Says Scot:
Great Mixed Use at Wesbrook Village at UBC. Great scale and proportion, narrow street, small gathering plaza in front of supermarket and nice building articulation through use of various materials.
Article Categories
Archives (2003-13)
Recent Articles
Recent Episodes
- Podcast
- Events
- Support
- About Viewpoint Vancouver
- City Elections 2022
- Climate Change
- COVID Place making
- The Livable Region
- Transportation
- Urbanism
- All The Livable Region
- Business & Economy
- Energy & Resources
- Governance & Politics
- Housing
- All Transportation
- Cycling
- Infrastructure
- Motordom
- Public Transit
- Walking & Mobility
- All Urbanism
- Architecture
- Art & Culture
- Design & Development
- History & Heritage
- Policy & Planning
- Nature & Public Spaces
- Podcast
- Events
- Support
- About Viewpoint Vancouver
- City Elections 2022
- Climate Change
- COVID Place making
- The Livable Region
- Transportation
- Urbanism
- All The Livable Region
- Business & Economy
- Energy & Resources
- Governance & Politics
- Housing
- All Transportation
- Cycling
- Infrastructure
- Motordom
- Public Transit
- Walking & Mobility
- All Urbanism
- Architecture
- Art & Culture
- Design & Development
- History & Heritage
- Policy & Planning
- Nature & Public Spaces
Yeah but UBC residential architecture is mostly blah… could be anywhere in North America. The university buildings are much more interesting and varied.
And the biking through here isn’t great. Traffic volumes and speeds are too high for the lack of separation.
And the UBC/MOTI obsession with unimpeded car traffic along 16th all the way to Marine is effectively cutting off south campus from the rest of campus for pedestrians and cyclist. UBC is planning to further widen 16th Ave to 4 lanes everywhere so that campus is divided by an urban highway without any stop lights for pedestrians to cross and large radius (high speed) multi-lane roundabouts so that cars never have to stop. Motordom at it’s finest right on ‘pedestrian and cyclist friendly’ UBC campus.
Totally agree. Hard to believe they could get it so wrong starting with the roundabout which is always the worst option for pedestrians and cyclists. I was referring to the specific Save on foods/apartment mixed use building not the surrounding development. They have improved the connection of Wesbrook Village to the campus by routing the 41 bus straight down Wesbrook mall through the village. Corey, every time I am out there I see packs of kids behind a parent riding through the village.
what is nice about the University “village” neighborhood, also named Wesbrock neighborhood or S-Campus, is that every second street is a “green” street ie no cars at all. I also like the highrises are all on the east end along Pacific Spirit Park so that its shadows fall mainly into the forest.
I agree with Jens that 16th Ave is far too car oriented and far too fast.
The two new roundabouts on 16th were a great opportunity for safe cycling facilties. Everything was rebuilt and there is plenty of space for pedestrians, cyclists, buses and cars. The Ministry wasted the opportunity. Bikes need to either ‘share’ with heavy traffic and buses in the roundabout or go on the sidewalk, dismount and walk around the roundabout. UBC is not much better with their strange intersection design at Wesbrook and Agronomy.
I agree, roundabouts are never a good solution for intersections. Traffic signals allow you to interrupt and meter traffic flow and allow pedestrians safe passage. This shows what the Ministry’s street design guidelines look like.
Delta is putting in a new round about, but with a twist. There are 2 designs being considered, turbo vs two lane but the round abouts have bike paths that can be cycled, no dismounting. Cyclists will have to stop to activate the flashing amber lights, but they will be allowed to ride across. http://www.delta.ca/your-government/projects-initiatives/112-st-and-80-ave-two-lane-roundabout
I don’t see any bike lanes or bike paths in those Delta design documents. What I see is an ordinary sidewalk with a cyclist mixing with pedestrians.
We need more roundabouts in BC. But in urban settings they ought not to be 2 lanes as they are far too dangerous for bikes or pedestrians.
The entire SW Marine Drive from UBC to Granville could be roundabouts where today there are traffic lights as there is little, if any, pedestrian traffic along SW Marine Drive .. starting at the NW Marine Drive/East Mall/Chancellor Place intersection. It would
a) slow traffic down at these intersections, and
b) help traffic flow continuously and would alleviate the current line ups along SW Marine Drive due to one red light (let alone 10 or so)
You’re all over the place Thomas, one minute its streets like 16th are too car orientated then its we need roundabouts on Marine Drive to help traffic flow continuously, next its there’s too many cars in Vancouver but we need to expand the Lions gate bridge to 6 lanes. Which is it? In my opinion Roundabouts are terrible in urban neighbourhoods. They provide a continuous flow of vehicle traffic, if they are busy with cars it is impossible as a pedestrian to cross the street. If crosswalks are used they are pushed away from the desire lines forcing pedestrians to walk out of their way. The expanded footprint required for a roundabout blows out the scale of the intersection and compromise existing buildings relationship with the street. If its a new intersection then the surrounding buildings get built at bad angles and setbacks out of scale and proportion to the streetscape. A properly scaled complete street with traffic friction and numerous traffic signals to interrupt flow and allowing people to cross at frequent intervals is what we need.
To clarify, Scot:
Roundabouts with single lanes at 30 km/h make total sense if the ped crossing is at least 2 car length away from it AND THAT IS NOT THE CASE AT 16th @ Wesbrook. Plus it is two lanes. Poor design, fit for cars. 30km/h is not the enforcable speed limit either.
Along NW Marine Drive there is hardly any ped traffic and as such roundabouts, instead of the current signaled intersections make (more) sense.
The design for the roundabouts (and all of 16th ave) originate at UBC C+CP. UBC draws the designs, MOTI approves them. UBC shares the blame for this.
Btw, when I complained to C+CP that the roundabout design pretty much forces cyclists to break the law and make illegal lane changes to be halfway safe, their response was ‘we do the same illegal lane changes when we bike there’. The idea that this might be a sign that the infrastructure has a problem did not occur to them.
16th should have been below ground and peds at level to cross. It is indeed far too car centric. It bisects south and north campus.
There isn’t even a subway station in the plans. While UBC claims to “consult” with residents and/or the UNA (the resident association aka “municipal like” government) it is often minor or ignored. It is used as a test for 2 lane roundabouts, the first one in BC btw, for the rest of BC !
Thanks for the great insight Jens. I went to UBC in the 90’s and it was a sea of parking south of campus. So its definitely better then back then but I see your point about road design. have you checked out the NACTO guide below?:
http://nacto.org/usdg/
Thanks Scot, that’s a nice resource. Had not seen that one before, I like how it is kept very accessible to a general audience. I have tried several times to convince people at C+CP to consult different guidelines, but they insist on TAC.
I have heard stories about the ‘B Lot’, that was before my time. And it’s great that surface lots are all slated to disappear. And parking got more expensive, but UBC still gives higher parking subsidies than housing subsidies to their faculty/staff.
Totally disagree Thomas. Makes sense to who? So what you are saying then is that a roundabout will have pedestrian crossing on all 4 sides so peds can cross? So then what is the point of having a roundabout? If roundabouts are for moving traffic which is what your implying, then how does a car smoothly move around a roundabout when waiting for a pedestrian to cross at every street? Regarding Marine Drive of course there is no pedestrain environment the traffic rules. First rule in Urban Design is to build the streetscape environment you want for pedestrians first, and other urban design elements will come in layers afterwards. What your saying is, Marine Drive sucks and has no chance.
I am saying both could improve.
16th @ Wesbrook also has modest ped traffic outside of rush hour and ped crossings are too close to roundabout .. and two lanes, thus confusing for drivers and peds (and bikers)
or that cyclists making an illegal movement wasn’t anything out of the ordinary.
I really like what they’re doing in Wesbrook village. The green pathways where roads would otherwise be are a nice touch. All the destinations are in one corner of the development rather than being in the middle like a traditional village, but because it’s constrained by the forest, farm and research zone nobody will ever live beyond walking distance of the shops or high school. Unfortunately 16th really cuts the area off from campus and the older neighbourhoods to the north.
If you go out there you’ll find a plethora of children making it obvious why a new elementary school is planned for one of the lots near the high school.
I have cycled out 16th several times this spring/summer with one or more kids. The path next to the road is in terrible shape so we use the bike lane on 16th. It’s scary, but smooth and I think it’s important to get everyone comfortable sharing the road with other vehicles.
Wesbrook is optimized for pedestrians and transit users. I find the roadway fine for cycling thanks to a low speed limit, raised crosswalks and stop signs, but my wife is paranoid about the kids mixing with the traffic so they roll very slowly along the sidewalks. I hope that next summer she’ll relax and we can get on the right side of the law.
Careful with the speed limit, don’t rely on it. The speed actual speed limit on roads in the Village depends on where you turn onto the road. They are not enforceable. CoV posts the 30 limit at every intersection, UBC refuses to do this. They don’t believe in strengthening the legal protection of vulnerable road users and claim (probably correctly) that making the speed limit legally binding will have little impact on actual traffic speeds. And RCMP won’t enforce 30 speeds anyway, they say their main focus is areas with higher speeds (where car occupants might get injured).
On 16th the bike lane could easily be made much safer by swapping parked cars and the bike lane. The same is true for many other roads on and around campus. But doing that will mean that parking maneuvers will impact motor vehicle travel lanes instead of ‘just’ impeding the bike lane, and MOTI and UBC prioritize unimpeded motor vehicle travel over cycling safety.
Your making some pretty sweeping generalizations about UBC promoting motor vehicle traffic, not sure that’s the case. I know Joe Stott and his planning team have worked really hard to create a walkable community at UBC and I think they have done a great job so far. How do you know the Ministry didn’t overrule campus planning regarding traffic design? If you know otherwise please share.
I know that there are many people at UBC that care about cyclists and pedestrians, and I am not sure where things break down. Living on campus and having a young child does make this somewhat personal though…
I have closely followed changes around UBC for about 4 years now, and while UBC has done some great things, e.g. along Main Mall, they have also messed things up pretty badly in other areas. 16th ave is a prime example, and UBC has aggressively defended the design against resident and parent concerns. The park-and-ride lot along SW Marine is another. Or the botched bike lane along the trolley bus loop (certainly no MOTI involved here). Saying there are ‘no concerns with speeding’ when the 85% speed is 18km/h over the speed limit. No kidding, they really wrote that. Or take a look at the original 16th Ave consultation report (http://planning.ubc.ca/sites/planning.ubc.ca/files/documents/transportation/reports/Roundabout-consultation-report-6-Feb-06.pdf) and tell me if you think their claims regarding pedestrian and cycling safety are made in good faith. Even when only considering the sources they give and not whatever other studies you may know about multi-roundabout safety. Now they claim that their new plan to add exit lanes to the Wesbrook Mall roundabout aids pedestrian safety.
This is probably not the place to get into too much details. If you are interested we can take this discussion somewhere else.
http://news.ubc.ca/2013/09/05/small-town-feeling-big-town-pulse/
It would be nice if – when the UBC line is eventually built – the line turns to the south and a 2nd UBC station is placed to serve the South Campus and Thunderbird Stadium.
yup. Send letters ! It is neither in UBC’s plan nor MetroVan plans and as such it may not until 2050 or later. In Vancouver they built buildings first, then maybe built public transit infrastructure. It is the 1950’s car is king model. See the new towers on Granville @ 76 for example, or Arbutus @ 16th .. and of course UBC’s towers or Port Moody’s. Too many old school inward looking politicians in too many city councils ! Not enough vision even in Vision Vancouver.
That’s “opportunistic” redevelopment. Higher density development on a historically consolidated site (supermarket or light industrial), so single family houses are not bought out and it won’t anger the NIMBYs too much
You’ll see them scattered around town without proximity to SkyTrain lines. i.e. King Edward Village (former Safeway). Granville & 70th (Safeway again, but at least that’s close to the Arbutus line if it is ever built).
Can someone remind me how many hectares of forest was cut down for this green development?
A significant number of trees fell to make way for the development. I watched with sadness as they chopped down towering evergreens to make way for the earlier Hampton Place development on the north side of 16th, but I’ve learned to look at things from more than one angle. What doesn’t get built at UBC is going to get built somewhere else, likely in a lower density form. I bet we’ve lost more trees in the Fraser Valley this year to build parking spaces than we lost at UBC in a decade.
UBC administration is really a strange creature. Others have already commented on the auto-centric road planning yet on the main campus they’ve closed roads and removed thousands of parking spaces. I remember when you could drive all the way to Sedgwick Library on Main Mall. There used to be dozens of cars lining that roadway every afternoon waiting to pick people up. I remember when almost every scrap of land from MacMillan to Thunderbird Stadium was a parking lot and people would arrive two hours early to get a paved space instead of one in a gravel lot.
I think there is a necessary separation between the [general purpose] residential and the campus residential – for noise and raucousness separation.
I’m not sure how that plays out on the north side of campus near the School of Theology – but that may be a quieter area.
Many good pedestrian oriented urban design principles have been used at Wesbrook Village from around the lower mainland. We have a fantastic urban design laboratory. The central mews or courtyard has uses/shops/patios opening onto it creating a vibrant, well used space. There is a layering and definition of the public realm from the interactive water feature, creature comforts like benches and a change in levels. It transitions well to a longitudinal “creek” towards the residential areas.
The Save On Foods outdoor seating + water features is successful- full of people. But I do wonder about who the beautiful fountains facing the road was for? With such thoughtful detailing, it should have been more integrated with local uses that draws pedestrians rather than eye candy only for motorists.
Delightful!
A town centre or market square would have been far better and far more pedestrian oriented. The smallish courtyard with fountain faces a road AND a liquor store. ! Still very car centric. Very myopic. They did not look to Europe with 1000+ years of urban design. Not bad compared to the car is king culture of the 80’s campus, or other North-American cities, but not state of the art roundabouts nor bike routing nor many true green principles. No solar panels, windmills, solar windows, solar roads, geothermal heat or tankless water systems. Even the newly proposed Community Energy System (CES) will use gas boilers until 2023 when they plan to hook up Triumf (hopefully it is still in business then as CES is not necessarily more energy efficient)
Re myopic/vision: When I asked a senior UBC planner about 3-4 years ago when they presented the official community plan “where is the future subway station” she just looked at me as if I am from Mars. The just released Mayor’s plan for MetroVan has a bus in its plan to serve UBC for at least 20+ years. Subway to Arbutus . if we get the finding .. a big if still. Then a (diesel?) bus. WOW. So 21st century.
At least the roundabout now, after MASSIVE outcry by UNA, residents and PAC we have rapid flashing beacons at the cross walk at the roundabouts and 30 km/h signs. That is called a major victory in the UBC “engagement” process for residents. Tiny tiny enhancements .. rest is of the shots are called by UBC (and MOTI).
Free parking for hundreds of vehicles still on SW Marine drive. This is “sustainability” ?
btw: sustainability in teh condo industry is code for “small units” as small units consume less energy and are indeed more efficient to heat or cool than big units/ A concrete highrise is a concrete highrise, built with gasoline/diesel powered cement trucks and gasoline/diesel powered excavators. The new Binning extension makes it very fast BY CAR to go to store on W 10th Ave or Granville or 4th .. 1/3 teh time of a bus with one chnage at least .. this is sustainable ?
Could have been worse, of course, and far uglier. At least the green streets and parks are a pleasure to walk, the highrises nice and shiny and sell for $800-$1200/ sq ft and the nearby park makes the dozen 20+ storey highrises and huge huge density somewhat bearable in this “village”.
There is a town centre in wesbrook Village its further south next to Blenz coffee you can see it in this photo
http://news.ubc.ca/2013/09/05/small-town-feeling-big-town-pulse/
Unfortunately, UBC bent to the pressure of accommodating its rapidly increasing number of students (local and international), prioritizing speed of residence construction (and obtaining housing dollars) over environmental protection and design aesthetics. They missed the boat on capitalizing from architectural competitions and inexpensive student input that could have preserved natural elements within design components. The campus could have become an admirable model of artistic sustainability, a tourist attraction, and a desirable living space. Instead, it is the reverse.
That’s pretty harsh. You make it seem like they have an unlimited amount of money to create an Architectural wonderland using cheap student labour. You must not realize the amount of time and energy that goes into producing Construction drawings (Architectural, Civil, Landscape)? Someone still would have to transform students studio work into something that’s build-able. The transformation to the Main Mall, and the public realm over the last 5 or so years and the housing before that has been a great achievement that has been carefully planned out for over a decade.
Yes, Main Mall, including the “village” around the Barn is very nice indeed. Loads of trees and green space.
Why does it feel so lovely: no highrises there at all.
Indeed. It caters to Asians mostly that are used to tight living quarters in far uglier settings, with “sustainable” and “spacious” 2 & 3 BRs at 850 -1100 sq ft !
Lower density, around court yards and fountains such as in Hawthorne would have been far better, more livable and enjoyable. But of course, an acre of 20 storey highrise commands a far higher premium than one with 4-6 stories.
At least they stacked the 12+ 20+ storey highrises against the forest so the tall shadows fall into the forest not onto other buildings with lovely view west to V Island and Gulf Islands.
VERY LITTLE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE. Very congested. Like Yaletown or Coal Harbor without the water !
But hey: they preserved the UBC farm. For what, I wonder ?