Central Waterfront District | Waterfront Station - CRAB Park

[vansky]

downtown let's go, always running for the surrey, o, o...

but what is this city going to do in the next 10 yrs? maybe nothing...?+

beware of surrey, as it might do nothing in 10 yrs...

[raggedy13]

I saw an early concept of the site done a year ago by a private firm. They looked at an option with a ~200m tower. If the City will allow it the developers will probably build it.

[ravman]

Originally Posted by jlousa

*l* I've never meant so many people that have no sense of reality in my life. What the heck do we need a supertall for? No Seriously I'd love to know.

Small thinking? Vancouver?? The envy of the world?? It isn't just because of the pretty mountains you know. Almost any city would die to accomplish what Vancouver has, in fact they are trying, or city planners are getting leached by citys that can afford anyone they want yet they choose ours.

The proposal being put forward is anything but unambitious. In fact I'd be surprised if we can pull it off, the amount of engineering need to overcome the obstacles is mind-boggling.
The draft proposal is incredible and if we can pull it off Vancouver will be all the better for it.

and this report is confidential?

[Spork]

Originally Posted by ravman

and this report is confidential?

I believe that this is it (from page 13): http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/currentplan...UB%20Draft%20Plan%20Low%20Resolution.pdf

[jlousa]

Here's the COV's staffs opinion of the Draft Proposal, surprised no one has commented on the 3rd proposed location for the Whitecaps stadium still being on the table.

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20090602/documents/ttra5.pdf

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

at least surrey is forward thinking none of this small town nimby vancouver stuff

Ya, its too bad Vancouver is nimby central.

[kylemacmac]

Supertalls? Thinking forward?

Big buildings look nice on postcards and make you feel pride when you see them from far away. It's a rush, a status symbol. I know. I've felt it. It's a great felling. But it's a passing feeling, like looking at a painting. Sure the feeling can come back, but after awhile you want to look away and do interesting things with your life.

Anyone who has spent time in a city like Paris or London can attest that big tall buildings do just about absolutely nothing to make a city more lively or interesting. In fact, I'd say tall buildings take away form street life, as pedestrian movement between offices and appartments happens on elevators, rather than on the street.

Lower buildings, packed closer together, with no parking spaces, would vitalize more of the city than by building high. If we force the issue of dense low-height areas and a need for good public transit, then voila, the streets will fill with people and Vancouver will suddenly be a much more vibrant city, and begin to take on the 'world class' vibe Lotus Land-ers seem to so universally long for.

Tall buildings don't make places important or lively.

[NetMapel]

Originally Posted by kylemacmac

Supertalls? Thinking forward?

Big buildings look nice on postcards and make you feel pride when you see them from far away. It's a rush, a status symbol. I know. I've felt it. It's a great felling. But it's a passing feeling, like looking at a painting. Sure the feeling can come back, but after awhile you want to look away and do interesting things with your life.

Anyone who has spent time in a city like Paris or London can attest that big tall buildings do just about absolutely nothing to make a city more lively or interesting. In fact, I'd say tall buildings take away form street life, as pedestrian movement between offices and appartments happens on elevators, rather than on the street.

Lower buildings, packed closer together, with no parking spaces, would vitalize more of the city than by building high. If we force the issue of dense low-height areas and a need for good public transit, then voila, the streets will fill with people and Vancouver will suddenly be a much more vibrant city, and begin to take on the 'world class' vibe Lotus Land-ers seem to so universally long for.

Tall buildings don't make places important or lively.

NYC says: WHAT ?

[vansky]

vancouver needs some good 200s, brisbane is getting plenty of those. world cities cannot live without skyscrapers, all the top cities on the list have so many, and why not here.

we need at least another 700 condos to show the world what this place is all about~

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by NetMapel

NYC says: WHAT ?

Good one. Can you please forward that bottom pic to Vancouver to show them what lively is all about. But wait, those signs are too big, those buildings too tall, those streets too loud and have too many people on it....etc...etc... i.e. the usual garbage excuses from Vancouver

[The Lonely Tanner]

Times Square above has been (temporarily) converted into a pedestrian mall. If it works, Broadway will almost entirely be closed to traffic.

Now that'll be a change.

[djmk]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Here's the COV's staffs opinion of the Draft Proposal, surprised no one has commented on the 3rd proposed location for the Whitecaps stadium still being on the table.

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20090602/documents/ttra5.pdf

mmm... new stadium right ontop of the helicopter pad.

i'm all for it. lets get 'er done.

[djmk]

Originally Posted by EastVanMark

Good one. Can you please forward that bottom pic to Vancouver to show them what lively is all about. But wait, those signs are too big, those buildings too tall, those streets too loud and have too many people on it....etc...etc... i.e. the usual garbage excuses from Vancouver

those signs are too big.

i do not want to see a big KODAK or MAXELL when walking down the street. its intrusive and ugly. actually, its downright disgusting.

[Canadian Mind]

Originally Posted by kylemacmac

...In fact, I'd say tall buildings take away form street life, as pedestrian movement between offices and appartments happens on elevators, rather than on the street...

Are you suggesting that people work and live in the same building if it is over a given height? If so, give your head a shake.

And a 50 story condo at 12 000 square feet with 12 condo's per floor will have more residents than a 10 story 24 000 square foot lowrise with 24 condos per floor, and takes up more land area, leaving less space for parks or other open, public, ground level areas. Makes sense to me to build the 50 story structure, atleast in an area where amassed employment opportunities are within walking distance or there is incredible transit connections (Downtown Van, Metro Town, Surrey Cetre (if they ever get that area off the ground), and to a lesser extent the whole of New West.

I'm more than excited about 8-12 story low rise yet still dense developments amassed around transit stations outside of downtown, such as SEFC and 4-6 story apartment/rental units and row houses everywhere else in vancouver;all provide varying levels of density, accessibility, and livibility.

Same goes for commercial and industrial. Put the biggest jobsites or densest tower where the most residents are (like downtown), and have smaller density developments (like a 4 story tech building) in the outskirts.

[djmk]

Originally Posted by Canadian Mind

Are you suggesting that people work and live in the same building if it is over a given height? If so, give your head a shake.

i think you need to re-read that sentence and i totally agree with klyemacmac.

just take a walk around the bentall towers and tell me the street life those towers provide (esp after 5pm) and compare that to a simple mix use street like gastown or yaletown.

[WarrenC12]

Times Square is not reality, it is a tourist trap. Just like the new strip in Vegas. Locals don't go there, and they don't reflect a reality for any other city on earth. I love both of those places, as a tourist, nothing more. Neither is going to happen in Vancouver.

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by kylemacmac

Supertalls? Thinking forward?

Big buildings look nice on postcards and make you feel pride when you see them from far away. It's a rush, a status symbol. I know. I've felt it. It's a great felling. But it's a passing feeling, like looking at a painting. Sure the feeling can come back, but after awhile you want to look away and do interesting things with your life.

Anyone who has spent time in a city like Paris or London can attest that big tall buildings do just about absolutely nothing to make a city more lively or interesting. In fact, I'd say tall buildings take away form street life, as pedestrian movement between offices and appartments happens on elevators, rather than on the street.

Lower buildings, packed closer together, with no parking spaces, would vitalize more of the city than by building high. If we force the issue of dense low-height areas and a need for good public transit, then voila, the streets will fill with people and Vancouver will suddenly be a much more vibrant city, and begin to take on the 'world class' vibe Lotus Land-ers seem to so universally long for.

Tall buildings don't make places important or lively.

yes - but a few supertalls won't hurt and if vancouver won't build em than let surrey do it

surrey's plan is a long one - something like 75 years

[SpongeG]

Vancouver's waterfront area could become "world-class" transportation hub

VANCOUVER - A new "world-class" transportation hub and a high-density extension of the downtown business district is what city planners would like to see happen at Vancouver’s central waterfront area.

With transit users frequenting the Waterfront Station area expected to nearly double with the Canada Line and a third SeaBus scheduled to operate in 2010, City of Vancouver staff will present the Central Waterfront Hub Framework report to the transportation and traffic committee on Tuesday.

The report is the outcome of a two-year study that researched what future development of the area east of Canada Place may entail and the challenges the city faces in creating a fully-integrated transportation hub.

While only a concept, the report is a glimpse of what a revitalized central waterfront may look like. City staff are recommending that council endorse the report as a guide to future planning in the area.

According to the report, the need for such a hub is evident and support from the public is strong to redevelop the area, which is mostly occupied by the Canadian Pacific Railway railyard, the Sea Bus terminal and a heliport.

The Waterfront Station building currently houses access to the West Coast Express, the SeaBus, SkyTrain and buses. According to TransLink, 50,000 people enter Waterfront Station on an average work day but with the Canada Line and a third Sea Bus close to 90,000 people are expected to be passing through the area every day.

The 42-page report shows pictures of internationally renowned transit hubs like Berlin's new Sony Center and London's St. Pancras Station as a way of visualizing how Vancouver's hub may be built.

Conceptualizations of the Vancouver transportation hub include a large passenger concourse built over top of the railyard north of the current station. The concourse, lined with trees, would be linked to the station to provide easier access to each of the road, rail, air and marine transit systems.

The concourse would have facilities like travel information, public washrooms, waiting areas, bike storage, changing facilities, luggage storage, shops, cafes and restaurants.

There are also concepts to build a new marine terminal that will house the SeaBus and future passenger ferries. A new permanent heliport is also conceptualized at the hub. Large walkways would connect the concourse with all of the different transit stations and Canada Place.

The plan calls for an extension of Granville Street closer to Burrard Inlet. There would also be a connector street a block east from Cordova Street to the water. Another road would run along the waterfront and connect both streets to Howe Street. They would all be elevated above the railyard and would presumably allow easier access to buses.

Surrounding the transportation hub, just in front of the marine terminal, there may be several commercial and mixed-use highrises as an extension of the downtown business district.

“The framework area should emphasize non-residential job space,” as a way of increasing “employment capacity” in downtown, states the report.

Also, more open spaces with views of the mountains would be created to attract people to the waterfront. The new space would also compensate for the likely destruction of part of Granville Square plaza.

The report notes a number of problems with the development site at the moment.

One of the problems city councillor David Cadman is most worried about is the fact that the hub and highrises would be built over a railyard where hazardous materials are held in rail containers.

“As long as we have that issue it’s hard to see a development over those rail lines. I think that’s the biggest road block.” Cadman said.

“The issue of emergency access becomes a huge issue,” since the rail lines will be covered.

Cadman added that the entire concept may be before its time as there are other areas of downtown Vancouver that could be developed, like the northeast part of False Creek.

There are also complex engineering and technical issues of building on top of a railyard and any rail capacity lost due to building support columns would need to be replaced according to a development clause CPR has with the developer. There is space to the north of the railyard, according to the report, but such space is already earmarked for future capacity growth.

The railyard is currently owned by the Vancouver Whitecaps soccer club.

Building a waterfront stadium for the Whitecaps has been a central element in the past when considering the area's development. But after problems arose between the port authority, a federal body, and the club, the stadium proposal fell through.

While the current conceptual framework by city staff doesn't include a stadium, it remains open to integrating a new stadium proposal and considers land where the current heliport is as a viable place for it to be built.

Of course, the city's concept rests on the assumption it will be able to wrangle up support from the property's land owners and then find a "consortium" of developers.

For instance, extending Granville Street will mean bulldozing part of a parking lot owned by Ontrea Inc. (managed by Cadillac Fairview Corporation Ltd.), which owns the adjacent Granville Square. The report indicates the company isn't keen on the idea.

However, the report also states that landowners, although not having committed to anything, have shown general interest in the concepts proposed.

No total cost can be estimated for the development. The framework suggests more than one developer will need to take part in the waterfront’s revitalization and that all levels of government will need to be involved.

“The next stages of work for the framework area will need to include investigation of potential city, provincial and federal sources of support and funding for development, as well as discussions involving landowners and [the three levels of government, CPR, and TransLink],” the report concluded.

[email protected]

http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainmen...+class+transportation/1647662/story.html

comments:

Ed

June 01, 2009 - 1:34 AM
Flag this as Inappropriate



Tsk tsk, such critical comments. I lived in Vancouver for 25 years then moved to LA where I've been for the last 10 years. Take it from me, Vancouver is a world-class city compared to many other parts of the world. You never know what you have until it's gone. Every time I travel back to Vancouver, it reminds me of how great the city is. So take a breather from the criticism, breathe in the fresh air and smile.


Vancouver Real Estate =DrugMoney

May 31, 2009 - 10:28 PM
Flag this as Inappropriate

A 10 Billion dollar a year illegal drug trade that launders it's dirty money in Vancouver Real Estate is what is kill the British Colombia economy along with the actions of the collaborators with international organized crime. Internationale organized crime groups, some back by foreign countries secret police, are after British Colombia's natural resources and are driving Canadians out of the province to get it. With homelessness increasing by over 387% since 2001 the drive to create landless poor is well underway. Embracing an Immigration policy that closes the door on the honest, but instead rolls out the welcome wagon for smugglers, embezzlers, drug dealers, and murderers is a prime example of how invested organized crime is in the political process in British Colombia. With British Colombia known as the Swiss bank for turning dirty money into legal assets, this back water state and its slum of a city Vancouver have become the worlds haven for criminals of all strips. With politicians interfering in police efforts to shut down the source of the drug trade, that is the money laundering operations and support services for global crime syndicates, the future for this failed narco state is grim. With every core legal industry in collapse, a mass exodus of business from restaurant chains, to cruse lines the continuing drop in standard of living has accelerated. With labor practices, wages and cost of living in line with other third world slums, British Colombia is North Americas first state to become a third world slum and continuing to fall. With International organized crime syndicates deeply involved in the political process investing millions in party politics and politicians, crime is the business of this once Canadian province. With drug dealers involved in government business from the sell off of rail ways to the purchase of water rights there is no hope for the honest Canadians that have been victimized by a corrupt judiciary and law society that have turned the sabotage of the national interested into an industry. Hardworking Families watch as the children's schools are closed, their homes taken away, and their opportunity sold to the highest bidders. Poverty, homelessness is the future for Canadians and their children thanks to community leaders. A world class city of stupidity and the dull witted.


Bob

May 31, 2009 - 5:36 PM
Flag this as Inappropriate

Where are the "World Class" salaries and opportunities, to go with the status?


Give us a break ,please.

May 31, 2009 - 5:19 PM
Flag this as Inappropriate

Vancouver cops and media are still too busy trying to convince every one that Vancouver is the world center for gangs and more gangs ,drugs and orginized crime center of Canada or maybe even the world. Maybe once they get done milking that dry,and grow up,well maybe Vancouver can get on with being a junoir world center. One would think that any city worthy of being a world class city would first look out for it's own citizens and clean up the homelessness and the poor of it's city. Also in a world class city,you don't see the police running amuck,tazering and harrassing it's citizens,people would be afraid to come to Vancouver ,they might get tazered to death at Vancouvers air port. Vancouver may have to put a leash on it's police,and tell it's media to quit beating the organized crime ,gang and drug problems drums a rest. Maybe try to be not so proud of it's so called gang ,and drug problems,I know the cops love all the free press. But a world class hub ,no not yet Vancouver has to grow up yet.


mrdowntown

May 31, 2009 - 12:55 PM
Flag this as Inappropriate

That's all we need. Drunken soccer riots mixed in with the downtown eastside.


Barry@

May 31, 2009 - 12:53 PM
Flag this as Inappropriate

Is this another stupid idea from THE TOWN DRUNK and the kid with the goofy haircut?


Lesson Learned

May 31, 2009 - 12:23 PM
Flag this as Inappropriate

Stop the visioneers already please. Can we just concern ourselves with safe local food, water and affordable housing. PS I want the seat with the view over the sewage outfall pipe.


stop the madness

May 31, 2009 - 11:56 AM
Flag this as Inappropriate

End this %$#%$^ soccer stadium downtown idea now.


Gordon

May 31, 2009 - 11:40 AM
Flag this as Inappropriate

I don't understand the logic of building a soccer stadium on the waterfront. The games are played inside the stadium, so the view aspect isn't a consideration. The stadium would create a large building that is a blind spot vis-a-vis water and mountain views from anyplace located near the stadium. A very large parking area that would only be used occasionally would be needed, taking up valuable space that could be used for better purposes. So again, where is the logic here?


T. Jones

May 31, 2009 - 7:53 AM
Flag this as Inappropriate

The industry that built the city, province and country is now going to be pushed out to move people around? They should re-evaluate the strategy..


POSTIONING

May 31, 2009 - 7:39 AM
Flag this as Inappropriate



Postulating - promoting the notion of "world-class" for overindulgent twits who forsake street people, drug tanks, needles and poverty. This article is a sad rendition, with a tone of narcissism that chooses to forget that Vancouver has two worlds - apart.


Bob

May 31, 2009 - 7:25 AM
Flag this as Inappropriate

Jorge, Waterloo might be world-class in terms size it's hardly world-class in terms of efficiency or aesthetics, which is what I think they're referring to in this article. What is it with Vancouverites that they have to sneer and criticize their city so relentlessly? Comparing Vancouver to London or Tokyo is just dumb. Different cities, different contexts.


West End Watcher

May 31, 2009 - 6:28 AM
Flag this as Inappropriate

Sydney's Circular Quay would be the more obvious model, with a revival of light ferry links to points such as Port Moody and Ambleside. This plan should have been in place even before the new convention centre finally got built. As for this statement: "Of course, the city's concept rests on the assumption it will be able to wrangle up support from the property's land owners and then find a "consortium" of developers." How come? Whatever happened to expropriation in the public interest. What this article really misses is that this is a transit priority that must be pursued by all levels of government—and not just a possibility.


Will

May 31, 2009 - 2:06 AM
Flag this as Inappropriate



The Canada line train looks like leftover parts from Expo 86. There is NOTHING world class about that. Did anyone check out what systems look like these days in other parts of the world? Like Vancouver's architecture, it is only based on the cheapest route possible. Stop exploiting the best in world/class city, it's tiresome and resolutely untrue.


Mike

May 31, 2009 - 12:46 AM
Flag this as Inappropriate

Patent nonsense. Vancouver is a village on global terms. Has the prices, but not the substance and opportunity of New York, London, Tokyo. See, if the planners can figure out a way to get families back into the city, instead of concrete and stacks of 600 s.f. bird houses.

[Canadian Mind]

Originally Posted by djmk

i think you need to re-read that sentence and i totally agree with klyemacmac.

just take a walk around the bentall towers and tell me the street life those towers provide (esp after 5pm) and compare that to a simple mix use street like gastown or yaletown.

What I interpreted his statement to mean was that people use elevators to get to work, and don't walk on or contribute to the streetlife (meaning residents of a mix-use building stay within it).

Obviously the main contingent of office workers in an office building work in tere, then leave an go home, with the only busy periods being in the morning, lunchtime, and late afternoon. But even then, it's better than having the 40 story tower spread out into 20 different 2 story locatiosn throughout the city. when the towers are active as people arrive to work, eat lunch, and go home, they contribute to the overall scene, but not 24/7.

Personally, I think every office tower should have substantial ground-level areas dedicated to resteraunts and shops, so they act as a destination for pedestrians rather than an origin during times when the office workers aren't at the office.

I'm also a big fan of mix use buildings ala Shaw tower when it comes to producing commercial space. It isn't the highest quality or quantity, but it is a sustainable and attractive way for developers to introduce office space into this market while still producing a profit. It also allows a more even and tapered amount of street life throughout the day, meaning less surge periods at specific hours while the rest fo the time the streets are virtually dead.

But for multi-use buildings to contribute an adequate amount of office space and residential space, they have to have a substantial height and mass, otherwise the citys core will (and already has) become littered with 200-300 foot developments of highrise sprawl. soon the cities core will have nowhere to expand but east and south, but historical areas and shadowing restrictions will further hinder hieght limits, increasing the skyscraper sprawl. In the meantime it would become far to expensive to redeveop the downtown cores 200-300 foot residential/hotel/ofice structures into larger, denser structures.

This however, is just my opinion. By all means blow these points out of the water if you must.

[jlousa]

I'm glad some people get.
Vancouver doesn't want to be New York, for those that want that you will be disappointed. Vancouver will be Vancouver and we're pretty good at it.