Login / RegisterCity of Vancouver considers removing downtown viaducts, increasing park space
When local development consultant Michael Geller went to South Korea for Expo 2012, Vancouver’s viaducts were among the things on his mind. That’s why one of his first stops was a place called Cheonggyecheon.
Cheonggyecheon is a renowned promenade that’s been hailed as a model of urban renewal. It’s actually an ancient stream that runs through the heart of the capital city of Seoul. But until 2005, the waterway was paved over. An elevated highway ran above it.
The stream was restored with the removal of the 5.8-kilometre freeway. Cheonggyecheon now attracts local and international visitors for strolls on its banks. Geller was pleased with what he saw.
“It has really become quite a beautiful walkway through the city,” he told the Georgia Straight in a phone interview on May 29, a day after he returned from South Korea.
May 29 was also the day when Vancouver city staff released online a concept of what it may look like if the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts are torn down.
The slide presentation talks about the potential of 25.25 acres of park space once the viaducts are gone. It also proposes merging Pacific and Expo boulevards north of the SkyTrain guideway, with a connection to Georgia Street. Carrall Street will run straight to False Creek, connecting people to the water.
Watch the presentation from the City of Vancouver.
It’s not just going to be about park space. The demolition of the viaducts will also create new communities. The presentation cites a development potential of approximately 850,000 square feet. It notes that the move will also provide affordable housing opportunities.
According to Geller, the city-owned lands below and at the eastern end of the viaducts may be a desirable location for a mix of market and nonmarket housing.
“To create affordable housing, the land does not have any real value,” Geller said. “If you want to create affordable housing, the land would have to be free. For the market housing in this location, however, once the sites are serviced, I think it’s not unreasonable to guess that the land has a value of about $150 per square foot.”
City councillor Geoff Meggs initiated council’s review of the future of the viaducts in 2009.
According to the first-term councillor, the two city-owned blocks on either side of Main Street between Union and Prior streets are considered by many as “logical for development”.
“Those two blocks have room for affordable housing or any number of things,” Meggs told the Straight in a phone interview on May 30. “Their development could facilitate a whole set of objectives.”
These include making Chinatown whole again. The original Georgia Viaduct was completed in 1915. It was replaced by the current twin viaducts during the 1960s. According to Meggs, this cut off the two blocks bounded by Union and Prior streets from the historic community.
“My discussions with Chinatown business interests and community leaders have gone well,” Meggs said. “They hope that would reconnect them back down Main Street.”
Meggs has previously credited architect and urban designer Bing Thom for taking an initial look at the feasibility of removing the viaducts.
In an interview in November 2009, Thom noted that this action would release at least 100,000 square feet of city land. “If you took four or five city blocks, and if you have the density of let’s say seven, which is what’s in the downtown, and say, ‘Okay, it’s $50 a square foot,’ or whatever, you probably get a few hundred million dollars of real estate,” the architect told the Straight in a phone interview at that time. “That’s just sitting there as a potential, which we could put to better use and create more housing and make things more affordable for working people.”
It’s still early days. For one thing, according to Meggs, council has to make a final decision about the fate of the viaducts. And as for Geller, he’s interested in costs.
The city is hosting three open houses about the viaducts from June 5 to 9. Details are available at vancouver.ca/.
The City of Vancouver (ie Visionless Moonbeam) would have towers going up on this first chance possible. Snuck under the public radar just like the bike lanes and other developments were.
For those who want park space, you're not going to get it from "The City of Vancouver". They just want more towers and development to pay back their political backers and will change the City's charter (like they already have once), rezone anything (like they have a number of times), and push it all through with bloc voting and cut debate right off (like they have several times.)
Trust not.
And they are lying when they say they are considering park space. They have said before that they want to sell the land to developers and get as much money as possible.
OK,
Demolish half the office towers downtown, charge people from North Van, West Van, Langley, Surrey (you get the idea) $1,000.00 per month to drive to downtown Vancouver to work.
Or here is a better idea,
YAH don't live in Vancouver
YAH don't work in Vancouver.
The downtown population is now close to 90,000.
If, I mean when, the Big Earth Quake Hits, just how the F_CK do people get out of the rubble, that was once downtown Vancouver.
Sounds good to me. I'm tired of subsidizing the bridge and tunnellers.
Fixed that headline for ya.
Removing them permanently would be a big mistake.
There is no reason why the viaducts couldn't be torn down. It would just take good planning, something with which the city has distinguished itself in recent years (despite what those who like to call Gregor Robertson or Vision derogatory names would have you believe).
So instead we have a viaduct so that bridge and tunnellers can commute into the city and use our services without the indignity of having to pay municipal taxes?
Toronto tried that for four decades and it hasn't been going so well for them.
And tearing them down is the most unimaginative and wasteful solution to this perceived problem. Would not reusing the viaducts be the "green" thing to do? Are we just going to replace them with more underutilized open space (eg. lawns)? Are they not a monument to the historic freeway fight of the 60s? You could really create something interesting and significant with these structures. No, they aren't pretty, or lovely to look at, but that's the whole f-ing point. They counterbalance the banal status-driven image this city works so hard to create, which is the real reason why they want to destroy them.
This whole green argument is a red herring... or a green herring in this case. Don't buy it!
the data in the presentation makes the point. they are way under-used, costing zillions for a purpose that can never be achieved, and ruin that whole waterfront area on the ground. yes, the redevelopment will cost money too, but for a purpose that can be wholly realized. keeping them is like fixing up a big hotel, year after year, that nobody ever goes to.
rip that sh*t out, increase foot and bike traffic. discouraging vehicular traffic downtown is the whole point. i especially liked the "Spine" proposal with all the different park rooms.
As for the potential for towers, of course there would be towers. That's not incompatible with affordable and/or rental housing. I do not believe that governments should be in the venture capital business so of course 'developers' will be building them. But the City could tender for developers who would build affordable units. This is just spitballin' but couldn't there be a binding agreement that rent would be capped at say 90% of market average.
____________________
www.2020vancouver.com
Pages