Surrey City Centre Redevelopment Plans

[nickinacan]

I started this thread since it seemed like much of the information regarding the City Centre plans was getting lost in the thread regarding the proposed Central City Phase 2 (City Hall) Development. This thread is meant to facilitate discussion regarding the overall design plans for the rejuvenation and development of the Surrey City Centre into a metropolitan centre.

From what I gathered at 'The Next Great Metropolitan Centre' presentation at Central City (February 28), the City of Surrey and Bing Thom Architects are both being very ambitious. The renderings and concept designs were absolutely fantastic, better than anything I could have expected. The major theme of the plans seemed to be "mixed use architecture". This theme was carried over in virtually all areas of planning. Some major design elements were:

- The development of the mirrored civic plaza across from the current Central City plaza to create a civic plaza. As discussed in a former post, it included a variable use element that could be a fountain (waterpark?), performance stage and ice rink. Again, 102 Avenue would be closed off to accommodate events.

- The redevelopment of three of the former lakes that were formerly in the area, protection of the creeks, and introducing the "green fingers" that will (some already exist) would run into the City Centre via multiple locations.

- The calming of King George Highway by redistributing some of the traffic to other main north/south routes in the area. These new connecting streets have already been planned, but have not been implemented.

- The intersection of King George and 108 Avenue will be turned into into a large roundabout intersection, planting a giant fountain in the middle of it. It would look and feel something like a smaller version of Columbus Circle in New York and act as a "gateway" to the city.

- The beautification of all the streets in the area with multiple types of trees, flora, street furniture and lighting. With the development, space was taken into account to allow ample light during the daytime.

- Focus all the tallest (Highest FAR) development along the King George corridor and around the Skytrain stations, most within a 10 minute walk of each Skytrain station. All development will taper to low rise as it reaches the edges of the City Centre.

- The Gateway area is slated to be more of a residential based area in kin to the West End.

- The Surrey Central area will become the major corporate and business centre of Surrey, with some residential highrises thrown in the mix.

- The King George Station area will be transformed into a mix of both commercial and residential.

[nickinacan]

Just to continue, I want to talk about some of the ideas that were shared during the presentation.

The most affirmative ideas were brought up with discussion with Councillor Barinder Rasode. The City of Surrey is committed to building one of the most sustainable city centres in North America. In addition, the plans are to develop cultural draws such as a new central library, recreation centre, parkland and events in the city centre to draw people in. The city's vision is to be able to have people locate in the city centre, and never have to leave. Everything will be located in one central area, and in walking or biking distance.

One gentleman in the crowd mentioned that he was an avid sports fan and wondered if they would ever develop a stadium. Oddly enough, Councillor Rasode mentioned that this was being discussed and is in the planning stages. I would assume that this would be the fabled 10,000 to 15,000 seat mixed use stadium that the Lower Mainland desperately needs. There was no mention of location.

As for City Hall, they are 100% in to moving City Hall to the City Centre.

I had the chance to talk to the representative from Bing Thom Architects regarding the designs. One thing that he mentioned is that city council has already approved these designs. As for the new building, it will eventually come in time, but he mentioned that market studies are currently being completed. He mentioned that the whole development of the City Centre could take up to 30 years. Councillor Rasode has mentioned that City Council's goal is to make Surrey City Centre "better than" Downtown Vancouver in 10 years. That is a very ambitious goal.

This presentation was much more informative than the previous open house. It didn't get down to the intricacies and details, but that is something that is currently being studied, but the ideas that were presented were all excellent.

One nice surprise was Former Vancouver Councillor Gordon Price was in attendance and shared some of his some advice/opinions/rants. he was impressed with the overall plan, but mentioned that to make it successful, the major focus needs to be on encouraging people to move around without using cars. In essence, he suggested multiple modes from Skytrain, LRT, but and even more bicycle right of ways. In addition, he mentioned that the main competition for the City Centre will be Guildford as a result of the Gateway program.

SFU apparently has an overwhelming demand to get into the Surrey Campus and will be investing in developing more space to accommodate the demand. One idea that was tossed around was even moving the focus off of Burnaby Mountain and and putting it on Surrey. There was even talk of possibly moving their sports teams to Surrey. These are only ideas.

[Whalleyboy]

there was something about sfu moving its sports stuff to surrey i thought

[raggedy13]

Those all sounds like some impressive ideas. There is no way I could see Central City being "better than" downtown in just 10 years but the more ambitious and aggressive their plans the better. I'm sure in 10 years it will be near unrecognizable either way and be well on its way to being a proper downtown. They might be able to build some great sports/entertainment/cultural institutions but it'll probably take a little longer for that fine-grain organic urbanism to come about.

Next building boom Surrey should be a real national construction hotspot, especially considering it will apparently be getting a number of tall towers capable of rivaling those of any city in Canada.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by nickinacan

One gentleman in the crowd mentioned that he was an avid sports fan and wondered if they would ever develop a stadium. Oddly enough, Councillor Rasode mentioned that this was being discussed and is in the planning stages. I would assume that this would be the fabled 10,000 to 15,000 seat mixed use stadium that the Lower Mainland desperately needs. There was no mention of location.

Are you refering to the now defunct waterfront stadium? Because this would not be it. Anything the City of Surrey is looking at in regards to a stadium has nothing to do with Kerfoot's stadium, as he has specifically stated he is not interested in building his stadium outside of Vancouver proper

Councillor Rasode has mentioned that City Council's goal is to make Surrey City Centre "better than" Downtown Vancouver in 10 years. That is a very ambitious goal.

I suppose it helps to set your goals high... but come on.

[djmk]

Originally Posted by nickinacan

- The redevelopment of three of the former lakes that were formerly in the area, protection of the creeks, and introducing the "green fingers" that will (some already exist) would run into the City Centre via multiple locations.

- The intersection of King George and 108 Avenue will be turned into into a large roundabout intersection, planting a giant fountain in the middle of it. It would look and feel something like a smaller version of Columbus Circle in New York and act as a "gateway" to the city.

I'm curious about these 3 lakes. i never knew these existed. how would the city "redevelop" them?

and a round-about with a fountain??? that is bold. i would imagine that traffic would have to be really slimmed down for this to happen. round-abouts scare me. i really do not know when to let people in or keep going, and if it is a multi-lane and really busy one....(ie like in rome) forget about it. and i think most BCer's are like me.

[twoNeurons]

It's likely what Kerfoot says about not wanting a stadium outside Vancouver proper is posturing.

He can't be seen wavering in his decision when he's invested so much into a downtown stadium.

Saying that, though, the Whitecaps stadium would probably be better suited for downtown Vancouver, as Kerfoot wants to elevate the status of soccer to a 1st class sport in Vancouver. Being in Surrey just doesn't have the exposure and wouldn't attract as much corporate support.

Anyway, we've gone down this road before.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by djmk

I'm curious about these 3 lakes. i never knew these existed. how would the city "redevelop" them?

and a round-about with a fountain??? that is bold. i would imagine that traffic would have to be really slimmed down for this to happen. round-abouts scare me. i really do not know when to let people in or keep going, and if it is a multi-lane and really busy one....(ie like in rome) forget about it. and i think most BCer's are like me.

What's so difficult about yielding to drivers in the circle? If you're in the circle, you don't yield. Same as an intersection, really. Now that you know, you have no excuse.

[LeftCoaster]

BC drivers better get used to traffic circles because more and more are coming. When used at appropriate intersections they are great.

[djmk]

Originally Posted by tintinium

What's so difficult about yielding to drivers in the circle? If you're in the circle, you don't yield. Same as an intersection, really. Now that you know, you have no excuse.

ya, i still do not like them. well, at least the big ones. i'm too much of a polite driver and i end up yielding to everybody and nobody yields for me and besides, i think the rule is.... always yield to the person on your right, so you are yielding once your inside the circle.

besides, right now i'm imaging my mother in law stuck in the center lane of a traffic circle going around and around and around and wondering how she is going to get to the outer lane.

actually, in my neighbourhood in N Burnaby, traffic circles have been installed in about 1/5 of the intersections. many drivers just wizz through them without looking. i ask ICBC why and they said that the purpose of a traffic circle is to have some confusion therefore drivers slow down and if there is an accident, the accident is from the back corner of the car rather than a T-Bone.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by djmk

ya, i still do not like them. well, at least the big ones. i'm too much of a polite driver and i end up yielding to everybody and nobody yields for me and besides, i think the rule is.... always yield to the person on your right, so you are yielding once your inside the circle.

Consider it impolite to yield once in the circle.

actually, in my neighbourhood in N Burnaby, traffic circles have been installed in about 1/5 of the intersections. many drivers just wizz through them without looking. i ask ICBC why and they said that the purpose of a traffic circle is to have some confusion therefore drivers slow down and if there is an accident, the accident is from the back corner of the car rather than a T-Bone.

That's one ICBC adjuster's opinion, but interesting nonetheless.

The one beef "I" have with small traffic circles is that people go the wrong way around them when turning left in order to short-cut the turn. Of course, this would rarely if ever happen on a large traffic circle.

Personally, I love the thought of rarely having to stop at an intersection.

BTW, did ANYONE get any pictures of these City Centre development proposals?

[nickinacan]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Are you refering to the now defunct waterfront stadium? Because this would not be it. Anything the City of Surrey is looking at in regards to a stadium has nothing to do with Kerfoot's stadium, as he has specifically stated he is not interested in building his stadium outside of Vancouver proper

Not at all. This has nothing to do with the soccer stadium. This is basically a mixed use venue much like GM Place, just on a smaller scale. The demand is there and it would help attract concerts that don't need a large scale venue like GM Place or BC Place.

And yes, they have set the bar very high for them, but they are working extremely hard to accomplish their goals, and even lobbying to attract business and government offices to the area. Even with the current economic situation, investment and the interest to invest in the Surrey City Centre is quite high. Weststone group has another huge project that will be announced in the coming months. Not to mention the investment by the multiple levels of government, which in multiple other upstart cities was the key to getting investment started.

Will Surrey rival Vancouver in 10 years? Probably not. But the rapid development, low business taxes, sustainable development might garner Vancouver to take a look at itself and prepare for more competition. Even if Surrey doesn't rival Vancouver, anything is better that what is currently there.

[nickinacan]

Originally Posted by djmk

I'm curious about these 3 lakes. i never knew these existed. how would the city "redevelop" them?

and a round-about with a fountain??? that is bold. i would imagine that traffic would have to be really slimmed down for this to happen. round-abouts scare me. i really do not know when to let people in or keep going, and if it is a multi-lane and really busy one....(ie like in rome) forget about it. and i think most BCer's are like me.

Apparently there were many small lakes in the Surrey Centre area before the 1950's. They were all filled in to allow more land to develop, much like many of the creeks in Vancouver. There were about 6 if I remember correctly. Essentially, the plan is to rediscover the lakes and integrate them into the parkland/greenway system.

From my discussion with the architect, when the roundabout/fountain was proposed, apparently the transportation department engineers had a panic attack. Since King George will be calmed, with traffic being diverted to other streets, it could be a reality. It also makes sense given the street layout around that area. Not to mention with the density proposed in that area, it will look spectacular.

[nickinacan]

Originally Posted by djmk

ya, i still do not like them. well, at least the big ones. i'm too much of a polite driver and i end up yielding to everybody and nobody yields for me and besides, i think the rule is.... always yield to the person on your right, so you are yielding once your inside the circle.

besides, right now i'm imaging my mother in law stuck in the center lane of a traffic circle going around and around and around and wondering how she is going to get to the outer lane.

actually, in my neighbourhood in N Burnaby, traffic circles have been installed in about 1/5 of the intersections. many drivers just wizz through them without looking. i ask ICBC why and they said that the purpose of a traffic circle is to have some confusion therefore drivers slow down and if there is an accident, the accident is from the back corner of the car rather than a T-Bone.

There are actually less points in a roundabout/traffic circle to hit a pedestrian or another vehicle, making them safer. Not to mention that it eliminates left turn lanes, keeping traffic constantly moving.

[DKaz]

Edmonton has a few 2 lane roundabouts. Basically you're supposed to yield to all traffic in the circle. If you're trying to get into the right lane and there's a car in the circle on the left lane, you're not supposed to go until that car is clear because he could be turning into the next road, but if you're turning right as well then just go right through if the right lane is clear. If you're turning right, you stay on the right lane. If you're going straight through, you use either the left or right lane. If you're turning left, you go on the left lane. Once the circle is clear, two cars will enter at the same time, they can either both go straight, or the guy on the left could be making a left turn and the one on the right going straight, or the guy on the right could be turning right and the one on the left going straight, or both of them could be turning in their respective directions. You're basically applying 4 way stop procedures to the turning circles. It's takes a little bit to get used to them but they're a lot better of keeping traffic moving in an intersection like King George and 108 where traffic is light enough that a traffic light actually slows down the flow of traffic.

If my description is confusing, BC Transportation & Highways has some excellent resource materials on how the two lane roundabouts work.
http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/popular-topi...oundabouts.htm

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by djmk

ya, i still do not like them. well, at least the big ones. i'm too much of a polite driver and i end up yielding to everybody and nobody yields for me and besides, i think the rule is.... always yield to the person on your right, so you are yielding once your inside the circle.

besides, right now i'm imaging my mother in law stuck in the center lane of a traffic circle going around and around and around and wondering how she is going to get to the outer lane.

actually, in my neighbourhood in N Burnaby, traffic circles have been installed in about 1/5 of the intersections. many drivers just wizz through them without looking. i ask ICBC why and they said that the purpose of a traffic circle is to have some confusion therefore drivers slow down and if there is an accident, the accident is from the back corner of the car rather than a T-Bone.

Like others have said before they are safer and once you get used to them (which really shouldnt take long) they make quite a bit of sense. They are also better for fuel economy, as you dont need to be constantly stopping and starting as with a traditional stop sign intersection.

one less tangible benefit is that they allow for a much more asthetically pleasing intersection as the middle of the circle can be filled with landscape features or even fountains statues etc...

Originally Posted by nickinacan

Not at all. This has nothing to do with the soccer stadium. This is basically a mixed use venue much like GM Place, just on a smaller scale. The demand is there and it would help attract concerts that don't need a large scale venue like GM Place or BC Place.

And yes, they have set the bar very high for them, but they are working extremely hard to accomplish their goals, and even lobbying to attract business and government offices to the area. Even with the current economic situation, investment and the interest to invest in the Surrey City Centre is quite high. Weststone group has another huge project that will be announced in the coming months. Not to mention the investment by the multiple levels of government, which in multiple other upstart cities was the key to getting investment started.

Will Surrey rival Vancouver in 10 years? Probably not. But the rapid development, low business taxes, sustainable development might garner Vancouver to take a look at itself and prepare for more competition. Even if Surrey doesn't rival Vancouver, anything is better that what is currently there.

Sounds quite promising, maybe could even attract a WHL team for surrey in the near future.

[djmk]

Originally Posted by nickinacan

Apparently there were many small lakes in the Surrey Centre area before the 1950's. They were all filled in to allow more land to develop, much like many of the creeks in Vancouver. There were about 6 if I remember correctly. Essentially, the plan is to rediscover the lakes and integrate them into the parkland/greenway system.

I really find this interesting. I wonder if there is a Trout Lake hidden somewhere just waiting to be found, however, if something is developed above the lake, i wonder how they would reclaim it.

Originally Posted by nickinacan

From my discussion with the architect, when the roundabout/fountain was proposed, apparently the transportation department engineers had a panic attack. Since King George will be calmed, with traffic being diverted to other streets, it could be a reality. It also makes sense given the street layout around that area. Not to mention with the density proposed in that area, it will look spectacular.

i'm glad i was not alone

[SpongeG]

surrey has some roundabouts already - there is one in south surrey/white rock that works great - much better than the old intersection

[twoNeurons]

Of course, the only negative thing about a LARGE roundabout is that they can be deadly for pedestrians if there are no underpasses/overpasses... as pedestrians may be tempted to cut across.

Here's one in Bellingham:

source


A diagram for pedestrians

source

The most important sign:

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by tintinium

Here's one in Bellingham:

source

That's beautiful. Imagine that at 108/King George with a fountain, then looking south down to see a row of commercial mid and high rises, residential high rises with commercial retail units on the bottom floor, 2 lanes of traffic each way with widened sidewalks filled with pedestrians. It'll be a calmer version of Broadway central district. If this is the future Surrey is looking for, this will truly make Surrey attractive.