May 1, 2017

Is Vancouver the urban-design leader? – 1

This week, a series from urban designer Gloria Venczel (principal of Cityscape Design), who asks: 

Is Vancouver the Urban Design-CityBuilding leader in North America?

 
Many new mixed-use developments in the City of Vancouver have a strong public realm component to them …   While negotiated, we take these public realm enhancements as a given.  Architectural edge programming in Vancouver is an integral part of  the public living room.  ‘Streetscape vibrancy’ design elements are implemented in varying degrees in contemporary projects on a consistent basis.
Is Vancouver the North American leader in producing contemporary mixed-use, people-friendly, walkable, vibrant  developments? Has the City of Vancouver’s early vision for pedestrian-friendly urban design spurred a symbiotic ( sometimes problematic)  relationship with the development community, resulting in a developers’ “race to the top”?  
It appears that the local Vancouver development market is very competitive in product quality and reputation but is head and shoulders above their North American counterparts in city building savvy and delivering walkable urban design projects.

Some examples, with photos by Gloria:
.
Mixed use, Melville St., Downtown Vancouver . Great building-edge programming  with retail/shops. Always filled with people.  
.
.
Mixed use, Fourth Ave, Kitsilano. Building designs that invite window shopping as well as opportunities to pour people into cafe seating.
.
.
Mixed Use, Fourth Ave, Kitsilano, Vancouver. Building designs that invite window shopping as well as opportunities to pour people into cafe seating.         
 .
.
  Mixed use, Fourth Ave, Kitsilano. Urban design that facilitates creature comforts for the “outdoor living room” like Adirondack chairs, trees, shade, window shopping.J

Posted in

Support

If you love this region and have a view to its future please subscribe, donate, or become a Patron.

Share on

Comments

  1. Tell this to the developments along Cambie. Boring architecture, they all look very similar, no street presence whatsoever, no mixed use, blah. Such a lost opportunity along this huge long stretch of Vancouver.

    1. Do we really want a long strip of mediocre retail stretching all along Cambie? Sounds like a modern version of Kingsway ( (yuck). Better to concentrate it around the transit nodes.

      1. No–we want thoughtful urban development like the above article suggests Vancouver is so good at. Yes, there should be higher densities of everything around transit (housing,shops, parks) but that doesn’t mean we should just be ok with dense sprawl along the arterials.

  2. This looks like a self serving puff piece if I have ever seen one. The first comment is bang on about all the similar, bland looking architecture in our city.

  3. The article specifically references several examples of mixed use zoning with continuous retail facing the sidewalk with a pedestrian transitional element, like outdoor café seating. It applies equally to expensive and average streets. All have a human scale, and some even have quite good architecture, though this article is about urban design of which architecture is only a part.
    Is there something wrong with that?

    1. There’s nothing wrong with that, but the notion that Vancouver is a leader in this when they are currently doing the opposite down basically the entire stretch of a major north south road…well, perhaps they aren’t fully there yet.
      Go walk south from 29th to 30th on Cambie. With 3 lanes of cars streaking by, the building on the corner looks like a private gated compound with an expanse of grass leading to a retaining wall topped with a fence. The whole thing screams stay out–you’re not welcome here. You won’t find anyone walking on the sidewalk either cause Cambie is so hostile people either drive out the underground or walk down the lane if they are going to king ed.
      This is being repeated over and over along Cambie. Such a wasted opportunity.

      1. I’m certainly no expert on this sort of thing, but it seems to me that there’s a pretty big difference between a building that includes ground-level retail and a pure condo. In the latter, the owners are striving for privacy, not for interaction with the public. Are there any examples pure residential buildings that wouldn’t be like this?

        1. Yes–I’m saying we should have a mix of mixed-use and residential only along this corridor. As is, it’s residential only and that’s my issue.

        2. Who is going to want to slog along a retail strip strung out over one road a kilometre or more long? Better to get away from that auto dependent pattern and develop denser commercial experiences spread around a few square blocks (think somewhere like Steveston).

      2. @ Don, you seem to have missed the central point in the article about mixed use zoning. While I would prefer commercial / retail in the Cambie residential developments from King Ed to Oakridge, that seems to be too aggressive of a change for the city to have assumed. Keep in mind these were until very recently supersized single-family lots with large detached houses, and still is just behind the developments. What a waste of valuable land.
        To me, the zoning still remains deficient; why go 80% of the way then stop? Continuous sidewalk retail would enliven the street, which contains an exceedingly generous, rare and park-like median filled with mature trees. The traffic din from the opposite side of the road is arguably less given the added distance across the median. The new sidewalks could be very wide to accommodate café seating and other pedestrian activity that commonly occurs on arterials with just as much traffic but with no median with gigantic trees, no QE Park and no rapid transit stations.
        The lack of usable pedestrian space on Cambie is a mystery given the presence of a subway line that carries over 100,000 people a day. Why can’t the rest of Cambie become a destination considering the allowable build-up of Oakridge and the old transit yard?

        1. Alex, you seem to be agreeing with me so I’m not sure where I missed the point?
          Those houses behind Cambie are all part of phase 3 of the Cambie Corridor Plan. That was to have been complete by now, apparently now it’s early 2018. It will have lower densities to Heather, I assume townhouse/rowhouse type developments.
          Also–for everyone who’s -‘ing me, speak up! Have a discussion 🙂

        2. You could say I’m half-agreeing with you. The disagreement is about the heritage boulevard which I think even the city of Paris would be jealous of if we had the smarts to line with continuous retail and public pedestrian space filled with activity, if properly zoned.

        3. I have a problem with Cambie being a pedestrianized environment. Not just Cambie – all arterials that have no reasonable hope of being radically de-motorized. Cafes/patios on busy roads, full of the noise and stench of motor vehicles? No thanks. We need to get those urban environments onto quiet streets with little to no MVs.
          I understand how/why retail/service development grew up around the main roads – It is so small town. It is time for Vancouver to grow up and get those shops and services into places that are enjoyable to spend time. European cities have busy roads too. But the places people enjoy are definitely elsewhere.

        4. We tried MeeT on Main last week and found the music was loud enough to drown out the traffic outside. It was a Beatles retrospective (kinda strange for a café filled to the brim with Millennials) played over a great sound system, so it was relatable to us, probably the only people in the place who remembered them when they were still together.
          A planning dept. director from another Metro city (who shall go unnamed) was dragged to MeeT a few weeks ago by his daughters. They lectured him: “Dad, this is a real street in a real neighbourhood.”
          I can’t argue with that.

  4. @Alex–the heritage boulevard? Again–I agree with your statement. What did I say to indicate I think otherwise?
    @Ron–I disagree, we can ‘de-motorize’ them, pretty easily actually. Just takes political willpower. But, I 100% agree we should have cafes and shops sprinkled into the urban fabric all over. Places like Marche St George are gems because they are so rare.

    1. That doesn’t mean we have to recreate those 30th century patterns when offered a blank slate. And how many people shop Main from Broadway to 30th. especially on one of our numerous winter days?

      1. Quite a lot, actually. Of course everyone comes out everywhere when the sun shines, but Main seems to have achieved a critical mass of retail and population and year round visitors lately that clashing umbrellas has become an issue on the increasingly crowded sidewalks.

Subscribe to Viewpoint Vancouver

Get breaking news and fresh views, direct to your inbox.

Join 7,284 other subscribers

Show your Support

Check our Patreon page for stylish coffee mugs, private city tours, and more – or, make a one-time or recurring donation. Thank you for helping shape this place we love.

Popular Articles

See All

All Articles