Today's coverage in the North Shore News describes the development as a transformation of the City of North Van's waterfront into a mixed-use, beachfront community. Concert Properties' sketches show a mixed-use neighbourhood laid out along the Spirit Trail route. It features a boardwalk, beaches and a dock for kayakers.
Concert Properties' Chairman David Podmore is quoted as saying the plan "is a really unique opportunity to make the waterfront more accessible for more people, and make the waterfront more lively."
In the North Shore News item, Podmore says the proposal isn't a plan, but "an idea or suggestion to start the conversation".
City Council doesn't seem to eager to rush this project through, saying "that while the plan is attractive, city planning staff are too busy to make studying it a priority."
The property at 801 Harbourside Drive is a 136,000 square foot waterfront development site that is currently the site is zoned commercial/light industrial.
Councillor Bob Fearnley was probably the most pointed with his opposition to the plan saying: "I'm going to vote against this," said Coun. Bob Fearnley. "It's a good plan, but we have policy here about preserving industrial land and we should stick to it. We have an OCP. The process to amend it is a lengthy one and it should not be done on the fly."
The Concert Properties' "ideas" apparently involve: "525,000 square feet of residential space, 320,000 square feet of office space and a range of community amenities."
Source North Shore News
Source North Shore News
42 opinions/comments:
I walk our dogs down there on a regular basis, and can't see a good reason why there shouldn't be residential development on that site.
Surely there are places less scenic where industrial and commercial tenants can locate.
The size is enough reason to say no.
But, ah, Barry, the industrial/port business needs to be on the scenic waterfront.
Lots of commercial land in the plan as well, this is about jobs in the community vs another residential megaproject. I doubt even the growth junkies on Council will support this.
Yeah... Spa Utopia and Thomas Haas Chocolates (both big favorites in our house) sure do fit in well with "industrial/port" development!
Saw the presentation and ideas for this site. Absolutely unique, exciting and vibrant for North Vancouver!
The pros:
An uptown residential mixed use development - strata owned, market rental, social rental (affordable), seniors etc.
A variety of 9, 10, 11 residential buildings in mixed heights - 4,5,6,8, storey buildings with one 14 storey tower. This will not impede the views from upper Bewicke or Pemberton.
Access to the Spirit Trail and access for all North Shore residents, finally, to enjoy our waterfront, other than the lower Lonsdale waterfront park.
Complimentary and harmonious to the adjacent hotel site and marina. Wouldn't it be nice to have another ferry service here? and kayaking?
Another 'destination' for residents and tourists.
The decision is: presently designated for commercial/light industrial use. If developed as same, what would the tax revenue be to the City of NV and what potential number of jobs would be created? vs what tax revenue would there be from a residential development and what approx number of jobs?
In actual fact, staff (presumably directed by certain council members) are very keen on this. The report by Richard White talking about a site office, staff duties etc. Link: http://www.cnv.org/attach/2009%2006%2022%20item%2005.pdf
It may indeed be a good thing, community groups support a thorough review of the OCP. Until that time, this is not appropriate.
If you can't build a 60 story tower at the end of Lonsdale, you can always lay it on it's side and put in on the last but of land that's got the possibility of actually generating employment in the area...
Why should industry get all the waterfront? If it hasn't been utilized by industry now, will it ever? If it were mixed use, wouldn't that be a better use of the land?
Ahh, because they tried to do a deep water port in Upper Lonsdale, the planning study said it was only a possibly.
Who's paying for all the LEC infrastructure that is being done at the present? Did the LEC get a lot of money from grants/loans/donations or is the taxpayer footing the bill?
"city planning staff are too busy to make studying it a priority" what are they doing that is making them so busy during this recession?
So commercial and industrial jobs are going to be displaced and the taxes are going to be made up by the residential taxpayer?
Uh huh.
I don't live in the City which is probably a good thing since no member of Council who voted for this ought to count on getting my vote.
I would say this proposal is about 2 months and 3 weeks late.
(For anyone who doesn't get it subtract 2 months and 21 days from June 22nd...)
It's currently a brownfield site. There are no jobs lost. I say build it.
Sorry, Lyle, I'm in favour of this project, plain and simple. Since when does industrial land have to front the waterfront? With today's vastly different methods of carrying on "industry", why not site it in less aesthetically pleasing locales and leave this rather special site for an enhanced residential community.
North Vancouver City is becoming the new Vancouver. Lots of residents wanting fewer and fewer businesses to pay more tax.
I say build the high density residential on the waterfront and let the District start looking for some commercial/light industrial sites.
Can you say Amalgamation?
www.NorthVanAmalgamation.com
The Premier won't push amalgamation, we would have to ask for a referendum. The District may vote for it but the City never would as we have been fiscally prudent and the District never has been. We're not going to fund their debt.
Both of us need to stop the Vancouver driven "Regional Growth Strategy" where we're told "we have to take our share" of the overpopulation of the Lower Mainland. We have the right to say no to the Vancouver developers trying to make a quick buck at our expense.
Amalgamation? Hah!!
There's no way I want NVC's traffic management ineptness even coming close to District roads. I've never (ever) seen a worse example of traffic engineering as that which goes on on the city!
George, I hate to tell you but many of those developers live here on the North Shore.
Vancouver - Head Office
Concert Properties Ltd.
9th Floor, 1190 Hornby Street
Vancouver, British Columbia
Canada V6Z 2K5
Or the European based developer of Site 8, sure they opened up a north van office and claimed to be local but it was as true as rest of the snake oil they were trying to sell.
"The District may vote for it but the City never would as we have been fiscally prudent and the District never has been. We're not going to fund their debt."
George, take a look at the land value INCLUDING LAND BANKS of the District and City. The District can pay off it's debt and buy and sell the City any day that it wants to sell some land.
Of course that would be a bad deal for the City as they like to use the District's parks and green spaces for free.
Amalgamation makes alot of sense.
Well, then, first convince your Council to pay off your debt and build the same level of actual money in the bank as the City has, prorated to your pop. Money, not land banks that may or not be developed.
Then come up with a plan that includes a new Council of 4 City and 4 District Council members elected in a Ward system and a Mayor elected at large.
Get the District Council to approve it and see if the City will. Then the referendum. There are probably more conditions but I would vote against it without these two.
You're dreaming, George.
Fearnley and Trentadue would vote against it right away as they would lose their pay with only 4 elected.
A ward system would stop one area of the city and one area of the district from dominating Council. They've have to run against each other in their home ward. Most of the rest would vote against it.
Would be an interesting run for Mayor.
I think Walton would win!
The District would support fair amalgamation. But they aren't in a desperate position. They would never accept, nor should they accept a 4 District 4 City council.
There shouldn't be any wards, but they can make tax zones based on population density.
So that the more populated District takes over the whole Council?
Don't bother even asking.
Actually, the idea is that the better politicians from each council would be elected to the new council. And based on the population of the new municipality it would be a 9 person council.
Likely 5 or 6 of the District council would be elected with 2 or 3 of the City council and the Mayor of the District would win the Mayor's race.
The District council put their position first, roll up their sleeves and get to work. The City council consider their position a stepping stone to higher political office and make decisions for the purposes of appearances, rather than make decisions that actually need making.
This results in NVC messes such as LEC, bumbled development proposals and a city that cannot be navigated.
It's no wonder city folk want to amalgamate with the District. It's akin to running away but not having to move!
Which City folk want amalgamation? None that I've spoken with.
It would be great if we had some real leaders here on the North Shore. Amalgamation makes sense to residents. However it needs strong leadership to be sold to the community that puts aside petty NIMBY attitudes.
To the pro-development people with your "nimby" insults, probably one anon guy, with a pro-development Council and a staff that attempts to rig every debate - you lose most of the votes.
If the "nimby" vote has the majority, then that's the way it will go, despite your lone anon voice. The more we get sick and tired of the high rises and developers that never keep their word, the more the citizens will turn out and vote.
No one gets outraged at a little less money falling out of the pockets of developers or the candidates their money buys.
puts aside petty NIMBY attitudes.
And I supposed any "attitude" that doesn't agree with your own falls into this category?
It's so easy to dismiss and hide behind colloquialisms like this when you don't have the fortitude to defend your position in debate.
It seems to me that Rod Clark in his previous life on Council had at one time proposed a feasability study on amalgamation. Bring it on again!
The current attitude of self preservation at the CNV needs to stop.
All North Van. residents I have asked about amalgamation think it makes sense however, any CNV councillor have been aghast at this suggestion because it would mean absorbing the District's finances.
I have always thought it makes sense to Amalgamate. Doesn't the District subsidize the City at least on the parks and recreation level except for the Lonsdale Rec. Center? In that sense isn't the District's debt also partially the City's?
On the other side of the coin although fewer politicians for this 'New North Van.' might seem on the surface to be a better deal for the stake holders, I wonder if it would be better for our representation.
Anon Monday, June 29, 2009 11:06:00AM is right on the money.
The majority of the decisions by city council and within the city are for appearance. LEC, bumbled development, proposals, traffic problems, and dysfunctional solar panels are just the tip of the iceberg. Amalgamation will be the first step to reducing government. Second step will be to have the municipality get back to basics, sewer, roads, parks, policing etc.
I just paid my DNV taxes; almost $4K. I really wish I didn't have to spend the $$, but for some reason, as I was writing the cheque, I didn't (and don't) feel ripped off..
However - if I had to write that same cheque to the police state that's CNV, I'd have a different opinion
Are District taxes more than those of CNV? $4K seems like a lot compared to what I pay in the city.
"It seems to me that Rod Clark" is posting anonymously on the blog.
Taxes on a single-family home assessed at $770,000 in the city are $3,778 or $3,208 with the home owners grant or $2933 if you are over 65.
What would the taxes on that house be in the District?
The District has approx twice the population and 15 times the area of the City. Therefore, a ward system of 3 City and 5 Dist. councillors, with one overall area vote for Mayor would be fair but unlikely to find City support.
Perhaps a little bit like Quebec, the City likes to have a sovereignity association with the District doing the heavy lifting and the City using District resources as needed.
When I saw the phrase "snake oil" I immediately thought of the late Ernie Crist, but it was George Pringle speaking.
Hmmmmm.
Post a Comment