1245 Harwood | 49m | 17fl | Completed - Page 2

whatnext · #21 Posted **Oct 13, 2011, 3:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by canada1824

now with this property, I do have some inside information on this.

- this new proposal is most likely going to be the last proposal the developer is going to try. After that, who knows?

-the last proposal, Bing Thom was told by almost the entire council that it was going to be approved.

-The developer wants to buy the two neighbouring properties. The green one was asking for way too much, and the other one was speaking nonsense. He was asking for half the density post completion.

-The heritage house is costing way too much to maintain, the developer who bought this property years ago is losing money right now while renting out the 6 units there.

-the developer wanted to save the house more than the tree, wants nothing more than to chop it off one night as it's really the source of all the problems with the permit going through.

-The original plan was to save both the tree and the house, in return for a higher FSR, problem is, city didn't want to.

-don't you love NIMBYism in the west end?

So the Vision Vancouver council lost us the Pantages Theatre by refusing more density, and now they're going to lose the city this Class A heritage building? Unbelievable.

canada1824 · #22 Posted **Oct 18, 2011, 2:23 PM**

either way. the city council has no say in this.

If the city planner approves, the developer has the permit.

I talked to the developer a few days ago and he/she was like, "great, first the west end didn't want the house, now the city wants the house. Can they make up their mind so I can stop wasting money making up permit applications?"

Millennium2002 · #23 Posted **Oct 18, 2011, 4:13 PM**

I wouldn't have minded if the tree was cut down or more appropriately moved to some other location. However, the mansion is a different story. Who said again that they didn't want it? O.O

Built Form · #24 Posted **Nov 4, 2011, 8:11 AM**

Wasn't able to go to the open house at Gordon House on October 24th. Did anybody? I'm curious to hear about any opposition to the Legg Mansion being torn down.
Here's the latest showing the new siting of the tower and the infamous tree. I especially like the arched entrances at ground level. Like 999 Seymour there will be movable sun screens; the one image shows an example of the laser cut stainless steel.
The deadline is November 11th for comments on this proposal. I urge anyone who opposes the needless destruction of the 1899 Legg house to write or call Scott Barker, Project Facilitator at City Hall, 604-873-7166. There is room as in the previous plan for the house, the tower and I'm sure (post negotiations with the neighbour) the tree as well.

Roof top lap pool.

All pix and pleas from Built Form

Chadillaccc · #25 Posted **Nov 4, 2011, 9:15 AM**

Looks great! But would be great to see the house retained

officedweller · #26 Posted **Nov 4, 2011, 9:19 PM**

Looks great.
Where are the laser-cut leaf panels going? all over, or in specific areas?

flight_from_kamakura · #27 Posted **Nov 4, 2011, 9:44 PM**

wow, that's totally amazing. hope they can save the old house too, obv, but holy cow is the tree used to amazing effect.

canada1824 · #28 Posted **Nov 8, 2011, 5:15 AM**

it looks amazing, yes. The neighbour, the one where 1245 shares with the tree roots with, is demanding that in order for the tree to be removed that 1245 keep the house and let him live in it post renovation. Granted, this will mean extra tens of thousands if not hundreds into rennovating the house.

It's pretty confident that the project will get its permit finally. Personally, I rather want to see that tree gone than the house. Plant a new tree!

officedweller · #29 Posted **Nov 8, 2011, 9:07 PM**

So why can't the proposed additions to Beach Towers look like this?

PriceTags · #30 Posted **Nov 28, 2011, 10:39 PM**

For more on the backstory of this project - check out "Report from the Development Wars" in Spacing Vancouver: http://spacingvancouver.ca/2011/11/2...elopment-wars/

Built Form · #31 Posted **Dec 15, 2011, 1:16 AM**

Tree 1 House 0
Project was approved on monday with certain conditions. Concerning the Legg House the developers were asked to either 1) re-use materials of the heritage house on site 2) relocate the house 3) the deconstruction of the remaining components of the house (whatever that means!) or 4) the offer of salvage to interested parties i.e. Vancouver Heritage Society.
This couldn't be worse for the house. With one brush stroke the DPB was trying to cover all options instead of taking leadership in preservation. As they demonstrated unequivocally in regards to the tulip tree; to the extent of moving the tower 3 feet to help better preserve the root ball.
One other condition of note is the inclusion of a minimum of 8 units to be rental only for 60 years or the life of the building.

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/develop...wood/index.htm

whatnext · #32 Posted **Dec 15, 2011, 1:50 AM**

Truly pathetic. All for the sake of a stupid tree.

djh · #33 Posted **Dec 15, 2011, 1:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Built Form

Tree 1 House 0
Project was approved on monday with certain conditions. Concerning the Legg House the developers were asked to either 1) re-use materials of the heritage house on site 2) relocate the house 3) the deconstruction of the remaining components of the house (whatever that means!) or 4) the offer of salvage to interested parties i.e. Vancouver Heritage Society.
This couldn't be worse for the house. With one brush stroke the DPB was trying to cover all options instead of taking leadership in preservation. As they demonstrated unequivocally in regards to the tulip tree; to the extent of moving the tower 3 feet to help better preserve the root ball.
One other condition of note is the inclusion of a minimum of 8 units to be rental only for 60 years or the life of the building.

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/develop...wood/index.htm

Does option 2 allow for relocation of the house elsewhere on the site? If so, wouldn't that be a good solution?

canada1824 · #34 Posted **Jan 2, 2012, 6:58 AM**

there is no space left and while the original plan by the developer was to have both the tree and the house with extra density, the new plan just doesn't have room.

I believe they want to make most units at rental, but at an obvious higher than market rate costs.

mcminsen · #35 Posted **Jan 2, 2015, 6:37 AM**

Three years since the last post on this thread?!

I took a walk around the property today and took these pics. The ground floor is taking shape.

View from just west of site, Jan.1 '15, my pic

View from just west of site, Jan.1 '15, my pic

View from just east of site, Jan.1 '15, my pic

View from back alley, Tulip tree on far left, Jan.1 '15, my pic

View from back alley, Tulip tree just right of centre, Jan.1 '15, my pic