Olympic Village & Southeast False Creek Updates Discussion

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The NPA is the party of conservatism and keeping things in the past. They long for the old days of Vancouver.

Vision is the progressive party.

Pretty much. Although I wouldn't call replacing everything with PRC condos and grass fields "progressive."

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

It's possible other parties will form for the 2018 election, civic politics is weird, but don't get confused over which one supports more change (even if it isn't exactly what you want).

I sure hope so. The way things are, the regressives have a voice, the real estate industry and cyclists/fitness nuts have a voice, and everybody else is screwed.

We need a third option - and possibly a fourth - yesterday.

[BIMBAM]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Pretty much. Although I wouldn't call replacing everything with PRC condos and grass fields "progressive."

Sure it is. It means regular people being able to own property or afford rent. Protection of single family homes through zoning is class warfare, and you may think I'm exaggerating, but I think at this point that underlying reality we never really acknowledged is becoming obvious because of its magnified effects.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by BIMBAM

Sure it is. It means regular people being able to own property or afford rent. Protection of single family homes through zoning is class warfare, and you may think I'm exaggerating, but I think at this point that underlying reality we never really acknowledged is becoming obvious because of its magnified effects.

Absolutely, SFHs have to go. But why not townhomes? Market housing? Mixed-use low rises and mid rises? The stunted, uniformly-shaped towers springing up all over the city are often too small for the average family, overpriced for everyone else, and often sold out and flipped through the roof by unscrupulous land speculators - none of that matters to Vision, so long as they can rake in the property taxes and claim the city's becoming more "livable."

Which brings me back to my point. Vote for the NPA, you keep the oversized logging town of recent past. Vote for Vision, you get cookie-cutter high rises and grass fields for the 1 percent. Something in-between is required.

[jlousa]

NPA=conservatism? I dunno about that, they began adding bike lanes to the city over a decade before it was fashionable and did it without uproar. They created the live/work downtown we have now and created the policies that made us the most livable city in the world...a standing we have since lost. They certainly weren't perfect but they seemed imo to do a better job of running the city. I fault the NPA for helping destroy the industrial land base in our city, and while the four pillar approach they brought in was great on paper, they failed to treat all four pillars equally and are responsible for not having done what was needed to help the DTES. No free passes from me.

[mukmuk64]

Originally Posted by jlousa

NPA=conservatism? I dunno about that, they began adding bike lanes to the city over a decade before it was fashionable and did it without uproar. They created the live/work downtown we have now and created the policies that made us the most livable city in the world...a standing we have since lost. They certainly weren't perfect but they seemed imo to do a better job of running the city. I fault the NPA for helping destroy the industrial land base in our city, and while the four pillar approach they brought in was great on paper, they failed to treat all four pillars equally and are responsible for not having done what was needed to help the DTES. No free passes from me.

Whatever progressive ideals the NPA once had they oddly seem to have lost them over time. Former NPA Councillor Gordon Price mentions his bafflement at the NPA's inability to embrace bike lanes at the end of this recent blog post. I honestly don't really have any feel for what the NPA stands for at this point. It just seems like knee jerk anti-"whatever Vision is doing" or vague "we'd do the same but better with more consultation" nonsense.

[mukmuk64]

Speaking of bike lanes and Olympic Village SEFC the separated bike lane on the north side of 1st between Quebec and Main is finished. It's the type that is at grade with the sidewalk. No pictures sorry, but maybe one of the frequent Olympic Village shutterbugs can make a side trip and take some snaps next time they're about.

The bike route is designed to be used as part of a future fully protected cyclist intersection but unfortunately this likely won't be completed until the new Concert condo across the way is built which is years away. As a result of the intersection not being completed, I've barely seen any cyclist actually use this bike lane, since the style of protected intersection forces the bike lane way to the side, and this is incredibly awkward for a cyclist that just wants to go straight on 1st into the Olympic Village. Additionally the geometry of the car blocking barriers on Main that allow cyclists to pass through don't really funnel cyclists into the bike lane well, which is odd since the City literally just redid them.

Going eastbound on 1st I still have no sense of what the City is going to accomplish here. At the moment it is a muddled shared space between cars and cyclists, with the city seemingly encouraging cyclists to cross from right to left in order to go straight but provide cars the ability to turn right.

It's hard to be too rough with the city here since this area is still in such active development that they clearly can't completely act on its entire plans all at once, but I am a bit concerned that they're not getting it right.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by mukmuk64

It's hard to be too rough with the city here since this area is still in such active development that they clearly can't completely act on its entire plans all at once, but I am a bit concerned that they're not getting it right.

Right outside my new place!

It's a weird one. I don't know why it's level with the sidewalk and not the street, that would make more sense IMO.

Building a single block of separated bike lane is silly too. Although I imagine it was part of the agreement with the developer, and they built or paid for it.

[WarrenC12]

Some views (and some soon to be lost) from Block 100:


Looking over The Creek's first two buildings:




Looking East down 1st Ave. The Streetcar ROW down 1st will be interesting... perhaps the new curb for The Creek will be set back, otherwise that will be a tight corner at 1st and Quebec, and a narrow block.




Another look at OV, soon to be obstructed:




Zoomed in on BC Place and Site 10A. Hopefully I'll be able to see the casino after all is said and done.



All taken by me.

[mukmuk64]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Right outside my new place!

It's a weird one. I don't know why it's level with the sidewalk and not the street, that would make more sense IMO.

Building a single block of separated bike lane is silly too. Although I imagine it was part of the agreement with the developer, and they built or paid for it.

It's worth remembering that a lot of Vancouver's road grade bike lanes are lingering "trial" lanes that were quickly created by simply putting up a few portable concrete barriers on the road.

I think these sidewalk grade lanes are more typical of Europe. From my handful of days spent in Amsterdam I'm pretty sure most of them were like this.

I do find these type of bike lanes don't seem well respected by pedestrians but that may just be because they're currently pretty rare and pedestrians aren't used to keeping an eye out for cyclists.

I agree the construction of this is probably associated with the development. We likely won't see a coherent bike lane through this corridor until the Concert development across the road is completed. The bike lane currently ejects cyclists about right into the "Navio" sign across the road (which you can see in the above photo), so some work will clearly be done at some point to continue the bike lane there or do something I don't know.

[jollyburger]

The Canoe Bridge is looking awfully green these days.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

The Canoe Bridge is looking awfully green these days.

I believe that the specific colour you're looking for is "Damp White."

[jollyburger]

They're also ripping up the grass around Science World to start building the new parks.

[the_prof]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

They're also ripping up the grass around Science World to start building the new parks.

No, the "new parks" are years away; they are just moving the children playground. See here: http://vancouver.ca/parks-recreation-culture/creekside-park-playground-renewal.aspx

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by the_prof

No, the "new parks" are years away; they are just moving the children playground. See here: http://vancouver.ca/parks-recreation-culture/creekside-park-playground-renewal.aspx

My mistake, I meant new playground.

[scryer]

I personally feel like Olympic Village is missing some taller towers.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by scryer

I personally feel like Olympic Village is missing some taller towers.

Absolutely. False creek should be a natural place for downtown to expand and i think the removal of the viaducts and relocation of the hospital will help to make that happen. The stadium district still kinda cuts it off though.

Compared to all other areas that downtown could potentially expand to, it has the least amount of nimbyism because of predominantly industrial and commercial land use for the past half century and there's no viewcones to impede heights.

What would help is having more large scale office buildings proposed, similar to what is built downtown. The housing is already being built there, i'm sure those people would love to be able to walk to their office in just a few minutes.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

Absolutely. False creek should be a natural place for downtown to expand and i think the removal of the viaducts and relocation of the hospital will help to make that happen. The stadium district still kinda cuts it off though.

Compared to all other areas that downtown could potentially expand to, it has the least amount of nimbyism because of predominantly industrial and commercial land use for the past half century and there's no viewcones to impede heights.

What would help is having more large scale office buildings proposed, similar to what is built downtown. The housing is already being built there, i'm sure those people would love to be able to walk to their office in just a few minutes.

If what you are suggesting is sort of a "south satellite" CBD, the I think it's a great idea. It would also synergize with West Broadway, providing credence for the rrt right out to UBC.
I would like to think, however, that area traffic flows, be they pedestrian, transit, or vehicular especially, remain fluid, even if little engineering tweaks need to be done.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by scryer

I personally feel like Olympic Village is missing some taller towers.

I don't. I think this is the perfect build form to continue south throughout Vancouver.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

If what you are suggesting is sort of a "south satellite" CBD, the I think it's a great idea. It would also synergize with West Broadway, providing credence for the rrt right out to UBC.
I would like to think, however, that area traffic flows, be they pedestrian, transit, or vehicular especially, remain fluid, even if little engineering tweaks need to be done.

It's moreso the notion of a naturally spreading downtown as the city grows, expanding the area of the CBD and integrating it more with new residential communities to reduce the amount of people needing to commute to the downtown peninsula.

It is a great way of reducing the amount of cars needing to go to the traditional downtown area that currently has many transit pinch points. Diverting those people who live outside of Van but work in the city to more accessible areas would be a great way of reducing congestion on the viaducts.

If anything the predominant reasoning and rationale to keep the viaducts is the fact that the CBD is not very accessible to people outside of the city.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

If what you are suggesting is sort of a "south satellite" CBD, the I think it's a great idea. It would also synergize with West Broadway, providing credence for the rrt right out to UBC.
I would like to think, however, that area traffic flows, be they pedestrian, transit, or vehicular especially, remain fluid, even if little engineering tweaks need to be done.

Mount Pleasant or the Kingsway-Broadway-Clark triangle seem like better locations. We'll need patches of midrise to break up the bland, uni-sized tabletop known as downtown.