View Single Post
  #136  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2009, 11:25 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 38,229
Yeah, if it was a negotiation, it would have traded freeways for rapid transit supported by higher density closer to the core - which, for its day, was created in the form of the West End - but we are now beyond the scales achieved by that, and that density needs to expand beyond the downtown penninsula, however, the single family neighbourhoods in the City of Vancouver closest to the downtown seem to be unwilling to accept density at a level that will sustain hard-wired rapid transit (SkyTrain/LRT).
It doesn't seem to be as much of an issue in the suburbs because you aren't rebuilding/reprogramming already established areas.

*******

WRT highest and best use - I don't necessarily think that highest and best use always follows an economic line (i.e. otherwise Stanley Park would be built on).

True, the obstacle that once existed below the viaducts (railway yards) no longer exists, but they still act to disperse traffic from the downtown. The value of the viaducts is that it takes traffic up (Dunsmuir) and down (Georgia) the hill of the escarpment, thereby avoiding a circuitous route via Pender or other eastside streets. If ramps were built directly down the hill, there would be much more traffic on Pacific and Expo Blvds. which have limited connections to the east (i.e. Terminal Ave.) - likewise, if they were removed there would be heavier traffic through the downtown eastside (Pender, Hastings, Water and Cordova). The viaducts provide a continuation of the street grid across to Main Street.

I think that they can be easily integrated into the urban fabric - like the approaches to Granville Bridge have been at the entrance to Granville Island.

The main reason that the area has not yet been developed is that it is last on Concord Pacific's timeline - that's a wholly artificial/arbitrary timeline. If International Village had not been sold off by Concord Pacific to Henderson, maybe it would be sitting empty too - as the last phase of the Expo Lands. If the site hadn't been the Expo Lands and railyards before, it would have an intermediate use on the site - like the small industrial buildings you see around SEFC.
Although such lands would be less valuable than adjacent waterfront lands, I think that it's just the history of the lands that have resulted in them sitting empty, not necessarily any inherent defect in them (such as the presence of the viaducts). i.e. the lands around the Cambie Bridgehead (north side) are undeveloped - but no one is suggesting removing the bridge approaches to make the land better for development. They will be developed in time.

Last edited by officedweller; Oct 23, 2009 at 12:06 AM.
Reply With Quote