March 13, 2015

The Daily Scot: Transit and Development – The Implications

Scot links to this ‘advertorial’ from Colliers: an interview with Andrew Grant, President of the PCI Group, the developer of Marine Gateway on the Canada Line, speaking about “The Evolving Relationship Between Transit and Mixed-Use:”

.

.

Note this: “We will generate from this site about two million transit trips a year.  Same thing with our retail tenants …”

Then in light of that, consider this – just one part of the Mayors’ Council Plan:

Plan

Failure of the plan means that upgrades are at best deferred.  Hence, more crowding as demand grows.

Demand is directly generated by projects such as Marine Gateway, Oakridge, Pearson Hospital site, and new condos along the Cambie Corridor – and that’s just on the Canada Line in Vancouver.  There’s also the new Capstan station in Richmond and related Concord development, as well as the Sea Island Luxury Designer Outlet near YVR.  Plus growth in airport traffic and general development.

In the event the referendum fails, would there then be an argument that all new transit-demand generating development be put on hold?

How, for instance, will neighbourhoods respond – like West Point Grey when the Jericho planning process begins?  Or UEl, as UBC proposes more residential on its lands, with no immediate prospect of new buses? Likely:  ‘No transit, no development.’

As a response, should cities require that any anticipated transit demand be met by the development that generates it?  And since there is no source of new funding, will new development be expected to provide all of the capital for upgrades and new service?

The development community will need to be prepared.  I’d suggest they get a good spokesperson – perhaps someone like Bob Rennie.

He could begin with Christy Clark.

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. Vancouver is a small culturally, economically isolated community with a small group of quasi-influential commentators lost in a wishful dialogue of what the city should be.

    Vancouver’s like all governments is heavily encumbered with an unmanageable, exponentiating debt load that should be front and center in the current transit debate yet is studiously avoided for obvious reasons.

    Although all portends point to a NO vote in the coming transit non-binding referendum the outcome remains to be seen. There is a strong enough consensus among decision makers that may yet interpret the outcome any-which-way.

    The fact so far is Translink has shown no proclivity to explore a Metro transit system any other way that a hugely expensive, and not necessarily appropriate system of tube and surface: the mayors are transfixed on an out dated system. It seems apodictic that the surface system will be conventional buses with little discussion of surface trams with an after-thought tube along Broadway terminating at Arbutus!

    Absolutely no mention has been yet countenanced on the advantage of the present in-situ historic village centers that are, although much obscured, still exist . . .

    http://www.theyorkshirelad.ca/1yorkshirelad/vancouver.re-boot/Vancouver.re-boot.html

    . . . Kits, Marpole, Champlain or any opportunity to bring the isolated universities into the digital age.

    May I recommend that, which ever way the vote goes, the mayors visit the city of Buenos Aires, not much large than Vancouver, where they will find preserved its historic village, San Telmo, La Boca, Palermo etc. and a new development, Puerto Madero: a lesson that may show a way to rectify mistakes made at False Creek North.

    The point is being there, not getting there!

    1. Post
      Author
        1. Before shooting your mouth off? You’re a rude crusty old man living off an ego built in the 60’s. You shoot your rambling mouth off more than anyone around here shamefully plugging your irrelevant blog whenever you can. Agree with Gord or not, have some bloody respect Laddy

  2. Post
    Author
  3. Infrastructure in BA is bad. The worst sidewalks in advanced country I’ve seen.

    Maybe we should levy developers to fund transit. They certainly seem to be profiting from it.

  4. Well Bob I thinq you were in the other BA. El Subte is of course old and starved of maintenance funds as is TX in most cities (try London UK: even Skytrain is experienciong old age break downs. Trouble with shiny trinkets, they cost big time to keep up!).

    Anyway for ten days I mostly walked BA: La Boca, along Defensa to San Telmo, Plaza Mayo then Puerto Madero. PM is brand new and still under construction: it’s sidewalk are perfecto! I suspect PM planners took one look at False Creek North and decided on another approach: PM was lucky to start with the four story masonry warehouses to convert into Condos. PM waterfront promenade is magnificent!

    From Plaza Mayo to Recoleta, along the pedestrian shopping street Avendida Florida, the pedestrian street is flawless.

    I’ll admit Palermo Veigo lives up to its name!

    I suspect Bob you don’t know BA very well: have you ever visited?

  5. PS I must say Bob you and Ron S. sound like a pretty resentful, disgruntled mean spirited duo: aren’t you getting yours?

    Ron S mentioned that I am . . . a rude crusty old man living off an ego built in the 60’s. Yup I had fun in the sixties: no fears! And after moving on from that ignorant city destroying . . .

    http://members.shaw.ca/webmaster-nonpareil/Thu%20Horror/thu.horror.html

    . . . greed ridden bunch, still doing their damage, and no one seems to care, or azre uyou all too yellow to speak up?

    Yup, old and decrepit, but I’m thriving.

    1. Roger, you should see this, perhaps you have, it’s quite beautiful:
      (I think I have to chop off the front otherwise it won’t post. Just add the www.

      .buzzfeed.com/danieldalton/the-muffins-taste-funny#.ng3LQeNmR

  6. I was there at the Wall Centre for Christy’s Liberal Nomination Party…an event MC’ed by Bob Rennie, and sponsored by Peter Wall, among others. I struggle to imagine it will be politically acceptable for the Mayor’s Plan to fail when development depends on increased transportation options. I believe we really will see the costs for the plan pushed in to property taxes: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/clark-warns-mayors-will-have-to-raise-property-taxes-if-no-vote-prevails/article22851649/

    1. Again, so we should be taxed to help line developers’ pockets? Most of these guys have more money than we’ll ever see.

Subscribe to Viewpoint Vancouver

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

Join 7,313 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