HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #20221  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 5:55 AM
Klazu's Avatar
Klazu Klazu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Above Metro Vancouver clouds
Posts: 9,444
Social housing with million-dollar waterfront views. Only in Vancouver. No matter what they say, there are going to be addicts in this building as well, making it a nightmare for the neighbors and the kids.

They could have built condos up on top and with that money build triple the social housing units elsewhere.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20222  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 7:24 AM
Changing City's Avatar
Changing City Changing City is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 3,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klazu View Post
Social housing with million-dollar waterfront views. Only in Vancouver. No matter what they say, there are going to be addicts in this building as well, making it a nightmare for the neighbors and the kids.

They could have built condos up on top and with that money build triple the social housing units elsewhere.
It's unusual, but not unknown. You can find examples in Europe, (Bergen for example) and in Toronto, and in London in the UK.

The economics don't work like that. These are costing $500,000 a unit to build. If the City sold the rights to build 60 condos above the school, I doubt they would have got much more than the $30m these are costing to build. They can't build them cheaper anywhere else, construction costs don't change because it's Coal Harbour, and they would also have to acquire another site as well, so the units elsewhere would end up costing more than $500,000 each. This also has a tight timeframe to be built, because BC Hydro are paying the School Board for the cost of the school, so they in turn can build their substation under the school site in Nelson Park. And that site has to be available in 2024.
__________________
Contemporary Vancouver development blog, https://changingcitybook.wordpress.com/ Then and now Vancouver blog https://changingvancouver.wordpress.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20223  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 9:15 AM
Prometheus's Avatar
Prometheus Prometheus is offline
Reason and Freedom
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vancouver/Toronto
Posts: 3,974
Quote:
Originally Posted by Changing City View Post

The economics don't work like that. These are costing $500,000 a unit to build. If the City sold the rights to build 60 condos above the school, I doubt they would have got much more than the $30m these are costing to build.
This response is wilfully obtuse. Why must a developer be restricted to 60 condo units? The height and density restrictions currently encumbering this site are entirely artificial; they were concocted by the city and they can be made to go away by the city. Liberated from these city-made restrictions, this ultra prime site could be worth more than $150 million, even with the requirement to provide the school. Proceeds from a competitive sale could fund exponentially more housing in addition to other much-needed city projects and services.

Considering the full range of options available to the city, this plan is a colossal waste and a breach of fiduciary duty to Vancouver’s citizens. Only through its own inflexibility and lack of balance between important policy objectives has the city dragged Vancouver into this asinine but avoidable situation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20224  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 4:56 PM
scryer scryer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by officedweller View Post
Vancouver awards $71 million contract for Coal Harbour waterfront school and social housing
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/coal...ctor-vancouver

As a side note - the staggered panels have become very tired very quickly.
I prefer the flat side rather than the curved side. I think the curve accentuates the panels.
Based on the close-up rendering below, the windows are small, as the bottom half of each is a spandrel panel.


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/coal...ctor-vancouver


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/coal...ctor-vancouver

Thank you for sharing officedweller! I would predict that the residents in the surrounding areas will definitely fight this one tooth and nail.

No one in the surrounding area spent over $1+ million on their condos, for some of the best RE in Canada (and arguably the world) only to have a social housing tower to pop up next door. The current neighbours have lots of money, and in this day and age that usually translates to lots of political power and influence. I guarantee that they will fight this tower to the bitter end, and they won't be shy about pulling some strings to do so.

For the record, I am not taking sides on that aspect of this discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus View Post
Why must a developer be restricted to 60 condo units? The height and density restrictions currently encumbering this site are entirely artificial; they were concocted by the city and they can be made to go away by the city. Liberated from these city-made restrictions, this ultra prime site could be worth more than $150 million, even with the requirement to provide the school. Proceeds from a competitive sale could fund exponentially more housing in addition to other much-needed city projects and services.

Considering the full range of options available to the city, this plan is a colossal waste and a breach of fiduciary duty to Vancouver’s citizens. Only through its own inflexibility and lack of balance between important policy objectives has the city dragged Vancouver into this asinine but avoidable situation.
Agreed. The red tape that the COV (and I would even say Metro Vancouver) imposes on itself is mind-boggling for me as well.
__________________
There is a housing crisis, and we simply need to speak up about it.

Pinterest - I use this social media platform to easily add pictures into my posts on this forum. Plus there are great architecture and city photos out there as well.

Last edited by scryer; Jan 16, 2022 at 5:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20225  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 5:32 PM
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 17,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klazu View Post
Social housing with million-dollar waterfront views. Only in Vancouver. No matter what they say, there are going to be addicts in this building as well, making it a nightmare for the neighbors and the kids.

They could have built condos up on top and with that money build triple the social housing units elsewhere.
I bet there are addicts and career criminals in your building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20226  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 5:42 PM
Changing City's Avatar
Changing City Changing City is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 3,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus View Post
This response is wilfully obtuse. Why must a developer be restricted to 60 condo units? The height and density restrictions currently encumbering this site are entirely artificial; they were concocted by the city and they can be made to go away by the city. Liberated from these city-made restrictions, this ultra prime site could be worth more than $150 million, even with the requirement to provide the school. Proceeds from a competitive sale could fund exponentially more housing in addition to other much-needed city projects and services.

Considering the full range of options available to the city, this plan is a colossal waste and a breach of fiduciary duty to Vancouver’s citizens. Only through its own inflexibility and lack of balance between important policy objectives has the city dragged Vancouver into this asinine but avoidable situation.
City Council considered the range of options that were available when they considered the rezoning for the site last year. Your preferred approach of ignoring existing policy wasn't supported. Council unanimously supported a building that is very slightly taller than the approved building from 1997.

The only reason it wasn't built in the 1990s, alongside the Community Centre, was there was no funding from the Province for the school. There still isn't, but BC Hydro's funding for the school makes construction possible. The social housing is an opportunistic use of the roof space of the school.

Many of the objections to the proposed building was that it's too high, and will intrude into private views. Imagine how many more would have objected if the approved plan from the 1990s had been thrown out in favour of a condo tower.

Obviously you're entitled to disagree with Council choosing to stick with the original plan for the area, but the Public Hearing extensively reviewed the options, and unanimously supported this building.
__________________
Contemporary Vancouver development blog, https://changingcitybook.wordpress.com/ Then and now Vancouver blog https://changingvancouver.wordpress.com/

Last edited by Changing City; Jan 16, 2022 at 5:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20227  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 5:53 PM
Changing City's Avatar
Changing City Changing City is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 3,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by scryer View Post
Thank you for sharing officedweller! I would predict that the residents in the surrounding areas will definitely fight this one tooth and nail.

No one in the surrounding area spent over $1+ million on their condos, for some of the best RE in Canada (and arguably the world) only to have a social housing tower to pop up next door. The current neighbours have lots of money, and in this day and age that usually translates to lots of political power and influence. I guarantee that they will fight this tower to the bitter end, and they won't be shy about pulling some strings to do so.
The article is about the construction contract being let. Construction starts in the next few months. The site has been identified for a mid-rise social housing building over a school since the Coal Harbour Plan (ODP) was approved. As the rezoning report noted "In 1990, the ODP had the foresight to promote co-locating social housing with civic facilities". All the surrounding towers were built as a result of that plan, so none of the owners in the area were blindsided by the unexpected announcement of social housing here. They might have thought 'it'll never happen' - just like the condo owners at International Village thought 'they'll never build a school here', but they were wrong, and Crosstown School is open, and full.

Similarly this new school will be open in 2024, and the non-market housing will be let to a variety of people in “core-need households”. That doesn't mean it'll be full of people currently living in tents in Crab Park. "The project will comply with the City’s definition of social housing, whereby a minimum of 30% of the units will be at or below the BC Housing Income Limits (HILs) levels, defined as annual household incomes of $55,500 or less for a one-bedroom, $67,500 for a two-bedroom and $78,000 for a three-bedroom unit for 2021."
__________________
Contemporary Vancouver development blog, https://changingcitybook.wordpress.com/ Then and now Vancouver blog https://changingvancouver.wordpress.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20228  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 6:27 PM
VancouverOfTheFuture's Avatar
VancouverOfTheFuture VancouverOfTheFuture is online now
Vancouverite
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 2,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by Changing City View Post
Council unanimously supported a building that is very slightly taller than the approved building from 1997.
i think THIS proves peoples point exactly.

Coal Harbour, Downtown, Vancouver and MetroVancouver have changed DRASTICALLY since 1997, and yet the CoV has kept stagnant and are doing what they planned to 25yrs ago.

118,000 more people, Coal Harbour no longer being a rail yard, yet no change in vision.

sums it up pretty good right there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20229  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 6:28 PM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant
Posts: 6,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klazu View Post
Social housing with million-dollar waterfront views. Only in Vancouver. No matter what they say, there are going to be addicts in this building as well, making it a nightmare for the neighbors and the kids.

They could have built condos up on top and with that money build triple the social housing units elsewhere.
I don't know the details of this project, but "social housing" is a bit of a broad term. It could mean below market housing aimed at working people.

Coal Harbour is full of ghost units, so I don't have much of a problem with a project like this. In fact, I would like to see a flood of rental projects injected into coal harbour.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20230  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 6:33 PM
csbvan's Avatar
csbvan csbvan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by logan5 View Post
I don't know the details of this project, but "social housing" is a bit of a broad term. It could mean below market housing aimed at working people.

Coal Harbour is full of ghost units, so I don't have much of a problem with a project like this. In fact, I would like to see a flood of rental projects injected into coal harbour.
The last thing Coal Harbour needs is more lifeless, half empty, multimillion dollar investment-only condo buildings. If Coal Harbour were to only have new rental and social buildings built going forward maybe it would have some life.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20231  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 6:57 PM
Changing City's Avatar
Changing City Changing City is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 3,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture View Post
i think THIS proves peoples point exactly.

Coal Harbour, Downtown, Vancouver and MetroVancouver have changed DRASTICALLY since 1997, and yet the CoV has kept stagnant and are doing what they planned to 25yrs ago.

118,000 more people, Coal Harbour no longer being a rail yard, yet no change in vision.

sums it up pretty good right there.
That's a weird take on the history. It was a railyard in the 1980s. The railyard was declared surplus to requirements and Marathon, (CPs development arm) were given the job of selling off the land. The City produced an ODP, the Coal Harbour Plan, to develop the area. It included 21% non-market housing, and three projects were developed, with a fourth site reserved for a school with non-market housing above it next to the community centre. Marathon sold the land to the City for that purpose in 1996, and sold all the other sites that weren't reserved for parks to condo developers, who built the towers that the Plan identified over 20+ years. The last tower was completed in 2012. This site was still reserved for a school, and the final part of the intended non-market housing. Every other site in Coal Harbour was built to meet the plan. Now there's funding available, this site will be too. The non-market housing is still needed; the school can finally be funded, and unless there's redevelopment of what's already been built, the area will be fully developed according to the plan.
__________________
Contemporary Vancouver development blog, https://changingcitybook.wordpress.com/ Then and now Vancouver blog https://changingvancouver.wordpress.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20232  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2022, 10:02 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 35,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus View Post
...
Liberated from these city-made restrictions, this ultra prime site could be worth more than $150 million, even with the requirement to provide the school.
...
Considering the full range of options available to the city, this plan is a colossal waste and a breach of fiduciary duty to Vancouver’s citizens. Only through its own inflexibility and lack of balance between important policy objectives has the city dragged Vancouver into this asinine but avoidable situation.
Exactly why Concord was suing Pinnacle over the 601 Beach site.

Also agreed that Council would not want to upset the high end condo owners by proposing a tall building on the site (whether condo or rental).
But what if they did? 601 Beach will also block a lot of views versus the original Concord Lands plan.
There is a market rental (maybe with co-op) next door at C-side.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20233  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2022, 12:10 AM
Zepfancouver's Avatar
Zepfancouver Zepfancouver is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,101
Gabriola Mansion, 1523 Davie St

Working the Gabriola Mansion today.
I didn't see any ghost (Ghosts of Vancouver https://www.ghostsofvancouver.com/ha...gabriola-house No, that opening in the wall is not a tunnel, just a crawl space)
Working (for sprinklers) in the basement, lots of seismic work. This place is bigger than I though, 16 rentals (floor plans https://www.carreramc.com/gabriolahouse ).
I'll be back there next week working the first floor, I'll capture more shots of the project then.

Video Link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20234  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2022, 2:48 AM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 35,434
Using my imagination I see a ghost holding a machine gun on the right side of that pic!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20235  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2022, 3:46 AM
Zepfancouver's Avatar
Zepfancouver Zepfancouver is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,101
Now that you got me focus on that right side, I see a ghost Pinocchio.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20236  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2022, 4:19 PM
Jimbo604 Jimbo604 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus View Post
This response is wilfully obtuse. Why must a developer be restricted to 60 condo units? The height and density restrictions currently encumbering this site are entirely artificial; they were concocted by the city and they can be made to go away by the city. Liberated from these city-made restrictions, this ultra prime site could be worth more than $150 million, even with the requirement to provide the school. Proceeds from a competitive sale could fund exponentially more housing in addition to other much-needed city projects and services.

Considering the full range of options available to the city, this plan is a colossal waste and a breach of fiduciary duty to Vancouver’s citizens. Only through its own inflexibility and lack of balance between important policy objectives has the city dragged Vancouver into this asinine but avoidable situation.
So true. City Hall seems determined to get the least value out of this site for the citizens of Vancouver.

Hopefully current crew will be replaced in city election just nine months away (Oct/22).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20237  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2022, 8:31 PM
Vin Vin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 7,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Changing City View Post
It's unusual, but not unknown. You can find examples in Europe, (Bergen for example) and in Toronto, and in London in the UK.

The economics don't work like that. These are costing $500,000 a unit to build. If the City sold the rights to build 60 condos above the school, I doubt they would have got much more than the $30m these are costing to build. They can't build them cheaper anywhere else, construction costs don't change because it's Coal Harbour, and they would also have to acquire another site as well, so the units elsewhere would end up costing more than $500,000 each. This also has a tight timeframe to be built, because BC Hydro are paying the School Board for the cost of the school, so they in turn can build their substation under the school site in Nelson Park. And that site has to be available in 2024.
Those examples you quoted are by river/lake banks, and not necessarily at extremely wealthy neighbourhoods with "million dollar views" as stated by Klazu.

For Vancouver and Metro Van, such projects can be placed at the banks of the Fraser River in neighbourhoods such as the River District or New Westminster's Queensborough district and they wouldn't bat an eye, but it would certainly raise eyebrows if one were placed smack at the waterfront of Coal Harbour. Besides, we are world-renowed for having very shady characters and criminals residing in or hanging around at our infamous subsidised housing buildings.

In other cities I've been to, the co-ops house the less unfortunate, but most of them folks or new immigrants who are still hardworking and trying to do their best to make a living. For instance, many Toronto co-ops house families with kids playing outside, and they do deserve all the water views. In Vancouver, many of those given lux living do not deserve anything except simple shelters. Some of them belong in jail cells.


If folks in Vancouver's City hall have even the tiniest of brains, that Coal Harbour site should be built not only as a school, but also a City-run downtown public market offering cheaper rents to small businesses or farmers who are willing to travel to the City to sell their produce fresh. That neighbourhood is in need of such a facility that would benefit those living around. It can attract tourists and visitors alike, and would also encourage the community to venture out to enjoy the waterfront, and doing so with a purpose.

Alas, our backward City has again let its residents down, and except for the school, wasting tax-payer's money to spend on something that not only does not benefit the majority, but can also be detrimental to the community.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20238  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2022, 10:21 PM
GenWhy? GenWhy? is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 2,119
Of the 57 units 34 are for families as the City's intent on choosing a program that is dedicated to such folks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20239  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2022, 10:45 PM
cov cov is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 245
Honestly, it looks great. The people complaining about it being a waste of money will complain about building social housing anywhere in this city. The reality is that social housing has to be built somewhere in this city.

If you feel like a neighborhood is excellent for social housing then campaign for it. Lobby your MLAs and city councilors. Don't hide behind dishonest arguments to disguise anti-social housing sentiments. Don't you think it's just wasting everybody's time? You push people to spend time addressing a problem that won't make you happy anyway. What's the point of this endeavor?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20240  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2022, 4:00 AM
Klazu's Avatar
Klazu Klazu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Above Metro Vancouver clouds
Posts: 9,444
Yeah, units at this location would have sold for multiple million dollars each and would have funded many times more housing in DTES.

Quote:
Originally Posted by logan5 View Post
I don't know the details of this project, but "social housing" is a bit of a broad term. It could mean below market housing aimed at working people.

Coal Harbour is full of ghost units, so I don't have much of a problem with a project like this. In fact, I would like to see a flood of rental projects injected into coal harbour.
The spin it always about "working people" but those small units will have some questionable people down on their luck in them, guaranteed. And nice choice of words about "injecting" life into Coal Harbour. Can't say I disagree about that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
I bet there are addicts and career criminals in your building.
Nah, 3 years in the building and only decent people mostly of Asian origin in our building and floor. I can only assume there is a few cheating on their taxes, but no shady characters. This is Burnaby, after all.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:35 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.