Metro Vancouver Parks & Green Space

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Well yeah that's what Lost Lagoon is right now, so the water content is just changing

There's no reason why it has to be that way and it didn't use to be that way. Is the park meant to be for Vancouverites or to be an off limits nature preserve?

I understand this is an internet forum, but I swear people here think that city parks are something meant to be admired from afar and not actively used for recreation.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Lost Lagoon has always been both, and it'll still be after this. Yeesh.

[idunno]

Well it says the federal government is a supporter of the project (Department of Fisheries and Oceans presumably) - so maybe senior government subsidies aren't out of the question!

[officedweller]

I think they should ditch the connection to English Bay (it destroys the Ceperley Meadow where a lot of events are held, including movie nights and marshalling areas for running events).

Here's what Lost Lagoon was 100 years ago.
The historic connection to English Bay is probably a fallacy.


Map shows Stanley Park more than 110 years ago. Reference code: AM1594-: MAP 368a-: MAP 368a-r | City of Vancouver Archives
https://www.biv.com/news/entertainment-m...y-park-looked-over-110-years-ago-8267388

They can build a connection to Coal Harbour for tidal flow and washing of the lagoon.
If they are smart, they'll build it like Swy-a-lana Lagoon in Nanaimo with weirs that prevent backflow at low tide, so the lagoon stays filled with water at low tide but still has flushing action at high tide.


https://www.yelp.ca/biz_photos/nanaimo-port-authority-nanaimo?select=9QV6gtW7PegzL6-dc8YWNw

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by officedweller

.
The historic connection to English Bay is probably a fallacy.

Is anybody suggesting that Lost Lagoon was historically connected to English Bay? All the commentary I've seen says the plan is to connect the Lagoon to tidewater, which it was before the causeway was built to cut it off from Burrard Inlet. There are other earlier maps in the archives that don't show any water where the lagoon is today, but just mudflats. It's called Lost Lagoon because at high tide there was a lagoon, and at low tide it disappeared.

I assume the plan for the connection to tidewater in both English Bay and Burrard Inlet is to allow water to flow through, to flush the lagoon. Obviously the amount of water coming in from the Burrard side will be far less than over a century age, when the causeway was a bridge.


Entrance to Stanley Park 1889 – Public Domain City of Vancouver Archives St Pk P115 on Miss604.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Is anybody suggesting that Lost Lagoon was historically connected to English Bay?

The vagueness of news headlines using the word "reconnect" and the title of the study "Reconnection Feasibility" suggests that the lagoon was once connected at both sides.
It seems purposely misleading.
I think that the word used should be "connection" on the English Bay side and "reconnection" on the Coal Harbour side.

The Daily Hive.
The article does later say "a new surface route"...
$30-million proposal to reconnect Stanley Park's Lost Lagoon to ocean water in English Bay and Coal Harbour
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/stanley-...connection-proposal-vancouver-park-board

Vancouver Sun:
The article does not say the English Bay connection is "new".
$30 million plan to reconnect Stanley Park's Lost Lagoon to tidewater

The reconnection plan would see a water channel from Second Beach enter the lagoon area during high tides “enabling a full daily tidal flushing,” using culverts.

https://vancouversun.com/news/30-million-plan-lost-lagoon-tidal-flat

Even the study itself on page 3 says:

The study (Appendix B) contemplated multiple reconnection schemes and determined that a full reconnection of Lost Lagoon to both Coal Harbour and Second Beach
is a feasible and recommended solution that offers environmental and social benefits while also meeting engineering and technical requirements at a lower cost than connecting only to Coal Harbour.

On Page 4:

Some of the key features of the refined design concept and sketches below, include:
− Reconnection through a water channel to Second Beach, combined with the installation of culverts linking to Coal Harbour under the causeway,
enabling full daily tidal flushing that improves water quality and reduces sediment build up (infilling).

Also from the report.
The islands shown on the George Vancouver map are in Howe Sound. Pt Grey is marked.

https://parkboardmeetings.vancouver.ca/2...onTidalReconnection-Concept-20260309.pdf

[Migrant_Coconut]

There does seem to have been a precedent, in the same way Granville Island used to actually be an island at high tide.

“The space between Second Beach and Lost Lagoon was filled in by the park board in the 1910s,” says Kheraj.

“It was a saline marsh: at high tide, the water would rush over and Stanley Park would be an island. (So) the park board pumped sand from the bottom of English Bay onto the isthmus between Lost Lagoon and Second Beach, to raise the land higher so it wouldn’t flood anymore.”

Obviously halving Ceperley (and therefore the potential event revenue) is a non-starter, so the plan will probably undergo some revision. I'm guessing they'll play musical chairs with the playgrounds to retain space.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

There does seem to have been a precedent, in the same way Granville Island used to actually be an island at high tide.

Obviously halving Ceperley (and therefore the potential event revenue) is a non-starter, so the plan will probably undergo some revision. I'm guessing they'll play musical chairs with the playgrounds to retain space.

Ah, thanks for that.
Strange how the paid report doesn't explicitly state that.

[madog222]

I don't think they are definitively saying it was connected to the west before. I read 'reconnect' to simply mean re-establish a connection from the lagoon to tidal ocean water, not implying to rebuild a former specific connection.
Their goal isn't to recreate how it was 150 years ago, their goal is to create a solution to the unhealthy ecosystem that currently exists.

[chowhou]

“The space between Second Beach and Lost Lagoon was filled in by the park board in the 1910s,” says Kheraj.

“It was a saline marsh: at high tide, the water would rush over and Stanley Park would be an island. (So) the park board pumped sand from the bottom of English Bay onto the isthmus between Lost Lagoon and Second Beach, to raise the land higher so it wouldn’t flood anymore.”

There was much discussion about what to do with Lost Lagoon. In 1912 the park board asked a famous English landscape architect, Thomas Mawson, to come up with designs for the Coal Harbour entrance to the park.

One design was for a causeway, another would have seen Lost Lagoon filled in for sports fields, and a third would have transformed the area around Lost Lagoon into a civic centre, with a sports stadium, a museum and a “round pond” in place of the natural lagoon.

The working class wanted the sports fields, the middle class favoured the city centre and the elite liked the “natural” style of the causeway. One thing they did agree on was that the natural “mud and marshlands” of Lost Lagoon “were undesirable, and aesthetically unpleasing.”

“That I think is one of the most interesting things — the naturalistic design of Lost Lagoon today is an artificial construction,” says Kheraj. “No one agreed that it should be left in its natural state, which is a muddy marsh.”

https://www.removepaywall.com/search?url...rk-a-natural-wonder-was-shaped-by-humans

[GenWhy?]

I just don't know why we can't just go back to the 1920s function of the lagoon which was pumping salt water in and out of it under the viaduct.

Chowhou, to your point, I'm not sure how (and to what degree successful) would be removing the lagoon's 100 year old designation as a bird sanctuary would work.

[Migrant_Coconut]

The main regions of the lagoon are proposed to include:

• channel - dredged to approximately the 1932 lagoon Bottom or deeper (-1 m to - 3 m). This area will be wet most or all the time and will allow for tidal flow between Coal Harbour and Second Beach;
• deep pond - dredged to approximately the 1932 lagoon Bottom or deeper (-1 m to -3 m). This area will be wet most or all the time and may support permanent saltwater fish and other aquatic species
• shallow Pond – existing pond bottom left unchanged at around 0 m to -1 m. This area will be wet about half the time, and mudflats the other half. This area may support shellfish and intertidal species;
• Intertidal marsh – existing pond raised with dredged material to approximately 1 m elevation. This area will be marshland vegetation that may be submerged at high tide. This area may extend into existing low-lying dry land that will become intertidal if not raised...

It's going to become another Iona, which it already is along the northeast end. That's all. Some people need to touch grass.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

I just don't know why we can't just go back to the 1920s function of the lagoon which was pumping salt water in and out of it under the viaduct.

Chowhou, to your point, I'm not sure how (and to what degree successful) would be removing the lagoon's 100 year old designation as a bird sanctuary would work.

If you watch the historic video I posted under the video thread you can see when they used to allow boating on the lagoon. Looks a lot more fun that what it is now and what they're proposing.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Not depicted: that same swan attacking the woman in the canoe two takes later. /s

It's not like Vancouverites don't have literally the entire ocean and several lakes to go boating in.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by whatnext

If you watch the historic video I posted under the video thread you can see when they used to allow boating on the lagoon. Looks a lot more fun that what it is now and what they're proposing.

Yes they allowed rowboats for like 9 years - I'm just stating I bet it would be likely hard to reverse the bird sanctuary designation.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

It's going to become another Iona, which it already is along the northeast end. That's all. Some people need to touch grass.

And what they've done on the north end, to continue around the whole lagoon edge, has been on the books for years. Funding for that has been an issue as well. This $30m drainage thing seems to be in addition to the perimeter wilding that was already approved

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Yes they allowed rowboats for like 9 years - I'm just stating I bet it would be likely hard to reverse the bird sanctuary designation.

Bird sanctuary? For what, the hundreds of — machines, oops Canada Geese, which aren't even native to this area?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Bird sanctuary? For what, the hundreds of — machines, oops Canada Geese, which aren't even native to this area?

Herons, cormorants, possibly even a few seals once it opens up to the ocean.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Bird sanctuary? For what, the hundreds of — machines, oops Canada Geese, which aren't even native to this area?

"Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?" - Oddball

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Herons, cormorants, possibly even a few seals once it opens up to the ocean.

The first version of Second Beach Pool saw other sea creature. "The old pool was drained and refilled with ‘fresh’ sea water once or twice a week – with the occasional surprised mud shark or octopus ending up in the pool to keep things interesting."