| |
Posted Jan 6, 2023, 3:52 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 41,621
|
|
From the thread on the topic posted June 6, 2010 (before the Evergreen Line):
https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=145264&page=2
Quote:
Originally Posted by red-paladin
I sent Translink a letter asking them what are the possible locations for future stations. This is what they told me:
Hi (red-paladin),
Sorry for the delay in responding to your email – I just received it as it was circulated rather widely given the involvement of different staff for the different lines…
Line by line, on the Canada Line:
· Capstan Way station came very close to being constructed but it was contingent on a substantial contribution from the developer of an adjacent property and the economic downtown destroyed the economics of the project so it is not currently proceeding but is likely to come back.
· YVR3 was planned to support an expanded airport terminal - if the Airport Authority proceeds with that expansion, the station would proceed as well. The Airport Authority’s strategic plan may have more detail on it.
· 33rd and 57th Avenue stations would only be built with a large developer contribution, should future land use plans support developments of the necessary scale. 33rd would be a particular challenge given the adjacency to Queen Elizabeth Park.
On the Expo Line, the geometry allowed for future stations at:
· Clark Drive
· Kingsway (E of Boundary Rd)
These could still be built if desired.
The section along Stewardson Way has excessive gradients (1.4% and greater, when SkyTrain stations need to be on a 0.5% grade or less) as well as very few tangent (straight) track sections of sufficient length.
On the Millennium Line, the geometry only allows for a future station at Woodlands – most of the line has excessive gradients and curvatures between the original stations. Where flat and straight sections exist, they are often too close to existing stations to be of consideration (e.g, approx 500 m E of Commercial-Broadway station).
Hope this assists, let me know if you have questions.
________________________________________________
Ian Fisher, Project Planner, Project Planning
TransLink (South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority)
1600 - 4720 Kingsway, Burnaby BC V5H 4N2 Canada
Tel 604.453.3058 Fax 604.453.4697
[email protected] www.translink.ca |
https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=145264&page=2
****************
See also:
Vancouver wants TransLink to consider new Expo Line station at Clark Drive
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-expo-line-clark-drive-false-creek-flats
*********************
Also, the City of Vancouver has forgotten that it was supposed to pursue better access to VCC-Clark Station from Clark Drive
when the Nature's Path office building site (called the "Residual Site" in the report below) was redeveloped.
I posted this in 2019.
I think a second station house for VCC-Clark Station (at the top of the hill on Clark Drive) needs to return to the City's and TransLink's radar:
Quote:
Found the reference I remembered...
While the proposed greenspace allows for the future development of a 2nd station house,
I think that the developer should be building it or contributing to it as a community amenity contribution.
Quote:
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Date: January 19, 2001
Author/Local: Wayne Pledger/873-7346
RTS No. 1763
CC File No. 5559
T&T: February 20, 2001
TO: Standing Committee on Transportation and Traffic
FROM: Rapid Transit Office in consultation with the Directors of Current Planning and City Plans, and the General Manager of Engineering Services
SUBJECT: Rapid Transit - Vancouver Community College SkyTrain Station Design
DISCUSSION
General Discussion of the Station
Appendix A (on file in the City Clerk's Office) shows the general arrangement of the VCC Station.
The station is a typical side platform, elevated station with a single entry at Keith Drive. It has been designed with a high degree of transparency that provides for security, visibility and access to daylight.
The VCC Station will be the terminus of the Millennium line until Phase 2 proceeds to a western terminus on the Broadway corridor. The station is located on the False Creek Flats north of Great Northern Way/6th Avenue and west of Clark Drive. It will serve Vancouver Community College, the surrounding single family and multi family residential community and emerging hi-tech industry. Initially, rider ship at this station will be light, but will increase as hi-tech develops, the Millennium line extends westward, and if VCC expands.
As with the other SkyTrain stations, the City wants to insure that it is well integrated with the surrounding area, and well connected to key destinations and the existing transit system. Achieving these connections to the east is challenging given the station's location at the base of the escarpment on the False Creek Flats and the steep grade change up to Clark Drive.
The Adjacent Residual Site
The RTPO has acquired the property on the north west corner of Clark and 6th Avenue (the Jessie's Moving site) for construction purposes. After construction, as with all land not required for the system, the RTPO intends to dispose of the residual property. The RTPO intends to work towards finding a new owner who will redevelop the site. The site is of particular interest to the City because it will be crucial in providing access to the Keith Drive entrance to the station or to a second station house at Clark Drive. As well, vehicle/parking access to the residual site will be from the station forecourt.
Appendix B contains a letter from the City to the RTPO regarding development of the residual site including ways to achieve a development that fulfills its important role relative to the station.
*******************
APPENDIX B
CITY OF VANCOUVER
RAPID TRANSIT OFFICE
December 13, 2000
VIA FAX: 739-3087
Rapid Transit Project 2000 Ltd.
2010 - 1050 West Pender Street
Vancouver, B.C. V6E 3S7
Attention: Teresa Watts
Director, Systems Design
Edward LeFlufy
Consultant
Dear Ms. Watts & Mr. LeFlufy:
RE: VCC Station - Residual site at corner of 6th and Clark (Vancouver Sawmills site)
I refer to the parcel at the corner of 6th and Clark Drive (the "Sawmills" site), which Rapid Transit Project 2000 Ltd. (RTPO) has acquired for the VCC SkyTrain station. We understand that some portions of the site are not directly required for the station and related infrastructure. This letter concerns the balance of the site, the "residual site", for which we understand the RTPO intends to tender a Request For Proposals early in 2001.
This letter is intended to re-affirm the City's objectives and expectations and RTPO commitments regarding the design and development of the residual site. The residual site will play an important role in providing the connections necessary to make the VCC Station an integral and accessible part of both the SkyTrain transportation system and the neighbourhood.
As with all stations, the City is concerned that the station be well integrated to the surrounding neighbourhood, and well connected to key destinations and the existing transit system. These concerns are particularly acute at this site, given the steep grade change between Clark and the 6th Avenue station entry level. The City wants to ensure that as part of the station and related infrastructure, there are good pedestrian and cyclist connections to Clark Drive and the #22 bus; to VCC, to the greenway/bikeway and to the rapidly developing areas north of the station site.
Because the greenway/bikeway access and the configuration and alignment of relocated rails to the north of the station has not yet been finalized, there are some aspects of the role of the residual site that may be affected by the resolution of these issues.
Current Zoning
The current zoning of the Sawmills site is I-3, which allows high tech and other industrial uses. Under this zoning a development proposal could proceed as an `outright' application to a density of 3.0 fsr and a height of 18.3m. An outright application could be processed without review by COV Urban Design and Planning staff, the Development Permit Staff Committee, the Urban Design Panel, or the Development Permit Board, and would not involve public notification.
The City is concerned about ensuring that the development of the site proceeds in a manner that recognizes the unique characteristics of the site, and its role with respect to the VCC station.
Methods to secure City and RTPO objectives for the residual site
There are two possible methods to secure a development of the residual site that fulfills its important role with respect to the station.
1) Contractual Agreement registered on title for the property
In this option, commitment is required from the RTPO that any developer of this site would engage in the City's conditional development process, including consultation and review by City staff, Urban Design Panel, and the Development Permit Board. In this scenario, the RTPO would continue to play a role in ensuring that the objectives of the contractual agreement are met. The agreement on title would include principles, objectives and performance expectations with respect to the development of the site within the bounds of the existing I-3 zoning.
2) CD-1 Rezoning
As with the "triangle" site at Broadway and Commercial, ultimately a CD-1 site specific zoning may be appropriate for this residual site. A CD-1 zoned site would by definition undergo the City's conditional development review process and would of course include urban design principles and guidelines, and Council approval of the Form of Development. The City believes that a highly public use would best serve the SkyTrain station and the precinct in terms of expanding accessibility, potential ridership, and a 24 hour presence. Alternately, retaining the principle uses of the existing I-3 zoning but allowing for a higher retail component would also assist to this end. Consideration could also be given to allowing a moderation of parking requirements given the immediate proximity of the site to the SkyTrain station.
The City of Vancouver needs a commitment from the RTPO with respect to which method would be preferred, so that the necessary steps to secure objectives for the residual site can be undertaken.
In either of the methods outlined above, the following characteristics of the residual site, and its relationship to the station and transit connections form the basis of our urban design objectives:
a) the proximity of the site to VCC station;
b) the challenges of the 15m drop in grade from Clark to the 6th Ave station entry level; and
c) outstanding issues of connectivity from Clark Drive to the 6th Ave station entry level and completion of the greenway connection to the level of the flats.
The role of the residual site will depend to a great extent on the final station design and the surrounding landscaping and forecourt design.
Urban Design Objectives - Connections to Clark Drive
As you are aware, City staff believe that the station should be designed to provide pedestrian and disabled access to Clark Drive Bridge in the current construction phase, either through a second station house, or via a centralized circulation system (so that patrons coming from the neighbourhood or from Clark Drive or the #22 bus do not have to descend an 11% grade to the proposed 6th Avenue forecourt, only to take an escalator up to the platform).
Although the station has been designed to physically accommodate a `second station house' providing direct access from Clark Drive, it is our understanding that this second access will not be constructed as part of Phase I.
Given this, the development of the residual site should provide for:
· highly public, visible and convenient access for pedestrians and disabled persons from Clark Drive to the Keith Road station entrance
· the potential for a future highly public, visible, and convenient access for pedestrians and disabled persons to a potential second station house entry at the level of Clark Drive
· depending on the resolution of the greenways access to the level of the Flats, a greenways route via the site, or allowance for exterior access to a greenways ramping system along the northern edge of the residual site.
If the RFP does not result in an interested purchaser for the site in advance of station completion, a commitment is required that the RTPO will take the necessary steps to ensure that access for pedestrians and the disabled from Clark to the 6th Avenue entry is provided via paths and landscape development on the residual site. This interim access arrangement is to be designed in consultation with City Staff, and is to be in place when the VCC Station opens.
Urban Design Objectives - General Considerations
The following outline urban design objectives based on the relationship and proximity of the site to the station, and the challenging characteristics of the site:
· building massing and interface with the VCC station: views to and from the station, and visibility of the station from Great Northern Way and Clark Drive
· consideration of city and mountain views northwest from the raised vantage point of Clark as it approaches 6th Ave and from the neighbourhood to the south east
· recognition of prominent and unique characteristics of the site - a highly visible corner of GNW and Clark Drive, with challenging topography
· active, publicly accessible uses to ensure "eyes on the street" along routes to the station entry points, and particularly on the station forecourt and on Clark Drive
· weather protection for pedestrians along these routes
· a widened setback along the 6th Ave frontage, including street trees, a sidewalk and landscaped step and ramping system to facilitate pedestrian movement up and down the slope
· a public open space and tree planting at the corner of 6th Ave and Clark
· relationship to the station forecourt: public uses fronting on and opening out to the public pedestrian space of the forecourt
· traffic: circulation and parking access considerations to ensure the development of the residual site does not adversely affect the functioning of the station forecourt and its access.
We believe the development of the residual site will play a crucial role in the effective functioning of the VCC Station and we look forward to working with you toward achieving our mutual objectives for this very important site. Please let us know at your earliest convenience what your preference would be with respect to the two alternative methods for dealing with the residual site, so that we may proceed together to secure its future potential.
Yours truly,
Patricia St. Michel
Planner
[email protected]
Phone: 604.873-7237
PSM/
cc: Larry Beasley, Director of Current Planning, City of Vancouver
Ann McAfee, Director of City Plans, City of Vancouver
Pat Wotherspoon, Assistant Director of City Plans, City of Vancouver
Ralph Segal, Senior Development Planner, Urban Design,
City of Vancouver
Anita Molaro, Planner, Urban Design, City of Vancouver
Wayne Pledger, Project Manager, City of Vancouver Rapid Transit Office
Renate Ehm, Transportation Engineer,
City of Vancouver Rapid Transit Office
Ian Smith, Senior Planner, Central Area Major Developments,
City of Vancouver
***********************
APPENDIX C
November 3, 2000
Minutes of a meeting held on October 16, 2000 at Architectura to review the design of the Vancouver Community College Station.
City Attendees:
Brent MacGregor
Dave Rudberg
Larry Beasley
Jane Bird
Wayne Pledger
Pat Wotherspoon
Attending for the RTPO and the Architects:
Tom Motomochi
Edward LeFlufy
Walter Francl
Peter Buchanan
Others to be inserted
The Purpose of the meeting was to provide City advice to the RTPO and their architects on the design of the Vancouver Community College Station, forecourt to the station, the adjacent residual site (Jessie's) and transportation connections to the station.
This meeting replaces the Development Permit Board meeting that would normally have provided advice on this matter but was deferred given the existing labour disruption. Any further delay in providing City advice would have not allowed the architect sufficent time to incorporate this advice into the existing design given the design schedule requirements.
Jane Bird (JB) outlined the key City issues:
1. The station is located in the SE quadrant of the False Creek flats, an area recently rezoned as "high tech" I3. The specific site is close to the Finning redevelopment site and the (already under development) QLT Site. The station is also located across the street from the Vancouver Community College, a major educational land use that is also considering redevelopment plans.
It is expected that the non residential land uses in the area will change very quickly and very dramatically and the station will play a key transportation role.
2 The land to the east and south of the station is higher in elevation than the existing station entrance. Clark Drive to the east is a major arterial with a major bus route. Connections between the existing station entrance and Clark are problematic for pedestrians, especially the disabled, given the elevation difference. A second station entrance to Clark is seen as an important element of the station for local pedestrians, transit users and the disabled east of Clark.
JB further indicated some concerns City staff had with uncertainty over what was in budget Scope and that if some of the connection elements such as a second station entrance were not included then the residual site (either as an undeveloped site or upon redevelopment) becomes critical in achieving these connections.
Edward LeFlufy noted that title to the residual site has not yet transferred to the RTPO, that the budget estimate for the station is $5.7 million without a second station entrance and that the following schedule will meet a station opening in the second half of 2002, approximately 3 months after Commercial Station opens:
25% design completion: October 20, 2000
65% design completion: December 2000
95% design completion: February 2000
100% design completionf: March 2000
Peter Buchanan and Walter Francl discussed the context for, and design of the Station. The following points were made:
1 Prior to the construction of the Grandview Cut, the station site used to be a beach. Various elements of the station including the roof and station entrance have been developed to create a billowy lite architecture evoking a wind feeling with these elements being held down rather than supported.
2. The station has a somewhat asymmetrical design with the 2 sides different evoking the image of a sail boat with a leeward and windward.
3. The views along Keith Drive towards the entrance to the Station are, or will be somewhat limited, given that Keith is a well treed street south of 6th/Great Northern Way and that the Jessie's site on the east side of Keith and the Rogers' site on the west side of Keith will frame the station significantly.
4. The views from the north (from Clark Drive and from SkyTrain) will be the most dramatic.
5. Lighting of the Station will be indirect from below with task lighting to important elements of the station and will be a "welcoming beacon".
6. CEPTED issues have been addressed by keeping the station very open and transparent.
7. Public art is intended to be a procession of overhead lanterns along the western edge of the forecourt from 6th Ave to the vicinity of the station entrance with features at the base of the lanterns evoking the original False Creek shoreline.
8. The roof will collect rain water and direct it to a sculptural element near the station entrance.
9. The forecourt area is intended to be open and will connect under the station (emergency vehicle access allowed under the western end of the station).
10. There is provision for an overhead walkway across 6th Ave to the Vancouver Community College but is not being provided for at this time. An at-grade signalized crossing of 6th is the preferred option (which would have to provided in any event) with a median proposed for 6th Ave, similar with what is being proposed for Great Northern Way to the east, adjacent to the Finning Site.
11. Walter Francl discussed the various options for a second station house connection to Clark including a direct connection between Clark and the Station and connections integrated into the residual site.
DISCUSSION
Dave Rudberg (DHR) was concerned with the large number of pedestrians who would be crossing 6th Ave/Grandview Highway North to reach the station and asked whether there was money in the budget for an overpass.
Edward LeFlufy (EF) indicated there was money for an overpass. However, the conclusions, following meetings with the public and VCC are:
1 Notwithstanding the potential for a grade separated faciltiy, it will still be necessary to provide a workable at-grade crossing.
2 VCC is reviewing its development options. It would seem prudent to defer a decision on an overpass until more is known of their development options as it may be better to put an overpass in a different place to what has been identified and/or integrate such a facility into either the residual site, the Rogers site and/or a redeveloped VCC.
The advice of the City is to wait until development options at VCC are better known until a decision on a pedestrian overpass is made.
Jane Bird (JB) raised the issue of the Clark connection and refered to the Amenity Package (Section 1.3.4.3 of the amenity package says that the VCC Station will be designed and constructed to include pedestrian and cyclist connections to the Bikeway/Greenway and the Clark Drive Bridge) and asked the architect to comment on this connection without the residual site.
A very significant portion of the remainder of the meeting discussed this issue.
EL begins by noting that the issue raised by JB raises the question of the second station entrance. The RTPO has concluded from an understanding of existing stations with "secondary entrances" (eg Joyce) that if a second station entrance is provided, it should provide the same level of service as the "first" station entrance (eg escalators, elevators, same number of ticket machines, etc).
EL explained that the RTPO proposes that the residual site would be used as the route between Clark Drive and False Creek. Options that exist include:
1 In the absence of redevelopment of the residual site, a switchback-type path could be created.
2 Integration of a way between Clark and the station entrance at Keith through or as part of the redevelopment.
3 Integration of a way between Clark and a second station entrance (at the Clark Drive elevation) through or as part of the redevelopment.
In the absence of the above, a direct connection between Clark Bridge and a second station entrance continues to exist.
It was unclear whether the Options 2 or 3 above would be an RTPO condition of the redevelopment site.
Brent MacGregor (BDM) and Larry Beasley (LBB) asked how the disabled would get between Clark Drive and the station entrance in the absence of a residual site redevelopment.
EL indicated this has not yet been decided but that there is an obligation by the RTPO to provide a means for this to ocurr. Options could include a ramp on the residual site and, upon redevelopment, through the new development.
DHR asked about the Greenway/Bikeway connection. JB reiterated the RTPO obligation under the Amenity Package to design and constructsomething. Further, this has, not surprisingly, become a significant design challenge, but that it does not bear on the issue of the Station design.
LB observed that it may be necessary to solve as an interim solution, the grade problem a first time with the money available and then a second time more permanently. LB also asked why not design the station in a manner that all vertical circulation (between the "first" station entrance, the platforms, and a "second" station entrance) were in a vertical line in the central portion of the station.
EL reiterated that in the absence of the redevelopment of the residual site, a ramping system would be provided on the site.
BDM recommended that the Station should be designed to provide pedestrian and disabled access to Clark Drive Bridge.
LBB recommended that Urban Design Guidelines should be developed for the residual site before the RTPO sells the property.
LBB made the following points:
1 The forecourt landscaping and public art proposal be strengthened to reinforce the visual connection of Great Northern Way to the Station along Keith Drive.
2 The Public Art proposal is weak. Could get lost. He likes the spirit but it almost needs to be taken across Great Northern Way to work.
3 The at-grade design concept should be carried under the Station to the northside of the Staiton and provide a definite terminating "edge" on the north side.
4 The vocabularly of the Station is quite interesting and in line with the other hi tech development proposals he has seen but wondered whether the design should be modified to provide a central vertical circulation point.
BDM asked whether there is sufficient student demand to warrant a pedestrian overpass of Great Northern Way. EL said not today but with future development.
Conclusions
The VCC Station should be designed and constructed to provide a pedestrian/disabled connection to Clark Drive Bridge when the station and system open. The existing location for the second station entrance works but the RTPO may wish to consider a more central set of integrated vertical circulation elements.
Urban Design Guidelines should be developed for the residual site before the property is sold.
A grade separated pedestrian crossing of Great Northern Way should be reconsidered when redevelopment options and timing of VCC is better known.
Carry the design of the forecourt under the Station to an "edge" on the north side of the Station.
Consider "strengthening" the public art component and landscaping to reinforce the existing visual connection along Keith Drive and consider extending it to the south side of Great Northern Way.
|
https://council.vancouver.ca/010220/Tt2.htm
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helvetia
|
Nice!
I didn't know that someone had updated that track map.
Thanks.
Last edited by officedweller; Jan 6, 2023 at 4:25 AM.
|
|
|
Prev
Linear Mode
