Suburban Updates - All Other Metro Vancouver Municipalities

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by officedweller

And the property next to River Rock known as Duck Island:

http://www.duckisland.ca/

http://www.duckisland.ca/system/files/Duck+Island+Brochure_Email.pdf

Interesting, I saw that about 3 years ago and the brochure was plastered with confidential stamps, so I didnt say anything... When I didnt hear anything about it in the following years I assumed plans had changed or died, but that is the exact same brochure from three years ago. Good to see it is still on the table, although I dont know about its location. It is close to transit which is nice, but sandwiched between a casino, overpasses, the airport and some industrial land. The development was almost big enouigh to be self contained though, so maybe it will be just fine.

[officedweller]

The massing reminds me of condos near the Cambie Bridge in Vancouver - but flanking the Canada Line - and there wouldn't be too much traffic to/from YVR over those bridges at the southern limit of the site at nighttime. There's also a habitat compensation area (marsh) next to the casino parkade.

I guess the main concern would be being under a flight path.

[LeftCoaster]

Yes it is very similar, good call.

My issue with the bridges and overpasses etc was not with the traffic noise so much as the feeling of segregation it would create for the development, making it more of a segregated cell rather than an integrated block in the city.

Not the end of the world or anything, just something to be concerned with.

Also, im sure Jlousa will be displeased at the loss of more prime industrial land... although Richmond is not in quite as dire straights as Vancouver in that regard.

[Metro-One]

Honestly I am against this proposal for all the reasons you just listed. Does every corner of this metro need to be residential? Does it not make sense to use that parcel, surrounded by a massive casino, a metro hub, industrial lands and the airport, to be used for industrial or entertainment purposes instead?

Residential tower development should be concentrated along #3 road in Richmond (preferably Aberdeen Station and north). Same goes for the River front of Surrey. So what if new West is redeveloping their river front, the Surrey Flats around Scott Road should be kept for industrial uses, if anything, industry should be intensified in this area.

It is great for people to live near mass transit, but for us to be truely successful as a metro people also need to work and be entertained near mass transit. Why not relocate the DinoTown theme park (bigger and better of course) along that parcel of land in Richmond? The casino is already there, as is the transit, perfect for such an entertainment destination. Not to mention the land there is flat (perfect for a theme park), is near an airport (why the hell want to live right beside where planes land and take off all day?) and is a severe flood plain (a theme park being flooded is far better than a residential area!).

Honestly, at one point in the 50s it was decided that every development should be a carbon copy suburban subdivision. At that time it was the be all and end all of urban development, they really thought it was the best solution! How did that turn out? Pretty bad in many respects. Now it seems the be all and end all is for every development to be a mixed use (primarily residential) condo tower. While high density residential living is a good thing, and some mixed use is a good thing, if everything is built this way we are only going to be repeating our mistakes from the suburban sprawl days of the 50s. Of course this time it will be an entirely new set of problems (the death of night life and true entertainment areas, the strangling of our industrial sector through high land values and overly strict operating guidelines, such as strict noise and light bylaws, possibly destroying 24 hour operations, the same goes for the airport, etc...)

Again, I hate to bring up Japan, but if you ever ride the train there while the cities do have lots of mix use (essentially residential and retail together) they also have many areas that are strictly commercial and entertainment. In fact it is often these commercial areas during the day that become the entertainment areas at night (there is a smart mixes use strategy). Also, snugged right in with the city are incredibly dense, intense industrial areas with rapid transit train stations at their door step.

sorry for the rant!

[officedweller]

Maybe being under the flight path is why it hasn't been snapped up. I don't see a segregation issue -
it's like the buildings between Burrard and Granville Bridges on the downtown side.

Maybe it can be developed as an office park (after all, that's what YVR has planned across the river)
- wait a second - this is in the brochure (despite the massing render looking like standard stepped residential)

The Plan’s vision is for riverfront oriented non-residential mixed use, including business/office, hospitality, entertainment, civic, education, recreation, and cultural uses with commercial at/near grade along key frontages, plus marinas, boating facilities, and related marine uses.

...

The site falls within the City Centre Area Plan, a subset of the Official Community Plan, that anticipates rezoning the subject property for a mix of medium to high density commercial uses.

Ta-da! - maybe it'll end up like the commercial buildings on Victoria's Selkirk Waterfront area.

[Metro-One]

Well that is some good news, but that render is poor because it makes it look very residential in nature.

Also, it would be nice for a more creative looking project (perhaps integrating itself with the guidway?), and some more than basic entertainment facilities would be welcomed in this city

When I hear entertainment my mind thinks of theme parks, water parks, go carts, good dance clubs (and yes strip clubs aka adult entertainment), night markets with festivals, etc... you know, fun stuff, not another movie theatre with a TGIF.

Oh well, I am heading back to Japan on Nov 11th so once again I can enjoy all those features that we don't have here! (Well, except for the adult entertainment, that has never been my thing, although the atmosphere in the streets in Japanese red light districts is great! Lots of unique goofy shops and good restaurants there. Also I think my wife would kill me if I did, hehe)

[jlousa]

The fact it's non-residential is a large part why it hasn't been picked up yet, there are a couple of parties interested in the parcel but not at the current price. The image provided is probably done intentionally to show what could be possible on the site hoping someone overpays for it and later tries to rezone for residential. It's a big gamble that usually burns the developer but not always.

[Whalleyboy]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Honestly I am against this proposal for all the reasons you just listed. Does every corner of this metro need to be residential? Does it not make sense to use that parcel, surrounded by a massive casino, a metro hub, industrial lands and the airport, to be used for industrial or entertainment purposes instead?

Residential tower development should be concentrated along #3 road in Richmond (preferably Aberdeen Station and north). Same goes for the River front of Surrey. So what if new West is redeveloping their river front, the Surrey Flats around Scott Road should be kept for industrial uses, if anything, industry should be intensified in this area.

It is great for people to live near mass transit, but for us to be truely successful as a metro people also need to work and be entertained near mass transit. Why not relocate the DinoTown theme park (bigger and better of course) along that parcel of land in Richmond? The casino is already there, as is the transit, perfect for such an entertainment destination. Not to mention the land there is flat (perfect for a theme park), is near an airport (why the hell want to live right beside where planes land and take off all day?) and is a severe flood plain (a theme park being flooded is far better than a residential area!).

Honestly, at one point in the 50s it was decided that every development should be a carbon copy suburban subdivision. At that time it was the be all and end all of urban development, they really thought it was the best solution! How did that turn out? Pretty bad in many respects. Now it seems the be all and end all is for every development to be a mixed use (primarily residential) condo tower. While high density residential living is a good thing, and some mixed use is a good thing, if everything is built this way we are only going to be repeating our mistakes from the suburban sprawl days of the 50s. Of course this time it will be an entirely new set of problems (the death of night life and true entertainment areas, the strangling of our industrial sector through high land values and overly strict operating guidelines, such as strict noise and light bylaws, possibly destroying 24 hour operations, the same goes for the airport, etc...)

Again, I hate to bring up Japan, but if you ever ride the train there while the cities do have lots of mix use (essentially residential and retail together) they also have many areas that are strictly commercial and entertainment. In fact it is often these commercial areas during the day that become the entertainment areas at night (there is a smart mixes use strategy). Also, snugged right in with the city are incredibly dense, intense industrial areas with rapid transit train stations at their door step.

sorry for the rant!

have you ever looked at Surrey's South westminster plan? It keeps industrial down in the area for the most part. When i talk about clean up I mean thing like building there waterfront walk way and retail street for the area. Most of the land is still open for industrial. Surrey just has plans to clean it up more make it more viable for people to want to go down there and also its a gateway into surrey and a bad impression when people first see it.
I remember going to a meeting thing where some guy was talking about how surrey is being smart keeping its industrial land it it was one of vancouvers worst ideas to remove so much of theres.
If you havent seen Surrey's south westminster plan here it is
http://surrey.ca/files/SouthWestminster110704.pdf

also surreys in the bidding for dino town last i saw hope it come here =)

[Vancity]

^Hope Richmond gets Dino Town hehe

[Whalleyboy]

is ti just richmond bidding? cause i heard besides surrey itself doing it theres a couple private offers coming from people in south surrey

[Vancity]

I don't actually know if richmond is bidding. sorry for misleading you. it's just something i personally hope the city of richmond would get. it'd be nice to have of that sort in the city, for families and their children to enjoy (and grown ups too..haha)

but if surrey gets it. all the more power to them

[Whalleyboy]

well i think it would be best in surrey especially with surrey having the youngest population

[Metro-One]

And hopefully such a feature would be built near a skytrain station, hence Richmond near the Casino would be perfect, but around a Surrey skytrain station could work as well.

[Whalleyboy]

like the flats around scottroad

[Metro-One]

Exactly

[Whalleyboy]

see that would help add to the clean up of the area.

[SpongeG]

Surrey to build B.C.'s first covered skate park

BY KELLY SINOSKI, VANCOUVER SUN OCTOBER 19, 2010 2:04 PM

METRO VANCOUVER -- The City of Surrey will start work next month on the first covered skate park in B.C.

City council on Monday approved the project, to be built by New Line Skate Parks Inc., for the facility, which will be built at Tom Binnie Park south of the Chuck Bailey Recreation Centre in Surrey's City Centre.

The project includes a covered skate park, a ball-hockey court, pathways and rain gardens.

Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts said the new park will provide "accessible and affordable recreation opportunities" for youth year-round.

"You won't find a covered facility like this anywhere else in B.C. and it will allow our youth to enjoy the skate park rain or shine," she said in a statement.

The facility will incorporate filters to clean storm water before it enters the city's sewer system as well as energy efficient lighting.

...

http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Surrey+build+first+covered+skate+park/3695770/story.html

[Whalleyboy]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

Surrey to build B.C.'s first covered skate park

BY KELLY SINOSKI, VANCOUVER SUN OCTOBER 19, 2010 2:04 PM

METRO VANCOUVER -- The City of Surrey will start work next month on the first covered skate park in B.C.

City council on Monday approved the project, to be built by New Line Skate Parks Inc., for the facility, which will be built at Tom Binnie Park south of the Chuck Bailey Recreation Centre in Surrey's City Centre.

The project includes a covered skate park, a ball-hockey court, pathways and rain gardens.

Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts said the new park will provide "accessible and affordable recreation opportunities" for youth year-round.

"You won't find a covered facility like this anywhere else in B.C. and it will allow our youth to enjoy the skate park rain or shine," she said in a statement.

The facility will incorporate filters to clean storm water before it enters the city's sewer system as well as energy efficient lighting.

...

http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Surrey+build+first+covered+skate+park/3695770/story.html

old news
http://www.civicsurrey.com/2010/05/18/chuck-bailey-youth-park-2-0-pics/

[SpongeG]

old news that just made the vancouver sun today

it was new to me too

[Whalleyboy]

ahh well if you look at the link i posted you'd see lots of pictures of it. Its basicly been in the works since the place was first opened