with an option to buy, just like a Hoot, of course tax free hush hush on the QT.

For all of you courageous enough to articulate your own opinion, let’s be frank, take a walk in the area, but don’t take a Google Maps walk, take a real walk, disregard the chicken smell in the air, and the shitty buildings that are holding up thanks to coats of paint and lots of Duct tape, disregard the empty, dirty, parking lots and tell me…

Here’s my question:
Say that psychedelic interior designed pub would be still there in a month time, ahem, when exactly would you have in mind to attend/ visit/ have brunch … ?
My point exactly!

Me? I wouldn’t worry much.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0e10baH6cE

The Vancouver “leadership” didn’t give a sheat on the Ridge, the Hollywood, the Rio, the Denman Cinema, the Pantages, Maxine’s, Granville 7s, the Playhouse … formerly known as “local entertainment” OR the Little Mountain Housing Coop aka “affordable housing” OR the Bloedel Conservatory (saved by the effort, time and money citizens of Vancouver) OR the Stanley Park’s Children Petting Zoo aka “family amenities”, the (insert here) …

If they could only find a way to give themselves a pay raise now, hmm, that would be just golden.
Oh, wait… 🙂

We live in Vancouver and this keeps us busy.

PS.
Excellent post in the Huffington by Mike Klassen, try link #1
Bill Lee #2
“What about the Eldorado Hotel?
And what about the VAG benefit?… the Hollywood, the Park…”
Well said! Well said!

It’s funny that when it’s a the son of a mega-rich non-Vancouver family that screws up his business, Gregor suddenly jumps into action.

I guess he was able to identify with Anselmi Jr. better than the average business owner.

And to think, if they’d only gone to daddy for help they could have just paid the rent and had nothing to worry about for 15 years.

Good thing Gregor is there to defend the next generation of hipsters from their business follies.

What a joke.

I spent countless nights in the Starfish room, Luvaffair, Kits Pub, and other grungy places that faded away with time. It happens. Every dive bar used to be cool at some point. It’s not a tragedy if it happens to be cool right now.

These west side and Toronto debutantes were dumb enough to blow all their cash on building a cool ceiling and bar and forgot to make money and pay the rent.

That’s who we’re bailing out now?

Madness.

Can we have reminiscences of old memories of when Queen Street West was hip and the hotels had not become chic, trendy and “mentioned” in bold names.

Or of the Plateau and Rue Prince Arthur when there was a Warshaw’s.

So people complain constantly that the city is always selling out to developers, that we have no culture, that this is “no fun city”… but when the city does finally stand up to protect a cultural space, suddenly it’s a waste of resources to do so?

You have discovered the secret of internet debating: If A, then B. If B, then A.

The same argument could have been made to keep the Ridge theatre and bowling lane alive and be saved from the wrecking ball. But the Mayor and Council said their hands were tied. This has everything to do with politics and meddling in private business matters.

I get the desire to malign the political parties for kowtowing to developers who fund their campaigns on one hand and protecting their ‘under-40’ voter base on the other, but any look at the City budget should produce no surprise that, regardless the parties in power on 12th and Cambie, there is huge incentive to grant construction permits and keep the cash flowing in to fund ongoing operations. The round of layoffs in 2009-2010 more than coincidental with the fallout from the 2008-2009 housing recession.

Other cities have managed to foster arts but this comes as a subsidy by increasing taxes elsewhere in lieu, or looking for more monied benefactors who can trickle down some funding through the artistic food chain. Vancouver seems unwilling, or unable, to make the shift.

I really wish that the City would have coherent, well thought out policies and strategies in place instead of inventing ‘next moves’ on the back of napkins. This stuff does nothing for our cultural OR business cred. Strictly, ‘Amateur Night in Dixieland’ (or the Tiki Lounge).

I’m not enamoured of ‘the deals’ between the City and developers, as they currently exist (and if anyone can help explain the formula, let us know).

They always seem to have strings attached. I suppose the developer could promise to keep the Waldorf—but for how long? And who would determine best use?

And in return the developer gets, what, increased density? A break on property tax on the hotel’s portion of the property (that is a cost to the taxpayer, in subsidy).

And if that property is subsidized, what gets cut from the budget—more community centre hours or other civic amenities?

So, some thoughts. Is there policy on:

1) Identifying older buildings to save, in advance, and which to let go. And on what basis they would do this, at all? As part of the cultural policy? Recreation? And why is the City so concerned about helping out a FOR PROFIT business (that can’t TURN a profit?) at that particular site.

I wonder if this issue might regalvanize all the nice people who live, visit and play around the Ridge?

2) Hitting up the very wealthy to help buy/preserve buildings for cultural/community purposes? They do this very successfully through foundations and private investment in NYC, San Fran, etc.

3) Seriously, sounds like this business group either got snookered—or just learned the biggest business lesson of their lives.

Is the Mayor going to respond to every biz blooper in a like-minded fashion fashion (first offering to help them find another venue to operate a bar/club/restaurant from? Come ON!).

If so, might I interest the taxpayers in this concept: combo art gallery/pool hall/wet bar/pet grooming/laundromat? I would be delighted to have my fellow Vancouverites…er…partner…in this EARNEST endeavour. Please send the rent money directly to my business associate in Nigeria.

Any other people out there who own private commercial property that they may want to sell one day, or who may want to approach the City about re-zoning, should seriously think about the implications of this bizarre ad hoc process.

The Waldorf Public House – a Donnelly Pub Group joint. Kids from Surrey and the Tri-Cities – experience the Tiki Bar in black with $8 highball specials.

Love it!

From Gordon Price:

http://pricetags.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/mixed-salad-thoughts-on-the-waldorf/

@Silly Season # 20. I too commend Gordon Price’s article as touching thoughtfully on the many difficult facets.

Another coming issue will be “food security” in the city as Canada Safeway (30% of the current shopping) is sold off and stores closed.
(The big cry, as was when the Marpole Safeway was closed for condo towers, is what about the adjoining liquor store!).

Preserve Ahts that few see (VAG and a few dozen “non-members” a day) or participate in or compulsory block-level arts involvement on a yearly basis to get people out of their homes, away from television and learning the Chinese, Punjabi of their neighbours as they carve soapstone, build gnomes and paint urban scenes from their porch, while the portable intaglio presses are making copies for all 50 people in the block.

Meanwhile the Doyenne of Doom, the Mother of Misery, Lachrymose Lederman in the Groan And Wail goes on as
“Waldorf closing a ‘gutting’ of arts scene”
by MARSHA LEDERMAN
The Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Jan. 11 2013, 9:27 PM EST
Last updated Friday, Jan. 11 2013, 9:29 PM EST
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/waldorf-closing-a-gutting-of-arts-scene/article7278639/

….”For me, Vancouver never felt more world class than it did inside that tiny, dark shipping container.” !!!
and
“I’m feeling pretty gutted,” wrote Vancouver-based musician and Waldorf regular (she’s a fan of the Monday night Ice Cream Socials) Louise Burns in an e-mail this week from Los Angeles, where she’s recording an album. “Watching Vancouver slowly commit cultural suicide is a difficult thing to do.”
In a profanity-laced tweet, Polaris-nominated musician Grimes, a Vancouver native, expressed similar displeasure, criticizing the city: “you’ve destroyed nearly every piece of culture that you had.”

Meanwhile in TO, small Kings Street West cafes are trying to keep the feet of Condzilla at bay.

TOWER PROJECT
“Entertainment District’s restaurant row resists condo frenzy”
by GAYLE MacDONALD
The Globe and Mail
Published Saturday, Jan. 12 2013, 12:00 AM EST
Last updated Saturday, Jan. 12 2013, 12:13 AM EST
…”“Approval of this project will cause a domino effect as developers, who are sitting on valuable blocks of land, will seek to build the same sort of density,” says Mr. Carbone, whose Victorian-era building will be dwarfed by the nearby condo. “It sets a precedent that will ruin the heritage of this neighbourhood, a go-to tourist destination for 20-plus years.
When Mr. Carbone started his family-run Italian eatery, he was one of a smattering of restaurauteurs trying to attract theatregoers for a meal before hitting venues like the Mirvish’s Royal Alex theatre. Today, his is one of 22 low-slung eateries along King Street West that are fearful that condo development is spiralling out of control in the Entertainment District’s four-block radius, a parcel of land that now has 51 condo projects under way or approved by the city.” [ more ]
theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/entertainment-districts-restaurant-row-resists-condo-frenzy/article7285865/

Once more – great comment A Dave #23!
Your informed perspective helps me to place the Waldorf issue into a larger civic picture.

Brilliant @25 – Bang. On. Have had pleasure of attending several NPA and Vision fundraising galas in past 10 years (they can be fun), and counted more, and different, developer tables at the Vision ‘dos’ than at the NPA ones. The writing has been on the wall for four years. Does anyone still believe that money doesn’t talk with the governing party? Vision has out-NPA’d the NPA, while the city sleeps… and apparently weeps.

Julia @27 – Indeed – where art thou, VEC?

Sad to see we’re 13 days into 2013 and already the ridiculous over the top hyperbole and general losing of one’s shit is as strong as ever.

two things.

First, I’m surprised at the hate at Robertson in this thread. When he doesn’t stand in the way of condo developers tearing down cultural or community icons, we shame him for doing so. Then, we shame him when he does (or promises to). Damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t.

Second, many people are complaining that giving the developer incentive to keep a space for the waldorf would drain taxpayer money. This ignores things like density bonuses, which allow a developer to access more of the land’s value without the city paying or giving a tax break.

@boohoo 30 translated : It’s only 13 days into 2013 and people are daring to criticize Vision’s inept bumbling and on the fly policy making.

@Brian 32-Rf sums it up – what’s behind the difference in action between the Waldorf and the Ridge?

First, I’m surprised at the hate at Robertson in this thread. When he doesn’t stand in the way of condo developers tearing down cultural or community icons, we shame him for doing so. Then, we shame him when he does…

I just tried to recall any other heritage, cultural or community assets under threat that the mayor made efforts to preserve these past 4 years and I can’t recall a single one. Can anyone list any others?

“This ignores things like density bonuses, which allow a developer to access more of the land’s value without the city paying or giving a tax break.”

True, Brian, but the Heritage Density Transfer program was run into the ground by former DOP Brent Toderian (who — purposely, it seemed — refused to act on any of the recommendations in 2 separate reports that warned of the impending problems).

Once Toderian successfully turned the program into a complete shambles, he moved to put a moratorium on the program, passed by Council in early 2010, which has since shut down any heritage preservation that would use this tool to preserve heritage/cultural spaces like the Pantages, or now the Waldorf (not sure if the Waldorf is even on the Heritage Registry?).

In my opinion, a kneecapped Heritage Density Transfer program fit in perfectly with Toderian’s Historic Area Height Review (HAHR) and the movement to tear down the viaducts. These three policies combined have pretty much eviscerated long-standing City cultural preservation policies (created post-Chinatown Freeway/Mayor Tom Campbell) in the Historic Area, and opened the whole area up to the condo towers now coming to Chinatown, the Pantages condos, etc., and rampant speculation that has followed in the DTES.

For example, once the Heritage Density Transfer program moratorium came into effect, the owners of the Chinese Benevolent Societies had little choice but to sign on with Toderian’s proposal for the Main Street towers, as it was really the only way to get any City money to renovate their 100 year old buildings – despite their historic, cultural and civic value. They, and others who were trying to preserve historic buildings in the area under the old rules, were blindsided by the moratorium, and suddenly “let’s make a condo tower amenity deal” became the only avenue.

That, to me, is a City that is run by people who are either too ignorant or shortsighted or addicted to DP money (as Roger notes) to recognize the true long-term value of preserving historic/cultural spaces.

So yes, it is frustrating to see what has happened under Vision (actually, as others note, most of this was started by Sullivan/NPA and just ramped up under Vision), and also rather ironic that, 40+ years later, our “progressive” (some would say “hippy-dippy”) Council has come full circle, and their policies closely mirror Tom Campbell’s full-stop, tear-it-down, development-crazy government, given that old Tom absolutely hated hippies and was never afraid to say so!

A Dave, thank you for all the explicit background on this subject.

It helps to explain why we are where we are today.

How can one “Save the Waldorf” now?

One thing that’s not being talked about is difficult Waldorf Productions have made it for anyone to partner up with them for anything entertainment, RE development, or any kind of business partnership.

They’re not financially responsibility, admit to knowing little about key elements of their business, and can’t manage cash flow.

And when they don’t get their way, they blow the whole thing up, creating a huge mess that makes any kind of help or solution near impossible.

And this is just craziness: http://straight.com/news/342681/waldorf-hotel-entertainment-leaseholder-sought-get-property-redeveloped-around-cultural-hub

One of the important lessons I hope comes out of this is one of the importance of proactive, functional, respectful, and realistic business (and political) partnerships.

Ahhh..so the plot thickens.Pauls link adds a few new twists to the ongoing saga
This makes me think about what was done with the Yale,I dont know the details but I know I get my bar back when the dust settles and that’s a good thing.I feel I spent enough money in there over the years I should get shares.
http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainment/Vancouver+blues+legend+bows/5699172/story.html

The Waldorf Comms team have put this up in response: http://www.waldorfhotel.com/2013/01/the-team-at-the-waldorf-created-a-community-driven-and-financially-viable-business-that-was-thriving/

Oh and one more thing that may be worthy of discussion:

At a now-prescient event at the Hotel Georgia in the fall where the topic was “Building and Artistic Community – The Hotel as a Creative Hub”, local artist and academic Landon MacKenzie pointed out that the brand new amenity spaces granted to arts and cultural by real estate developers are often not conducive to the creative process. The best artist spaces are raw, industrial, and as far from new and up to building code as is possible.

So, if the parties involved preserve the use of the land as part of a new development, will it be as well used, revered, and useful as what was there today?

Hubris (pron.: /ˈhjuːbrɪs/), also hybris, from ancient Greek ὕβρις, means extreme pride or arrogance.

Hubris often indicates a loss of contact with reality and an overestimation of one’s own competence or capabilities.

*cough*

@Waltyss # 45. I agree entirely with you.

Well, at least we can see that Waldorf Productions has SOME concept of OPM (other people’s money)—or land.
😉

But I see some other problems, too.

Not content with merely not paying rent, youngish Mr. Gomez, goes ‘all in’. Not only does he indicate that he can swing a major land deal (not his own land, mind you), but hints—broadly–that ‘The City has had a very positive reaction to our ideas.”

Well, that’s bringin’ out the bazookas, innit?!

(Naturally, if Mr. Gomez has had discussions with ‘someone’ at City Hall , we would certainly all like to know ‘who’ and for how long).

Now, I don’t know if Mr. Gomez is trying to get his hands on the property himself, or alleviate some of his own financial problems, or make nice with City Hall over policy (however it is defined today)—but it appears that he has definitely ‘over reached’ at this point.

Sigh. The owner of the property is always the last to know, isn’t he?