New article in the Globe and Mail on Saturday

Aquilini didn’t know what the city’s plans were for the viaducts when designing its project, so it designed with the viaducts in mind. If the viaduct bridges are removed in 2018, which is the city staff’s plan, they can’t be completely dismantled, or Aquilini would be in a bind.
“Our towers are designed with the viaduct being in place. So, really, those viaducts won’t come down around where we are building the towers – they have to stay. Because our emergency services access is off those viaducts.

As soon as I see the word “Crosstown”
I think of Joel Solomon (the Vision backer
millionaire) and his development company.
Offices on Victory Square, lives in Gastown
tower and his plans for the area.

Home >> Life >> Home & Design >> Architecture

Rentals to capitalize on Crosstown potential after removal of viaducts
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/home-and-garden/architecture/rentals-to-capitalize-on-crosstown-potential-after-removal-of-viaducts/article25668657/
BY KERRY GOLD Special to The Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Jul. 24, 2015 4:08PM EDT
Last updated Friday, Jul. 24, 2015 4:11PM EDT

Considering how little developable land there is near downtown Vancouver, the inevitable removal of the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts is a golden opportunity for the city to create a neighbourhood from a fairly blank slate.
It’s also a developer’s dream opportunity. But what could that look like? Until the city unveils details when council decides on the removal of the viaducts in September, we can only piece together the information so far.
In the stadium precinct, Aquilini is delivering 600 new rental units to the market with its three-tower project that has just launched. The company has, wisely, been stepping up to fill the demand of a near-zero-vacancy-rate rental market.
“It’s a good time to be in rental in Vancouver, yes,” Kevin Hoffman, senior vice-president of Aquilini Development and Construction, says.
With their new rental community, they are attempting to connect Yaletown, Gastown and Chinatown to finally establish Crosstown, the neighbourhood that has never quite taken off. The newly completed Aquilini Centre tower connects with Rogers Arena, which Aquilini owns. They started taking tenants about a month ago, with rents starting at $1,550 for a 460-square-foot space and going up to $2,450 for 1,750 square feet. The groundwork has begun on the south tower, and the east tower is about a year away. Because they’re providing rental, the city relaxed the parking requirements.
“It will be a vibrant area filled with people who want to live near the action,” Mr. Hoffman says. “Putting both commercial and residential in the area will add vibrancy that’s been lacking. When you go to the games there aren’t a lot of people around.”
Aquilini didn’t know what the city’s plans were for the viaducts when designing its project, so it designed with the viaducts in mind. If the viaduct bridges are removed in 2018, which is the city staff’s plan, they can’t be completely dismantled, or Aquilini would be in a bind.
“Our towers are designed with the viaduct being in place. So, really, those viaducts won’t come down around where we are building the towers – they have to stay. Because our emergency services access is off those viaducts.
“So when we talk about them coming down, they will come down past Rogers Arena.”
That extra piece of leftover viaduct required for the Aquilini project, the city’s planning director Brian Jackson says, could look like New York’s famed High Line elevated park. It could also be part of a bicycle bridge that could help those who might not want to cycle up a 5-per-cent grade. The details are being worked out.
“We’re looking to see how best to get the bikes up from the lower level to Dunsmuir right now,” Mr. Jackson says. “We’re trying to determine how much viaduct we need.”

Concord Pacific didn’t want to comment on its plans for the area.
======== more

This 1971 pic shows the original 1913-15 Georgia Viaduct on the left, and the existing Georgia Viaduct on the right. The Dunsmuir Viaduct was built after the 1913-15 Georgia Viaduct was demolished.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2589/4038505585_08e67331cd_b.jpg

So…?

The original Georgia viaduct was structurally unsound and needed replacing. The current two replaced it. On the website, the historical information is not included in the overview and it characterizes the two only as part of a freeway, never mind the escarpment on the edge of downtown. That page is a bias-filed opinion piece that has no place on an informational website.

Well, it’s not your neighborhood, why would you care, right? My point is, I don’t want it to be your neighborhood. What has happened to your neighborhood is a travesty. So is main/terminal/2nd/Quebec. Now they want to connect prior or malkin to a “superroad” . Goodbye community gardens in strathcona park, hello more concrete, more cars, more ugly condos and I don’t believe for a second the city won’t sell development rights on most of their proposed parkland. Can this area handle more density? Does anyone care?

> The majority of riders are going to and from downtown, and use
> many routes

Do you have data to back that up? My gut says you’re wrong: many many people live in the Vancouver area and cycle to work outside the downtown area.

“In 1968, the freeway proposal was scrapped. However, by that time, 15 blocks of Strathcona had already been purchased and cleared for urban redevelopment. This included plans for the construction of the current Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts – the only two pieces of the freeway system to be constructed. Unfortunately, although much of Strathcona, Chinatown and Gastown were saved, the construction of the viaducts included the demolition of Hogan’s Alley. Bounded by Union St., Prior St., Main St. and Jackson Ave, this small area was the first and last location in the city with a substantial concentration of black people.

The “decommissioning” of the freeway resulted in the conversion of the highway viaducts to the two one-way roads we see today. Vastly over-designed and under-used, the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts cut a swath of parking lots and residual space across the former industrial lands below and visually distanced the Chinatown neighbourhood (to the north) from the False Creek waterfront, with its imposing structure.”

Quote from Spacing Vancouver, Erick Villagomez.

So what’s the alternative? The current situation sucks, you clearly don’t trust government so any solution they purpose you’ll dismiss as lies, so then what?

Couldn’t help but noticing in the Vancouver Sun this morning that there are four car shares operating in the city yet the COV can’t get one heavily subsidized bike share program going. Just another example of it is much easier to sell a service that people really want rather than one than someone has decided they should want.

Pretty easy to figure out what you are looking at if you look at the display boards (from the City’s updated web site), where your view is linked to the overall conceptual plan.

That still doesn’t explain why they would build pieces to a freeway system that was scrapped, other than the obvious, that they were built to replace the existing viaduct.

There’s no reason why the space under and around them can’t be used. No one has ever tried.

“That still doesn’t explain why they would build pieces to a freeway system that was scrapped, other than the obvious, that they were built to replace the existing viaduct.”

The premise is that they were designed as part of a new freeway system, but were caught in the cancellation of that plan. You are suggesting they were just a replacement, and not connected to that freeway plan.

If you think they were originally just a replacement for the previous viaduct, perhaps you could comment on why they were built with so much more capacity? Their design capacity only makes sense in the context of a (then cancelled) freeway system.

“Did they forget the ‘Neighbourhood?'”

I can’t see the slides you mention in France’s post (it won’t download at the moment, at least for me) but I think I know what they show.

The following information is from the most recent display boards. There is park space and neighbourhood space shown, but they are separated left to right, not waterfront vs non-waterfront. The space on the left is owned by developers, the space of the right is already designated as a (to be developed) park.

I understand that the display boards you saw earlier this decade were up to 5 years old. The following is from July 2015. I would go with the most recent info myself, all things being equal. If there were towers in between the park and the water on the boards you saw, it would depend on the viewing perspective. There are lots of spots where the new towers would be between the water and the viewer. But that doesn’t mean that there is no park by the creek.

I agree with you that the space in the artist’s perception won’t necessarily be all green grass. It will depend on what other amenities (including structure) people want in the park. Playgrounds? Paths? A landing spot for the active bridge from Dunsmuir?

Not insulting, just don’t know what you’re saying.

It’s not my neighbourhood so why should I care. Then you don’t want it to be my neighbourhood. Then what’s happened to my neighbourhood is a travesty.

What?

Then it’s about a superroad (whatever that is).

Then it’s about parks, then density. All in one paragraph.

Again, what?

And dare I ask for an alternative?

As far as I know, cars can still use the viaducts or have the viaducts been converted to bicycle lanes too?

You’re like 90% of the way there! The city heavily subsidizes *all* car owners by providing free or cheap on-street parking. That subsidy also applies to car shares.

But yeah, it’s easy to ignore these millions of dollars and complain about the cost of bike infrastructure, so by all means keep doing what you’re doing.

The previous viaduct was one way in each direction, and this was not sufficient. the dunsmuir viaduct at the edge of downtown has three lanes which matches the number of lanes that dunsmuir has. Does that mean dunsmuir is a freeway? Or Hastings? Or burrard? You are saying it only makes sense in a freeway context but in the same sentence you acknowledge it was already canceled. Aren’t you kind of proving my point?

I have no problem if the COV limits their subsidy of bicycles to providing racks for cyclists to park their bikes.

Thanks, Jeff. I can read plans, and artist’s projections with the best, and I know what I saw. And it was towers at the perimeter of False Creek, like a necklace (or a noose).

I’ll be the first to admit that the plans I saw were generated (by my estimate) more than one election cycle ago – so, Raj Hundal and Stuart Mackinnon (but before) were probably there. And Melissa DeG would’ve been there, too.

And, of course, all will be constrained – by virtue of the fact that the meeting was in camera – from being able to shed any light on the issue.

I tell all this: I sincerely hope to be proved wrong. I’m a contradiction in terms – a Hopeful Cynic.

So, if there’s a plan that permits open public access to the waterfront, I support it. As you say, that was years ago, so I’ll try to be hopeful.

But, if it happens, this won’t be the first time I’ve seen the old bait-and-switch, with (in this instance) the public being sold on the ‘much more desirable’ amenity (Park) that’s been created, back over here, if we just allow the developer to maximize his profits by building on the last available tidewater in the city.

As I say, I’d rather not crow, ‘I told you so’. Really. But this play is barely into the first scene. There’s still plenty of time for plans to change.

the height of the picture is significantly different than the height of the rendering. I still don’t think it changes the fact that it’s very easy to figure out what’s going on, or…?

It seems to me a strange thing to be pulling out for criticism. It comes across as something like nitpicking, not constructive criticism.

I guess Norman I’d rather work with the system where possible. Sitting back and just whining about how bad everyone is guarantees you’ll get what you don’t want. If you truly believe the whole system is corrupt, why would you even bother engaging with it at all.

So generous!

Jen

Height and angle are closely related if you think about the angle of elevation.

But your original point was that you couldn’t tell what you were looking at. Now, knowing that the angle of elevation is different, and having the photo that shows your clip in the context of the broader plan, can you tell what you are looking at?

Are you trolling me? If you’re 7-foot tall and I’m 4-foot tall we see the world from a different angle, even when we’re standing in the same spot. If you don’t believe me look up the word “angle” in a dictionary. That’s why at first when you look at those two images, it takes a moment to register where things are. And then, if you’re an adult, it clicks and you can see everything you need to know about what’s planned. And you move on.

And I guess if you’re not, you post online about how the renderings are “full of fancy” and you “can’t even tell what (you’re) looking at.” As though the city were trying to manipulate everyone because you’ can’t find a photo that shows the area from the same angle. Sigh. You are the only one bothered by this.

Improved walking connections.
Improved cycling connections.
Ability to accommodate improved transit connections on surface streets instead of viaducts.
Ability to accommodate a steadily shrinking number of motor vehicles coming into the city, while meeting the future needs for the fastest growing transportation modes.
And you suggest that all the above leads to an increase in emissions? It is closely aligned with changing transportation demands, all of which produce fewer emissions than the alternatives.