The transformation is underway:
In two or three weeks, said the delightful traffic manager on site, this block of Granville will look more like this:
And the construction will move north until the street (according to this rendering that looks south from Helmcken) is more like this. (Note the widened sidewalks with the optional parking between the curb row of trees.)
This design is adapted from Alan Jacobs’s proposal (more about that here in Price Tags 44.)
I’m surprised at how dramatically this block of Granville between Davie and Drake has been transformed by the medium-rise residential buildings. Not a surface parking lot remains. And yet, the blocks to the north are largely untouched (how do those porno shops survive?).
I had assumed at the time we were rezoning Downtown South that the influx of residents on all sides would transform the southern blocks of Granville into more of a neighbourhood shopping street – and therefore, like the other commercial arterials in the West End, should retain its low-rise scale. No need for boosting the densities and encouraging lot consolidation.
Granville has resisted. Some will say thanks for that; the street shouldn’t be homogenized into another low-rent Robson. Still, change will come. It’s just not clear quite yet what that will be.
One thing I will continue to bet on: when the Granville Bridge loops are rebuilt and the street is connected to the False Creek neighbourhoods, Granville will regain some of its lustre as Downtown’s Main Street. More on that tomorrow.
I’ve been admiring the view down Granville lately, since they cut down the trees. I know the plan is to replace the trees, but I’m surprised to hear myself say that I think maybe Granville Street would be more interesting without them – it’s nice to be able to see the buildings and the remaining neon signs. (I may think differently in summer however.)
The Granville St redesign is hopefully only the start, while I agree the removal of the loops will greatly improve the south area I think just as big is the waterfront hub proposal of extending Granville to the north and opening up the view which is currently terminated by the parkade entrance.
I’ll second the comment about the trees. At first I was upset that they were cut down, but once I took a monent to actually look at the street, I liked it. It now looks closer to historical photos. Without the trees I can really see the wonderful heritage buildings and neon lights (looks really good at night). I almost wish they were not replaceing them.
I think this is a great project that should do wonders for this street. It’s a shame it was just completely pedestrianized and made into a more European type high street. But anyway, the plaza like special area next to Sears should be interesting along with multi-way pedestrian crossing. If only the city would allow Picadilly Circus type adverstising at Robson/Granville, that would really liven up the area.
I agree the trees shouldn’t be replanted.
I love trees but I’ll echo the above comments. When they first cut down the trees on the section between Georgia and Robson, it really opened up the space. The street felt wide open and much less claustrophobic. It is an urban street. I’m not sure what the point of making a few trees suffer through an environment that is really not that great for them.
To your title, I’m not sure if I would classify what is essentially a changing of the colour of the street from boring brown to gruesome grey as a transformation.
A transformation would have been making the whole street from the bridge to the waterfront car free. Ironically, in spite of the opposition from some of the business to it being car free, that turned out to be the solution to the problems on Friday and Saturday nights. At least it will be pedestrian only during the Olympics.
It speaks to the lack of will in this city recently to try bold measures. We need to recapture the bold spirit that existing in this city in the seventies which made Vancouver the great place it is today. Without this, Vancouver will fall behind other cities that are willing to be bold and take some risks.
I wish they’d consider keeping the trolleys on Howe/Seymour, has it been a problem? Then ban *all* traffic, at least from Theatre Row north (well, I guess with only one theatre it’s no longer Theatre Row)
I think, urban street or no, the trees provide nice shade in the summer and help keep city temps down. I live next to a wide open parking lot and can notice a huge difference in the area with trees and the area without when out walking after dark. The parking lot is still radiating heat, while the nicely shaded streets have cooled off nicely
It is not like it is Phoenix here. There maybe 10 days a year when the heat is an issue during just a few hours a day. The rest of the year, the extra heat would be nice on the street and would encourage walking and the use of outdoor patios without having to use heaters.
Along streets with lots of traffic, the trees are definitely nice. It is also nice to have some variety along our streets. We somehow have the need to make every street look (and every building for that matter) look very similar. It makes for a boring city.
I’d just like to add to what Richard said. There was an option you listed in the original pricetags that provided for a bus-only lane in either direction the whole length of Granville on the downtown peninsula, and also would have added a great deal more pedestrian space. Like you argued in the piece, transit use is increasing while car use is decreasing, especially downtown, and transit efficiency should be improved rather than simply maintained. That would have been a bold and really exciting vision for the street. It fit the idea of Granville as a high street for all of downtown, and also as a gateway to all the bus routes in the city, a place where people mingled after arriving from the suburbs, almost like an outdoor Grand Central Station. Unfortunately, it was turned down.
The redesign as it is, I would say, is an improvement. But only slight.
So, cutting down boulevard trees just as they reach a decent size is the latest psalm in the gospel of the new urbanism. Somehow, while depressed, I cannot say I am surprised. It’s the commercial imperative, once more, maximizing attention to advertising and awareness of shops rather than providing an objectively pleasant environment for pedestrians.
I recall reading some years ago during one of the never-ending redo Granville Mall episodes (under Mayor Gordon Campbell) that the reason merchants didn’t like pedestrian malls was because the trees blocked people’s view of their signage and showrooms.
My comments were not in support of cutting down trees, it was more that since they have been cut down due to Canada Line construction, why automatically plant new ones just because that is what we always do on streets. “New urbanism”, while full of great concepts is getting way to prescriptive and dogmatic which is leading to a lack of diversity in our streetscapes and our city in general. Everything is becoming the same.
Why not plant the trees in a park or a site where they can really be enjoyed. Alternatively, they could be grouped in bunches inside of being lined up along the street.
You can tell this is a discussion board based in Vancouver. Out of everything in this redevelopment plan, and more importantly, everything not included, are trees really the biggest issue? Sure, they are the only mildly interesting part, in that this is the first time I’ve seen them put into the car space rather thant he sidewalks and used to separate parking spots, but that really is the only new part of the plan. Otherwise, this is just the same as any other street. That’s the problem. There are other ways to make this street unique and embrace its role in downtown that don’t involve trees whatsoever.