Downtown Vancouver Updates

[s211]

Originally Posted by Changing City

"At the same time, these improvements also achieve an overall reduction in vehicle congestion that will benefit motorists and goods movement and ultimately the economic vitality of the downtown."

Overall reduction in congestion? The city can only bald-face lie so long and expect the public to buy into that lie. Congestion is a planner's stick instead of a carrot, and it's used all day long to compel people out of vehicles.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by s211

Overall reduction in congestion? The city can only bald-face lie so long and expect the public to buy into that lie. Congestion is a planner's stick instead of a carrot, and it's used all day long to compel people out of vehicles.

What would be your alternative? It's pretty obvious that everybody in a car would be far more congested.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Here's the big picture plan. (Same number of cars accommodated; better facilities for bike & walking. The Richards two-way bike lane helps achieve the anticipated bike use). Again; it's the City Engineer's Plan, although planners helped supply the population and employment numbers.

"The over all goal of the Downtown Transportation Plan is to improve access to downtown homes and businesses while enhancing the unique attraction of downtown Vancouver.

Given the population and employment targets, the total number of trips to downtown will increase by 30 percent. However, the change in the number of trips is different for each of the modes. The more sustainable modes like walking and biking will increase the most. Outlined below is a short summary of how people will reach downtown destinations if all of the plan components are implemented within the next twenty years.

• Walk trips are expected to more than double.
• Bike trips are expected to more than double.
• Transit trips made during rush hour are expected to increase by 50 to 60 percent.
• Vehicles entering downtown are expected to decrease slightly or remain about the same.

In short, the plan accommodates significant increases in walk, bike and transit trips by recommending major improvements for these modes. At the same time, these improvements also achieve an overall reduction in vehicle congestion that will benefit motorists and goods movement and ultimately the economic vitality of the downtown."

Thank you.

This is what I thought was going to be the plan based on the decisions made over the past decade.

Turn DT into a luxury suburb is really what were after.

The polarization in this region is going to become palpable over the next decade or two.

[GenWhy?]

The idea is to make walking not a luxury.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by rofina

Thank you.

This is what I thought was going to be the plan based on the decisions made over the past decade.

Turn DT into a luxury suburb is really what were after.

The polarization in this region is going to become palpable over the next decade or two.

You're welcome.

How you equate having more people walking, biking and taking transit with making Downtown a 'luxury suburb' seems contradictory.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by Changing City

You're welcome.

How you equate having more people walking, biking and taking transit with making Downtown a 'luxury suburb' seems contradictory.

Not me personally, I live just outside the core, biking is my go to.

But that's definitely how a very large mass of non Downtown residents is going to be perceiving this.

It really boils down to a simple concept that many people, rightly or wrongly, believe - an assault on the automobile is an assault on the working man. You don't want cars, you don't want regular folk.

Its definitely a polarizing move, its just a shame City planner/ engineers don't see the flip side of the coin because they think they're making the right decisions.

[red-paladin]

An interesting re-clad proposal, I think some will like and some will hate:

http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2020/05/28/333-seymour-to-undergo-reclad-and-add-rooftop-amenity/

[csbvan]

I like some aspects of that re-clad, but not so much the bland-ification of the glass.

[a very long weekend]

Originally Posted by Changing City

You're welcome.

How you equate having more people walking, biking and taking transit with making Downtown a 'luxury suburb' seems contradictory.

I think it's great too, but as someone who has never lived more than 5-30 minutes from my job/school/etc., I know that many people consider proximity to work to be a luxury. Basically, because they have children or large dogs or whatever, and feel like they require larger flats, which are much less expensive in some far off place. So that, to many, "luxury" is buying that commute time.

(Leaving aside the obvious, which is that if getting a dog or a kid means you have to move somewhere unpleasant, you probably should think twice.)

[a very long weekend]

Salesforce, interesting. This is a very good location for the sorts of people that Salesforce tends to employ, who are most likely going to be coming in from the suburban neighborhoods, or from proper suburbs.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by a very long weekend

Salesforce, interesting. This is a very good location for the sorts of people that Salesforce tends to employ, who are most likely going to be coming in from the suburban neighborhoods, or from proper suburbs.

Salesforce is one of the companies that's already said employees can work from home for the rest of 2020, regardless of what else happens. It will be interesting to see what happens here.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by rofina

Not me personally, I live just outside the core, biking is my go to.

But that's definitely how a very large mass of non Downtown residents is going to be perceiving this.

It really boils down to a simple concept that many people, rightly or wrongly, believe - an assault on the automobile is an assault on the working man. You don't want cars, you don't want regular folk.

Its definitely a polarizing move, its just a shame City planner/ engineers don't see the flip side of the coin because they think they're making the right decisions.

Sorry - I shouldn't have said 'you' - I should have said "How anyone equating having more people walking, biking and taking transit with making Downtown a 'luxury suburb' seems contradictory." I found owning a vehicle cost a lot more than buying a couple of pairs of shoes.

And I fully acknowledge that some people think any changes of our limited movement space - roads and sidewalks - is a threat to their preferred mode of transportation. I think the traffic engineers who are trying to add 50% of trip capacity without adding any road capacity are doing a pretty good job so far in reallocating space without adversely impacting vehicular traffic. Certainly the Burrard Bridge redesign seems to have accommodated a significant increase in bike safety, and riders, without backing up traffic. I'm assuming they've thought about how to add a 2-way protected bike lane onto a one-way street with the same attention to detail.

I think Vancouver as a whole has been pretty timid about reducing road space, compared to many cities in Europe, and some in the US. The gradual introduction of pocket parks, reallocated parking spaces to outdoor seating etc. has been far more modest than in some places. It'll be interesting to see how the blanket approval of patios beyond sidewalks across the City for the remainder of the summer, enacted yesterday, plays out.

I walk everywhere, for almost all my journeys, and I've been aware of the steady increase in the numbers of cyclists using the protected lanes, but also all the streets that lead to them like Adanac/Union. That has really gone up in the past few weeks - and I'm guessing that more people who have tried cycling in those weeks will stick to it in future.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Sorry - I shouldn't have said 'you' - I should have said "How anyone equating having more people walking, biking and taking transit with making Downtown a 'luxury suburb' seems contradictory." I found owning a vehicle cost a lot more than buying a couple of pairs of shoes.

And I fully acknowledge that some people think any changes of our limited movement space - roads and sidewalks - is a threat to their preferred mode of transportation. I think the traffic engineers who are trying to add 50% of trip capacity without adding any road capacity are doing a pretty good job so far in reallocating space without adversely impacting vehicular traffic. Certainly the Burrard Bridge redesign seems to have accommodated a significant increase in bike safety, and riders, without backing up traffic. I'm assuming they've thought about how to add a 2-way protected bike lane onto a one-way street with the same attention to detail.

I think Vancouver as a whole has been pretty timid about reducing road space, compared to many cities in Europe, and some in the US. The gradual introduction of pocket parks, reallocated parking spaces to outdoor seating etc. has been far more modest than in some places. It'll be interesting to see how the blanket approval of patios beyond sidewalks across the City for the remainder of the summer, enacted yesterday, plays out.

I walk everywhere, for almost all my journeys, and I've been aware of the steady increase in the numbers of cyclists using the protected lanes, but also all the streets that lead to them like Adanac/Union. That has really gone up in the past few weeks - and I'm guessing that more people who have tried cycling in those weeks will stick to it in future.

I'm largely in agreement.

However, I don't think its too difficult to see how someone who has to drive into Downtown from a far flung part of town sees motor vehicle restrictions in favor of walkability a slight against them. Its a move that caters to those of us that are privileged enough to live near downtown or downtown.

Couple that with the fact that I paid for my condo what buys you a family house in the suburbs and you kind of start to see how Downtown's are being designed for a particular type of person.

Personally - I love it. That's the selfish side of me. I live close to downtown and enjoy all that Vancouver has to offer, precisely because I made life choices that prioritize me, I can definitely see how it would rub someone the wrong way that the city is being designed for people like me to enjoy.

Adanac/Union - yes! I often cycle Adanac, the bike traffic is real. Love seeing that. Also love the little park/flex space around Land Yachts bikes. Cool little areas that you wont get to enjoy by car, only bike or on foot.

[BodomReaper]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

An interesting re-clad proposal, I think some will like and some will hate:

http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2020/05/28/333-seymour-to-undergo-reclad-and-add-rooftop-amenity/

Hate it - architectural vandalism. This is one of the only playful office towers downtown. At present it has a cool retro-futuristic and whimsical character that grabs your attention with chrome columns which unified the design, curved podium glasswork with chrome mullions, shiny brick, and reflective + randomized glazing. A thoughtful and distinct design.

Soon to be another box with neutral cladding.

[kaitoe]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

An interesting re-clad proposal, I think some will like and some will hate:

http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2020/05/28/333-seymour-to-undergo-reclad-and-add-rooftop-amenity/

Interesting. I take it this was never completed? https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/333-seymour-street-vancouver-grant-thornton-place

Though I do see echoes of that in this re-clad.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by kaitoe

Interesting. I take it this was never completed? https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/333-seymour-street-vancouver-grant-thornton-place

Though I do see echoes of that in this re-clad.

Both are happening as separate projects.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by rofina

However, I don't think its too difficult to see how someone who has to drive into Downtown from a far flung part of town sees motor vehicle restrictions in favor of walkability a slight against them. Its a move that caters to those of us that are privileged enough to live near downtown or downtown.

I think we can all sympathize with that perspective to a certain degree, but at this point, the only way to maintain or increase road capacity and have more people accessing downtown... is to start knocking down buildings for wider streets.

[s211]

Originally Posted by BodomReaper

Hate it - architectural vandalism. This is one of the only playful office towers downtown. At present it has a cool retro-futuristic and whimsical character that grabs your attention with chrome columns which unified the design, curved podium glasswork with chrome mullions, shiny brick, and reflective + randomized glazing. A thoughtful and distinct design.

Soon to be another box with neutral cladding.

Is it Morguard that's running with this, or did they lose management of this building along with the adjacent development site? If the former, they recently also reskinned a building in Edmonton and sucked all the individuality out of that building too (I'm assuming they still manage that Edmonton building; Morguard has been losing clients this past while).

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

mcminsen is live and well and out and about, making daily posting of beautiful photos of Vancouver in the Canadian threads, especially the daily weather thread.

Great to hear, thanks!

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by BodomReaper

Hate it - architectural vandalism. This is one of the only playful office towers downtown. At present it has a cool retro-futuristic and whimsical character that grabs your attention with chrome columns which unified the design, curved podium glasswork with chrome mullions, shiny brick, and reflective + randomized glazing. A thoughtful and distinct design.

Soon to be another box with neutral cladding.

Agreed.
It was one of the only "futuristic" looking buildings we had.
... but not unexpected given the renovation of the lower levels.
I'm surprised they didn't fill in the chamfered corners.