[Surrey] Whalley District | 6 + 35 + 37 + 46 fl | U/C - Page 4

GMasterAres · #61 Posted **Jan 11, 2018, 7:59 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

That's a hilariously optimistic number of people in the rendering.

Agreed on it not reading at all like a retail district. I assumed that they were condo lobbies and amenity rooms.

TREES EVERYWHERE. ZOMG PUT TREES ON THE ROOF.

*sigh* marketing renders.

GMasterAres · #62 Posted **Jan 11, 2018, 8:03 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shift

By retail - thinking they are implying more restaurant / cafe for that corner. I think the greenery works.

Here is the floor plan of the ground level for phase 1 (building to the right in the rendering)

There are 2 retail units facing the corner plaza. Townhouses along 136A further north (so not really a shopping street). There is more retail on Whalley Blvd than 136A.

About the plaza:

'In addition, a 426-sq. metre (4,585-sq.ft.) street-level outdoor plaza is proposed to be located on the southwest corner of the Phase 1 site, at the intersection of future 136A A Street and 107A Avenue. This space will incorporate seating along the eastern edge of the plaza, and will be activated by two commercial retail units (CRUs) that are oriented towards the plaza, and frame it along the northern and eastern edges. The plaza is intended to be used as a public gathering space where frequent weekend entertainment, education, and art events can take place. The applicant has proposed to partner with a non-profit arts and culture organization (as the Flamingo Square Arts Connection) to activate the space.'

How can they claim it is a "retail" street when only 2 of the CRUs are on 136A and the other 5 aren't (4 of which are on Whalley Boulevard). Given there is retail/commercial space in the Tien Sher development directly across the street on Whalley Boulevard I would argue WB is the "retail" street not 136a. I think there is 7 or 8 CRUs at least across the street so just in that 1 block of Whalley Boulevard you have 12 or 13 CRUs, to 2 on 136A.

Am I missing something?

Shift · #63 Posted **Jan 11, 2018, 7:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhausner

How can they claim it is a "retail" street when only 2 of the CRUs are on 136A and the other 5 aren't (4 of which are on Whalley Boulevard). Given there is retail/commercial space in the Tien Sher development directly across the street on Whalley Boulevard I would argue WB is the "retail" street not 136a. I think there is 7 or 8 CRUs at least across the street so just in that 1 block of Whalley Boulevard you have 12 or 13 CRUs, to 2 on 136A.

Am I missing something?

That sketch with the retail street annotation could have pre-dated the more detailed design shown in the Dikeakos plans.

GMasterAres · #64 Posted **Jan 11, 2018, 8:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shift

That sketch with the retail street annotation could have pre-dated the more detailed design shown in the Dikeakos plans.

Quite possibly. I mean it kind of was a pencil sketch and maybe when the city pushed back at making 136A pedestrian only and wanting it to still serve as a road, they redesigned to move the retail footprint to Whalley Boulevard.

Who knows you could be right. Also maybe the building on the other side (Phase 2/3?) could have 10 CRUs facing 136A.... until we see that plan I guess I'll just *shrug*

officedweller · #65 Posted **Jan 11, 2018, 9:58 PM**

My assumption was that the shopping district would run SOUTH from this site.

Shift · #66 Posted **Jan 11, 2018, 10:45 PM**

^136A will run south from the site - so who knows - could end up being lined with retail further south as those sites redevelop. Will not link directly to the Anthem site though - 136A will end at 105A according to the plan.

flipper316 · #67 Posted **Jan 12, 2018, 5:44 AM**

The A stands for adjacent right?

interrobang · #68 Posted **Jan 12, 2018, 3:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by flipper316

The A stands for adjacent right?

Actually, the "A" just designates that the road doesn't coincide with the standard 1/8th of a mile between roads/blocks. The same goes for "B", "C", etc. In 1957 Surrey adopted a grid system of streets and addresses, where 8 blocks = 1 mile.

EhJay · #69 Posted **Jan 13, 2018, 4:33 AM**

Which also means that a standard block is 200m for us Metric users!

GMasterAres · #70 Posted **Jan 15, 2018, 4:50 AM**

Yah a "Surrey Block" = 200 meters compared to a Vancouver block which = 100 meters. Unfortunately Surrey can't really renumber things at this stage so in the transition to a tighter street grid (moving from 200 to 100 meters) they need double the streets between their blocks.

100 Avenue -> 101 Avenue in Surrey = 45th Ave -> 47th Ave in Vancouver.

So where Vancouver put 46 between 45 and 47, Surrey would have to put 100.5 between 100 and 101 which is silly. So they just slap an "A" (or "B" if they put 2 streets between) so the roads go 100 Ave, 100a Ave, 101 Ave.

I believe there is only 1 "C" street in all of Surrey and that's 143C street, a very small street in Newton.

invisibleairwaves · #71 Posted **Jan 15, 2018, 5:39 AM**

I've been wondering for a while if Surrey should maybe make a push for a few more named streets, at least in the city centre. The "grid" there is such a mess anyways, and it would probably help with the whole placemaking thing. "136A Street" and "107A Avenue" just sound clunky for what Surrey hopes will be prime downtown addresses.

Ramsay · #72 Posted **Jan 15, 2018, 3:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhausner

So they just slap an "A" (or "B" if they put 2 streets between) so the roads go 100 Ave, 100a Ave, 101 Ave.

I believe there is only 1 "C" street in all of Surrey and that's 143C street, a very small street in Newton.

Quote:

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

I've been wondering for a while if Surrey should maybe make a push for a few more named streets, at least in the city centre. The "grid" there is such a mess anyways, and it would probably help with the whole placemaking thing. "136A Street" and "107A Avenue" just sound clunky for what Surrey hopes will be prime downtown addresses.

They should use names for streets where ever possible. I personally think it helps an area develop an identity. like "the Drive" in Vancouver.

Shift · #73 Posted **Jan 15, 2018, 7:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramsay

They should use names for streets where ever possible. I personally think it helps an area develop an identity. like "the Drive" in Vancouver.

The grid numbering system in Surrey is actually smart. You can locate any address on the map / or in your head based on the numbers.

ie. 14356 90th Avenue will be near 143 St and 90 Ave.

Where as 839 Somename Street in another city you have no idea where that is.

I guess GPS solves that - but I like the grid for instant referencing.

Surrey does name streets for identity in some cases - such as the renaming of 103 Ave in City Centre to Central Ave.

Theres also a whole neighbourhood informally known as 'Bird Land' north of 108 Ave that is all bird named streets. There are also lots of other exceptions around the city where naming is in place instead of numbered streets.

djmk · #74 Posted **Jan 15, 2018, 8:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shift

The grid numbering system in Surrey is actually smart. You can locate any address on the map / or in your head based on the numbers.

ie. 14356 90th Avenue will be near 143 St and 90 Ave.

not to be confused with 90th Street and 143 Ave.

Shift · #75 Posted **Jan 15, 2018, 10:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by djmk

not to be confused with 90th Street and 143 Ave.

There isn't a 90th Street - Streets (which run North/South) start at 120 St (Scott Rd) and end at 196 St (Langley Border)

There are no avenues numbered higher than 120 (Highest is 117 Ave - near Fraser River) so theres no confusion / duplicacy.

GMasterAres · #76 Posted **Jan 16, 2018, 12:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by djmk

not to be confused with 90th Street and 143 Ave.

If a number < 120 in Surrey it is an Avenue. If a number > 120 it is a street.

As Shift pointed out.

So (143)91 will mean it is on an Avenue. (96)51 will mean it is on a Street.

Further to the street discussion above though, though we're starting to get a bit off topic but a little education right?, Surrey has I believe discussed starting to name streets/avenues in the Surrey Central core just to add that downtown vibe and you're seeing that. So very likely when 136A is built out for example, it will eventually get some sort of name but from an address perspective, it will still have a number associated.

My feelings are Surrey will likely focus on naming A/B streets/Avenues first as those are what confuse people and they'd still be in essence, maintaining the grid logics.

LeftCoaster · #77 Posted **Jan 17, 2018, 10:49 PM**

I like Westvan's system of A-Z names N/S and numbers E/W.

It only works in areas with 26 streets in width but it makes for the best of both systems, in ease of knowing where something is with the charm of named streets.

EhJay · #78 Posted **Apr 4, 2018, 7:51 PM**

New signage has gone up around the site.

Maverick Life

Shift · #79 Posted **Apr 4, 2018, 8:55 PM**

Wonder if Maverick is just the 6-storey building on Whalley Blvd or also the tower. Seems like each would have a different name - so i'm guessing they are marketing the 6-storey first.

Both are to be completed as Phase 1.

Nites · #80 Posted **Apr 5, 2018, 1:58 AM**

Maverick life lol. Are they trying to cater towards the hipster community something