It will send up being a parking lot. Downtown is dead… CPR or the infusion of millions of dollars have not and will not make it the place to be or shop.

Mayor green said people are flocking to live downtown… yet she hasnt moved there.

Build the thing. Education is a huge industry here now. Get with the program PG. We don’t need a vacant lot to lease for $1 a year.

I am still amazed how the art students and poets pulled this off in the first place. An innovation and design center for wood in the middle of downtown? Why not over on River Road, take over the old Winton facilities or go out to the BCR site (where the true wood inovators are). Lots of room there too.
However building it on George St. will be good for the construction industry and that I cheer for. It will also be nice to see some local elitists get their respective faces rubbed in the mud, plus, honor their personal guarantees on their real estate flips.

I am still amazed how the art students and poets pulled this off in the first place. An innovation and design center for wood in the middle of downtown? Why not over on River Road, take over the old Winton facilities or go out to the BCR site (where the true wood inovators are). Lots of room there too.
However building it on George St. will be good for the construction industry and that I cheer for. It will also be nice to see some local elitists get their respective faces rubbed in the mud, plus, honor their personal guarantees on their real estate flips.

There has been little in the way of innovation by BC lumber producers. Sure they have invested in their operations to increase the LRF(lumber recovery factor) this is not innovation but merely a way to improve the bottom line.

I have said right from the beginning that the university would be the most appropriate place for a research facility especially if an engineering program was a part of it.

The problem now is that there is a full city block that is vacant smack dab in the middle of downtown. Do we add cement footings to the blue fencing? A community garden on a grand scale? Oppenheimer Park North?

If the WIC does not proceed in some form the taxpayer of PG will be left holding the bag having $4 million + invested that will show a return of $26.00.

The shocking reason why it should not proceed

http://alexgtsakumis.com/2013/03/19/exclusive-breaking-news-pat-bell-accused-of-bid-rigging-wood-design-center-shirley-bond-demanding-government-funding-and-christy-clark-supporting-both-actions-dan-mclaren-and-brian-fehr-spe/

lonesome sparrow says ” If the WIC does not proceed in some form the taxpayer of PG will be left holding the bag having $4 million + invested that will show a return of $26.00″……this project or any new or renovated project downtown won’t draw a big boost in city taxes for a least 10 yrs because of the new downtown tax exemption incentive….but may if and when the private sector ever gets seriously involved with their own money and stays away from making quick flips using public tax dollars or trying to jump the cue on Pubic Political Pet Projects….do we need the WIDC building downtown if it will no longer house students or a significant civil engineering program? I’m not sure what the main attraction will be without those two components….

So I read the article, Olddog, and was doing okay until I got to this sentence ….

“Mr. McLaren, a highly successful financier and insurance broker in the North–with unimpeachable integrity,”

I then realized once more that Tsakumis is full of it ……. as Clark sort of says, the internet is full of such people …… ;-)

Hey Ben
Look at you trying to protect your friends who are afraid of losing tenants to WIDC and cover Bell’s heine at the same time.
Just make the scandal go away hey Ben?

With stunning revelations such as : “and whose constituency office is TWO BLOCKS from the proposed Wood Center” in reference to Bonds it is clear that Alex is once again simply throwing shite against the wall in the hope that some might stick. Obviously never been to our fair city, most everything is within TWO BLOCKS.

The article is full of gossip and rumor with no back up documentation. Journalism it is not! Just another rant by a guy that owns a computer and has an axe to grind.

The interviews are further proof that Dan and Brian are not the sharpest tools in the drawer. Minor league players failing to make it in the bigs.

“……this project or any new or renovated project downtown won’t draw a big boost in city taxes for a least 10 yrs because of the new downtown tax exemption incentive”

We really do not know what the tax structure will be, do we?

First of all, the property is owned by the City and will continue to be. The City does not tax itself. I doubt that they even have records of lost opportunities for those properties they own which are not used for civic purposes and are thus avaialable for sale to other parties.

Secondly, I am not sure whether the development is elligible for such tax incentives.

That being said, the City will end up owning the entire property and improvement after 26 years which will more than make up for the investment of a tax holiday, if that is the way it will work.

Just think wood. Think planting a tree which is harvestable in 26 years. The wood industry should be so lucky.

I agree with you, Gus.

There’s no honour among thieves.

Well I guess we will just have to wait and see with what happens next.

All that being said, I am of the same opinion as lonesome sparrow. The original intended use of the building does not belong in the downtown. UNBC cannot afford two campuses this early in its life. It is struggling as it is.

It needs all the facilities at the main campus which support it students as well as its profs and other research.

What it needs on top of that is the start to a research park. Tying in a wood research centre located in PG which works in harmony with the FPInnovations at UBC and in Quebec is the way to handle this vision properly.

http://www.fpinnovations.ca

Here is the FPInnovations page on their Advanced Building Systems research. May look familiar to those who know what is being proposed here.

http://www.fpinnovations.ca/ResearchProgram/Pages/research-program-advanced-building-system.aspx

BTW, the BC lumber manufacturers are competitive in this field and have been for some time.

The laminated timber firm in Penticton is one of the primary suppliers of such products in Canada.

http://www.structurlam.com

http://www.fpinnovations.ca/ResearchProgram/Pages/research-program-advanced-building-system.aspx

City owns a great deal of property downtown however our elected officials seem to lack the long term thinking and planning that is needed to develop these lands in a manner that will truly benefit PG

BC lumber companies have not had to be innovative, lots of feedstock for the spaghetti mills to turn big trees into boards. The pine beetle may change that and force their hand and we can become more of a leader instead of entering the game in the middle innings.

Glue lams are hardly a new technology but may find some new uses. We are also behind the curve on things like laminated veneer lumber(LVL) that can use small trees and other species.

There are new kiln technologies that actually change the molecular structure of the lumber(TMW) making it almost impervious to mold and insects without chemicals.

http://www.ecovantagewood.com/ecoprem-products.aspx/ecodeck-deck-dock-and-railing-systems

10 years ego in UNBC there was a plan to build a research building as part of DTO construction dubbed “silicon valley north” and rent out part of it later.

The research part later was scrapped from the construction plan and the building was downsized due to funding shortages and the subsequent increase in building cost per square foot due to smaller square feet that was originally planned.

This WIDC project remind me of that failed ambitious dream. But UNBC needs another dream which doesn’t cost a penny.

“I have a dream that one day on the red hills of [Prince] Georgia the … former slaves and the … former slave-owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.”

Guess there are some BC companies making TMW decking:)

http://www.naturalwooddecking.com/

It needs all the facilities at the main campus which support it students as well as its profs and other research.

=============================================

Main campus supports its students with … limited access to housing, food options, transportation, groceries, drug stores, medical, etc. Somewhat like PG’s other “all inclusive” facility on the eastern heights.

Downtown offers relatively cheap land, accessible buildings, restaurants, alternative housing, groceries, etc.

Curious … president George and the UNBC senior group are the major customers of a downtown bistro with a private conference style dining room room…why? Because it better suits their needs of anything “on campus”. Better for networking, access, cost effectiveness, etc.

Downtown revitalization needs to start somewhere … if there is a successful project every year for 25 years then we will have 25 more pieces to a community core.

And for the record, the use of wood in commercial construction is primarily limited by the lack of engineering and construction expertise to “connect” the components … without this expertise, building codes remain static, specifications continue to call for steel and concrete and innovative wood products remain on the shelf. You don’t need a forest to educate an architect, an engineer
or a policy maker. Downtown works just fine.

The failure to include an engineering program at UNBC from the outset seemed very odd to me given the nature of the economy in this region. Does anyone know why that happened? I’ve heard two theories but don’t know if either is correct: (a) the established universities objected to the competition; (b) the senior administration in the early days of UNBC consisted mostly of social science/humanities people who did not have much interest in science and engineering.

I’ve heard two theories but don’t know if either is correct: (a) the established universities objected to the competition; (b) the senior administration in the early days of UNBC consisted mostly of social science/humanities people who did not have much interest in science and engineering.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Billposer – there are always two other possibilities C) both a and b and D) none of the above

The correct answer in this case is C.

Geoff Weller, the founding president, was more interested in traditional “academics” and many of his early hires did not believe in “Applied degrees” i.e. Education, Engineering, Business, etc. Remember there was no undergrad degrees for Education at UNBC initially and now is a two year after degree. Even though PG had several successful MBA cohorts in the late 80s hosted by CNC and delivered by City University, it was another decade before UNBC would offer an MBA program. Weller hired Poli Sci guys who hired Economists who all sat on hiring committees who didn’t really didn’t want applied Business faculty on staff.

Also, part of the original degree portfolio approval process included a provincial degree proposal approval committee consisting of established institutions. UBC (primarily) was very protective of their funding in Education and Engineering and effectively vetoed any notion that UNBC should establish programming in these areas.

So, both of your theories have substance.

“the lack of engineering and construction expertise to “connect” the components”

That is the entire essence of cross laminated timber pannels. The connections of the floor and wall members to make an integrated structural entity is well known in precast concrete construction which reached heights of over 20 storeys in Toronto and parts of the USA in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

I woukld not say there is a lack. However, the 6 or so storey, full scale, CLT wood building which was tested on a Japanese shake table was able to withstand earthquake forces with very primitive (in comparison to concrete connections) angle connectors. Bolts pulled out, etc.

It is those very types of tests which have to be done. They are not done in a city’s downtown. They cannot be designed on computers. Real, full sized testing has to be done. So we design here and test in Japan? Possibly. Wahtg ekse do we design here and test in windtunnels and shaketables elsewhere?

Might as well do it at people’s offices all over Canada. We no longer need a central place in, of all places, PG sitting in the hinterlands. Central place for such computer based research is the networked world.

This is an attempt to help downtown, nothing more. There are no guarantees, as there were none with PLAZA400, the Courthhouse, the BDC building, the downtown version of casino/bingo, the RCMP as a performing centre, etc.etc.

We have to look elsewhere.

“Geoff Weller, the founding president, was more interested in traditional “academics””

Strange thing to say about a man who came from Lakehead University with several professional programs.

Can you provide some background to verify that opinion?

I think this might be a “leak”.

From Michael Green Architecture and Radio Canada International posted March 14, 2013

http://www.rcinet.ca/english/daily/interviews-2012/13-55_2013-03-14-wooden-skyscraper-to-built-in-canada-soon

Tall wood building going up on Canada’s west-coast

Elsewhere around the world, tall wood buildings have been welcome additions to the skyline. London, England pioneered the development with a nine-storey condominium building. In 2009, it took just an hour to sell all 29 units. Then a seven-storey building went up in Sweden. Melbourne, Australia has bragging rights for the moment, with a 10-storey apartment building, but Austria is thinking big with plans to construct a 30-storey wooden tower.

Michael Green says here in Canada, while they have engineered a 30-storey building, they will begin this year, with a 6-storey building in Prince George, British Columbia. It will be home, appropriately enough, to the Wood Innovation and Design Centre.

Just imagine if we would have gone ahead with building a 10 storey wood building thinking it would be the world’s tallest such building. We would have been the laughing stock of the world ….. well, the part that might actually care …. LOL

10 sotrey apartment building in Australia

http://makeitwood.org/made-from-wood/Forte.cfm

more
http://www.forteliving.com.au/community.html

Sorry people. Just show that if one does not keep up with specific issues for 6 or so months, on loses touch.

“The Earth Sciences Building at the University of British Columbia is said to be North America’s largest panelized wood project.”

http://www.joconl.com/article/id53927

Depending on what the building design for the George Street property may be like, we may hold that title for a few months, for what it is worth. However, the building at UBC is 15,000m2 and costs $58 million,so it may be bigger.

Can you provide some background to verify that opinion?

============================================

“Working with the Interim Governing Council, the original body appointed to oversee the beginnings of the university, and with a small staff, Geoff worked out the master plan for UNBC. He was largely responsible for setting out the five major themes of the university–environment, northern studies, women’s studies, First Nations studies, international studies-…”

from the UNBC website published at the time of Dr. Weller’s passing in 2000

Gus .. check this out … shaketables are old school technology .. laptops are in

[url] http://www.ansys.com [/url}

http://www.ansys.com

grrr

More recent efforts in the last decade (2000-2009) to put Technology/Eng. among the UNBC’s main research areas of (1) Env. and Natural Resources (2)Community Dev. (3) North/Rural and Env. Health (4)First Nations and Indigenous Studies was not successful – mainly due to internal dynamics of competing forces and not external factors.
Env. AKA Envy …

Technology was present in the original thematic research themes, but somehow did not make it later to the 4-5 research areas.

“shaketables are old school technology”

Computers have come a long way, but the old GIGO school of thought still holds true.

Actual destructive testing is what determines the algorithms which will be entered into computerized modelling.

Modelling goes a long way to testing various alternatives, but the real world still governs.

Go to this site at UC San Diego school of engineering, scroll down to the bottom of the page to VIDEOS, and watch the video called Masonry Shake Preview.

http://structures.ucsd.edu

“Earthquake engineers from UC San Diego, University of Texas at Austin and Washington State University are joining efforts to make buildings such as hotels, schools, apartments and hospitals safer.”

Here is the facility at UBC … built in 2003.

http://www.civil.ubc.ca/about/facilities/eerf.php

So tell me, anotherside, what exactly do you know about structural engineering research?

Just how much research and development does it take to cut down a tree? Be specific.

And this is how the shake table and computer simulation is combined for very large structure research.

http://www.eng.buffalo.edu/Research/infraenvironment/earthquake

From the linked page:

The centerpieces of the NEES facility are dual-movable, six-degree-of-freedom shake tables, made by MTS Systems Corp., which easily can be repositioned within the lab, for real-time seismic testing of structures up to 120 feet in length and 30 feet in height.

The shake tables’ versatility will enable earthquake engineers to conduct real-time dynamic hybrid testing — a form of testing being pioneered by UB researchers that sets new standards in earthquake-engineering research. Powered by Mathworks and UB software, it combines shake table testing of portions of a structure with real-time computer simulations of the remainder of the structure. It will provide researchers with a more complete picture of how powerful earthquakes affect very large structures, including bridges and buildings, without having to test an entire structure.

I am going to go out on a little bit of a limb here.

At this time in our engineering knowledge, if we are to engage in serious structural engineering research that will be of use to the rest of the world, other than local home builders, an office building will no be the right environment for such research.

I happen to think that is a very strong limb which will not fail to support me for some time into the future.

“Just how much research and development does it take to cut down a tree?”

Good question.

Ask the people who develop and refine mechanical tree harvesters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WwPHeM5ltI

Is that specific enough.
? ;-)

Here is the facility at UBC … built in 2003.

http://www.civil.ubc.ca/about/facilities/eerf.php

So tell me, anotherside, what exactly do you know about structural engineering research?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I was a invited guest to the opening of the UBC facility in 2003 based on my contributions to the field over the years.

…. Gus I really do appreciate your links, … without getting into a long, protracted discussion, I thank you for supporting the point of view offered; computers are now the key to ongoing research, that shake tables capable of destructive testing of whole structures are now redundant and that collaborative networks to facilitate major research are in existence. All factors that indicate that the PG facility does not need to redevelop the wheel but rather refine it.

Have a great evening :)

Use the PG Hotel site to erect a memorial to BC Rail, and the sale of which allowed all these Lieberal deals and boondoggles such as the:
-Airport Renovation
-Airport Runway extension
-Airport Cargo facilities
-Unneeded 10 or 6 story 2×4 tower
-Bridge at North Fraser
-Overpass for Bobtail at Highway 16
-Weigh scales south of town built on a hill

Campbell sold a BC birthright and good paying jobs for this? What a joke.On us.

Wood Innovation and Design Center….an “Innovative” way to make a few people rich on the backs of tax payers…this project has nothing to do with redeveloping downtown and everything to do with some people trying to make a quick buck. We may have inadvertently elected Ms. Green as Mayor, but the citizens of Prince George are not that stupid to think that this WIDC building is for the betterment of us Prince Georgians….if this facility is to be built it should be built on the campus of UNBC where this type of project belongs! Shame on the City of Prince George to bleed away resources and assets from our University which was to be a jewel on the hill!

This whole idea of a ten storey wood building shows just how far everyone got from reality. Over the years we learned to build buildings out of steel and concrete
because of value and fire destruction.
If a fire starts in this building, it will be leveled. I say dont build it.Also we have a double standard in our city hall.
Some of us pay a lot of taxes downtown,
where others dont pay any taxes. Depends who knows who I guess.