Concord Pacific and Concert Properties reveal big plans for two False Creek developments

    1 of 3 2 of 3

      Concord Pacific has revealed plans for a major development that’s slated for construction at the north end of the Cambie Street Bridge.

      “False Creek Central” will consist of eight high-rise towers and feature 1,300 condominiums plus 90,000 square feet of commercial and retail services, according to a Concord Pacific media release.

      The new neighbourhood will also include two four and five star hotels and convention facilities, to be constructed by Paragon/VOX 360.Combined investments in the development are valued at over $1 billion, according to the media release.

      An artists rendition of Concord Pacific's plans for the Smithe Street section of a new neighbourhood it's calling "False Creek Central".
      Concord Pacific

      The unveiling of Concord’s latest development comes shortly after Concert Properties filed a proposal for one of the last undeveloped pieces of land on the south side of False Creek.

      Those plans for the area between Science World and the east edge of the Olympic Village describe a mix-used neighbourhood consisting of five towers ranging from 12 to 18 stories tall.

      Concert Properties' has filed plans with the City of Vancouver to develop a vacant piece of land just south of Science World.
      Concert Properties

      You can follow Travis Lupick on Twitter at twitter.com/tlupick.

      Comments

      15 Comments

      spencer

      Oct 2, 2013 at 3:39pm

      new developments are starting to go in the right direction but when all you hear is how little space there is avalible and how much it cost to eighter develop or buy,why do they make the towers so small.
      WE ARE ONE OF THE FASTEST growing cities in Canada I think we caould support some buildings with 20-50 stories tall

      0 0Rating: 0

      James

      Oct 2, 2013 at 3:56pm

      You've got to love the drawing of Smithe street with only one car, has Concord bought into the Popular Science view of flying cars?

      0 0Rating: 0

      Birdman

      Oct 2, 2013 at 4:57pm

      This city is f**ked.

      0 0Rating: 0

      Meathead

      Oct 2, 2013 at 7:48pm

      These developments keep giving Vancouver a bad haircut. While the locations seem suitable as anyplace to develop... can we not get some real height in this city? In lieu of the clusters of 20-40 story condos let's get full on boner and go for at least 80 or even 100 floors! Because if I need to remind anyone flat-top skylines went out in the 90's.

      0 0Rating: 0

      Steve

      Oct 2, 2013 at 8:24pm

      What will happen to the Dragon boaters and the Dragon boat competitions?

      0 0Rating: 0

      Alan Layton

      Oct 2, 2013 at 8:57pm

      Isn't the development beside the stadium in the same spot that Paragon wants to put in their resort/casino?

      Before Concord Pacific builds anything more they need to build the park they promised the city over 20 years ago. They're using the uncertain future of the viaducts to stall for another 5 years or so. I guess all we'll ever get is a small swatch of grass with lots of concrete as our park

      0 0Rating: 0

      Thomas

      Oct 2, 2013 at 8:59pm

      Couldnt they hire a decent architect? Does it all have to look the same?

      0 0Rating: 0

      sicntired

      Oct 3, 2013 at 3:16am

      Just what the city of Vancouver needs.More high end condos for the wealthy,as that's who Vision Vancouver serves.There is nothing a developer can do wrong where vision is concerned.What other city government would put social housing as one of it's goals and then redefine what that means to suit their developer supporters needs.How many projects have we watched start out with great promises for "market" and "affordable"housing mixes .Only to saes the market end grow while the affordable side vanishes.I will never forget when they said that the athletes village(what a nightmare)affordable housing was going to first responders.That actually seemed like a win at the time.At least it was going to people who were giving back.Then we find out that the "fees"made affordable a joke.That building was too expensive on every level and should never have been approved.There are too many examples to count.I still remember the promises when people were evicted from the little mountain site.Too expensive a site for poor people.Vancouver has become greed central.The once sacrosanct sight lines are all but vanished.Ripping off one people's view to serve a wealthier tenant is common place.Gregor the green just wants his name on a plaque somewhere.There is nothing being planned that will even replace the SRO's we're scheduled to lose in the near future.People on pension,disability and assistance,who need the services available in this city will soon have nowhere to live.Lane housing is super tiny and super expensive.Nothing under 1400 a month.That would take 5 people on assistance with room for one.Meanwhile,there are people renting out rooms in old run down houses for 375 a month and you share with half a dozen others.Good luck if you own anything of value.I have seen men in tin sheds in back yards with an extension cord for 375 a month.You have to be addicted just to be able to cope.But I'm sure the developers will promise some affordable housing which is now running at 1200 a month or more according to vision.Promise and then renege.

      0 0Rating: 0

      Alan Layton

      Oct 3, 2013 at 8:24am

      I agree with Meathead. We need some truly, monumentally tall buildings in Vancouver. But just like the idiots who forced the city to get rid of the neon - which we badly miss now - we have other idiots who want to keep their tiny slice mountain view intact. Burnaby is the place that is going to build these skyscrapers (Brentwood, Metrotown) and since they'll be built on plateaus they will dominate Vancouver. If people don't like tall buildings then they should move to Victoria where the skyline is non-existent. It's no wonder most of the new buildings are boring and look the same. We've painted ourselves in to a corner by all the weenies who worry about that buildings are going to compete with the 'natural beauty'. I don't find mountains with housing up the sides and ski runs gouged out of peaks particularly attractive. For 2/3 of the year we can't even see the mountains due to the rain anyways.

      0 0Rating: 0

      Hmmmmm

      Oct 3, 2013 at 9:59am

      I would first be concerned about what is ON and Under that parcel of land. Wonder if they will even mention that...Not sure I would buy there without doing my own research. just saying.

      0 0Rating: 0