HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #141  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 1:45 AM
agrant's Avatar
agrant agrant is offline
Cheers!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by osirisboy View Post
i know you guys are talking per capita but my impression is that the parks can certainly take the added population from the condos. they arent that busy
One could argue that Vancouver could take a few less condos.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #142  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 4:09 AM
osirisboy's Avatar
osirisboy osirisboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 4,626
i guess one could argue just about anything
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #143  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 4:21 AM
agrant's Avatar
agrant agrant is offline
Cheers!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by osirisboy View Post
i guess one could argue just about anything
Yes, but would they be on topic?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #144  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 2:10 PM
Delirium's Avatar
Delirium Delirium is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Miami
Posts: 3,221
what is this "per capita" to parkland thing? if that's what you want to use, it certainly doesn't make your case any stronger. quite the contrary.

there are only 978 units in the entire citygate development.

creekside = 148 units
the brighton = 132 units
the viceroy = 152 units
citygate 1 = 173 units
citygate 2 = 75 units
citygate III = 147 units
station place = 75 units
sussex = 76 units

Yaletown park for example (the 3 tower development downtown) has almost as many units! furthermore, there's nothing else around citygate. there is room for way, way more development and as it stands now, your per capita to parkland ratio is probably one of the highest in the entire city. less than 1,000 units and you have 3 major parks within a 5 minute walk, a brand new seawall and another large park coming plus all the green space and stuff in the nearby olympic village.

Andy Livingstone Park = 10.4 acres
Creekside Park = 6.1 acres
thornton park = 3.8 acres
total = 20.3 acres


photo from www.globalairphotos.com


http://vancouver.ca/parks/info/plann...sion/index.htm

perhaps the focus and effort should be on improving the parks in your backward if they are so bad...

Last edited by Delirium; Aug 25, 2009 at 2:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #145  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 4:06 PM
metroXpress's Avatar
metroXpress metroXpress is offline
(||||||-||||-||||||)
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 2,220
^ they should build a new Science World in the green space...something interesting that would look great with the exsiting one we have
__________________
"Think simple…reduce the whole
of its parts into the simplest terms,
Getting back to first principles"


~ FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #146  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 4:44 PM
AlexYVR's Avatar
AlexYVR AlexYVR is offline
In Love With YVRthing
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago:Vancouver
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by agrant View Post
One could argue that Vancouver could take a few less condos.
I don't know if I would argue this - I would certainly agree that DT Van could use a few more jobs to keep the number of condos in balance. I think we can always use more condos as long as amenities, job opportunities, and public space continue to grow concurrently. This may seem like an impossibility - asking more of everything from a finite amount of space - but Vancouver has always excelled at this and it is one of the things that, in my opinion, keeps us ahead of the pack in many ways.
__________________
WWJJD?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #147  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 4:52 PM
Cypherus's Avatar
Cypherus Cypherus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,273
Forget the extension of the Creekside park. It uses up valuable land when we already got sufficient green-space in Stanley Park.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #148  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 6:26 PM
johnjimbc johnjimbc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 766
Oh, who needs Stanley Park. We've got mountain wilderness on the other side of the harbour.



Point being is green space is useful to the immediate neighborhood . . . livable neighborhoods where people live, work, shop, walk, etc. - not the existence of a nice park on the other side of town.

One can argue whether or not that particular park is needed because of the proximity of other parks. One can argue about the size of a park to fill the need. But the logic that other parks exist in another area entirely doesn't apply if the city wants to continue to create livable neighborhoods in themselves. I would hate to see Vancouver move away from something they do so well. If the park was planned - particularly to nearby residents - they should follow through with it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #149  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 8:25 PM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
with glowing hearts
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: █♣█ Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 12,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allen View Post
^ they should build a new Science World in the green space...something interesting that would look great with the exsiting one we have
YES, Science World is the only real museum we have...and it's an attendance success. But for the average grown up, there isn't much to do. It needs to be a lot bigger...maybe even 4x. I've always envisioned the space centre moving into an expanded Science World facility.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #150  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 9:01 PM
cornholio cornholio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,751
Im stunned, actually really I cant beleive there are people advocating less parkspace for more Condos. Are you guys serious?

There isnt enough parkspace in the city as it is and that creekside park will be serving something close to 50,000 people within a close walking distance in the not to distant future.

Your precious condos can be built elsewhere, the parkspace in that area cant.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #151  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 9:11 PM
metroXpress's Avatar
metroXpress metroXpress is offline
(||||||-||||-||||||)
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 2,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x View Post
YES, Science World is the only real museum we have...and it's an attendance success. But for the average grown up, there isn't much to do. It needs to be a lot bigger...maybe even 4x. I've always envisioned the space centre moving into an expanded Science World facility.
Right on! That would be a great idea...to combine McMillian Space Centre into the new expanded Science World.The two buildings can be combined by underground passages and they would be the outdoor science park on street level.
__________________
"Think simple…reduce the whole
of its parts into the simplest terms,
Getting back to first principles"


~ FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #152  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 9:23 PM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
with glowing hearts
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: █♣█ Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 12,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allen View Post
Right on! That would be a great idea...to combine McMillian Space Centre into the new expanded Science World.The two buildings can be combined by underground passages and they would be the outdoor science park on street level.
The Outdoor Science Park is nice, but seems like a waste of money and space with the weather we get.

Not so sure about an underground passage, i'd rather have Science World expand from where it is right now towards the edge of Main Street
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #153  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 9:50 PM
osirisboy's Avatar
osirisboy osirisboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 4,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornholio View Post

There isnt enough parkspace in the city as it is and that creekside park will be serving something close to 50,000 people within a close walking distance in the not to distant future.
what?? when and where are these extra 50,000 people coming from? and if there are another 50,000 people that will be using the parks whats another 1000
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #154  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 11:06 PM
AlexYVR's Avatar
AlexYVR AlexYVR is offline
In Love With YVRthing
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago:Vancouver
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornholio View Post
Im stunned, actually really I cant beleive there are people advocating less parkspace for more Condos. Are you guys serious?

There isnt enough parkspace in the city as it is and that creekside park will be serving something close to 50,000 people within a close walking distance in the not to distant future.
Not that I'm advocating less park space and more condos - like I said, I think we have the ability to grow both concurrently - but Vancouver has a very high percentage of green space per capita for a major city in N/A. It's at 11% last count. We're not exactly hurting in the park sweeps.

There it is, so I'm a little more substantial:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/pa...ban-parks.html

Quote:
In Canada, Vancouver has a high percentage of parks compared to other urban centres. The city's 200 green spaces cover a total of 1,300 hectares — 11 per cent of the total land mass. Stanley Park alone covers about 400 hectares, including hiking trails, beaches and an 8.8 km seawall.
Even excluding Stanley park we're at a pretty good percentage considering how far we've come with dense downtown living. I mean, factor in the fact that we're ALSO the 3rd densest city in North America (excluding Mexico) by many counts, and we're pretty impressive for having figured out to have our cake and eat it, as well.
__________________
WWJJD?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #155  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 11:21 PM
agrant's Avatar
agrant agrant is offline
Cheers!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,869
Please tell me how developing a condo area in the park makes our lives better. 50 years from now, when everything around has fully developed - you can bet the downtown and east side will add thousands more by then. If you've already condoed the park, you're screwed. What option do all these people have? Oh, there is Stanley Park way over there, Oppenheimer Park way over there, a little green patch here and there we can all share.... that sucks. This discussion is moot. The park will go in, and it will turn out great. It'll be another thing Vancouver can be proud of keeping as green space. Some people may see these green spaces as useless, but they are what make this city what it is.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #156  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 11:27 PM
AlexYVR's Avatar
AlexYVR AlexYVR is offline
In Love With YVRthing
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago:Vancouver
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by agrant View Post
It'll be another thing Vancouver can be proud of keeping as green space. Some people may see these green spaces as useless, but they are what make this city what it is.
Can't agree with you more on the above, but be a little even with this, dude. Even just in the areas you're quoting, Crab Park is right there. Carrall St Greenway's going to lance through that whole area. Sun Yat Sen is right next door. Urban gardens are cropping up around the whole area, not to mention the Yaletown parks (of which I don't know the names) as well as the entire seawall.

If you're going to call Oppenheimer park 'way over there' you should remember that the only way to make it more accessible to people like you? Build condos closer to the park. Again, I think we more than most people can have cake and eat.
__________________
WWJJD?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #157  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2009, 11:33 PM
agrant's Avatar
agrant agrant is offline
Cheers!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexYVR View Post
Can't agree with you more on the above, but be a little even with this, dude. Even just in the areas you're quoting, Crab Park is right there. Carrall St Greenway's going to lance through that whole area. Sun Yat Sen is right next door. Urban gardens are cropping up around the whole area, not to mention the Yaletown parks (of which I don't know the names) as well as the entire seawall.

If you're going to call Oppenheimer park 'way over there' you should remember that the only way to make it more accessible to people like you? Build condos closer to the park. Again, I think we more than most people can have cake and eat.
Oh man... Carrall Street Greenway is a park? I thought it was a street with bike lanes. Sun Yat Sen doesn't qualify as you have to pay to get in. More of a museum than anything. Urban gardens? LOL! Nice try. Yaletown parks are obviously in Yaletown? Seawall also doesn't qualify as a park really. Can you play frisbee on it?

Anyway, why condos in this spot?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #158  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2009, 12:49 AM
Canadian Mind's Avatar
Canadian Mind Canadian Mind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,921
regarding an underground passage for science world and the space centre, why not build the space centre out on false creek, connected to the main entreance of both it and science world via a tunnel that is underwater when the tide is up, but above the water when the sea level is low? give it some fancy floor/interior lighting so it looks cool at night, both from inside the tunnel and when it is viewed from above water.
__________________
"you're eating chicken periods" - Vid
"I love eggs, especially the ones with runny yolks" - Me
"EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, you're disgusting!" - Vid
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #159  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2009, 1:00 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,021
I am in favour of the current proposal over whatever has been shown to the community workgroup. But depending on the the proposal having building line Pacific might work even better. It would create a longer park that fronts waterfront and provide a larger area with Southern exposure, as someone mentioned that northern section along Pacific won't be nearly as popular and it will be darker then the waters edge. As long as the new proposal doesn't compromise any sqftage I could be sold on it.
I know some people think that the area is oversupplied in the park dept but it's acutally below city standards of hects/1000people.

Also just to clarify that while the Dr Sun Yat Sen gardens might be a pay garden the city gardens directly next door are just as nice and they are free.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #160  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2009, 6:44 AM
fever's Avatar
fever fever is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,019
There's a large hole in the city bounded by the Cambie Bridge, Expo Blvd, Keefer, Quebec, and False Creek. There's not much reason to go into this area most of the time. There are occasional events: hockey games, football games, the dragon boat festival, etc. But the rest of the time, it's mostly empty. It doesn't feel particularly safe at night. It's not inviting, especially with the viaducts. Putting a series of condos along Pacific would cut a passage through the area that has eyes on the street and on the park. If this can be done without compromising the size of the park - by orienting the condos in a line instead of a cluster - I think it could be an improvement for future condo owners in their better views, for people walking through the site at night, and for people using the park in the greater amount of park space fronting the water.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:40 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.