Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff's two cents
If the 104th frontage has retail streetwall, I'm in. Otherwise, I consider this project a complete failure in terms of city building. The tower design is nice, but I think it's (relatively speaking) immaterial to the urban transformation project (pedestrian-friendly, community-creating, place-making, eyes on the street for safety, etc.) many would like to see in Surrey.
Hopefully that "to be updated" notation on the rendering is a sign of positive things to come.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves
My thoughts exactly. Even townhouses or a building entrance would be an improvement over a big cement wall right on Whalley's busiest east-west route. But I'm not going to get my hopes up about the "to be updated" part; Surrey's planners have repeatedly demonstrated that they aren't interested in any of the features of urban transformation you described.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff's two cents
 Good to know I'm not alone. I spent 23 years in Surrey, and so get excited (or in this case very worried/disappointed) every time a new proposal comes along promising to help the place transform into a more livable city.
In my view, city planners can still redeem themselves for past mistakes (Infinity/Park Place, d'Corize) by demonstrating leadership on the implementation (as opposed to mere talk of it) of a truly urban form - including pedestrian- and community-friendly streets and shopping, and of course a finer-grained road network.
If Surrey pulls off this transformation, it could very well be the poster child for North American reformation and revitalization of defunct, postwar, automobile-centric suburbs. If it fails (as it for the most part seems to be in the early stages thus far), such failure will speak volumes to North American city planner pondering similar moves.
Dianne Watts has been quoted as saying she'd like to rip down most of the city's big box stores and parking lots. I genuinely wonder whether or not her thoughts venture beyond simply replacing parking lots with skyscrapers, keeping mall tenants happy, streetwalls generic, sterile and/or nonexistent, adding a train or two, and thus turning the "city" into Western Canada's answer to Mississauga. I wonder as well what Bing Thom would have to say about the city's progress thus far on his own vision. |
You may laugh, but that cement wall could be made into a cement wall with protruding urns and vases in which to grow ornamental plants. I don't know how expensive this would be, but it's sometimes done in Europe (I'm thinking of Italy for some reason ...) and here and there ornamentally in Paris.
With a bit of creativity and resourcefulness, maybe something of beauty, yet still relatively inexpensive (say, compared to installation of retail space) .... it might be a good place and time to put some real public art in Surrey.