Surely, there must be someone, somewhere who’s against creating a downtown place for people. But as Emily Jackson chronicles in Vancouver Metro, this group of voices in favour is well-placed and loud.
Response to the idea has been largely positive thus far, a reaction that’s far from the “war against the car” and cries that rang out when the city eliminated driving lanes to build a bike lane on Hornby in 2010. Businesses also feared that the loss of traffic and parking would hurt sales.
But the Downtown Vancouver Business Improvement Association has evolved in the past five years and is a fan of the idea, CEO Charles Gauthier said.
He was “pleasantly surprised” to get fairly unanimous positive feedback on the plaza from neighbouring building owners, with the caveat that the space must be programmed and needs a stewardship committee.
“It is a magnet. On a human scale, it just provides this unique place in the heart of the city for festivals, events and, yes, protest,” he said.
On top of that, in the DVBIA’s own survey to reimagine downtown, 11,000 respondents were vastly in favour of a plaza and “it’s kind of hard to not pay attention to that,” Gauthier said.
Previously I had thought that it was a bad choice of location but then when you look at it, people have been naturally gravitating to it for decades since it has some natural attractions. Those nice steps that you can sit on and people-watch. Closeness to many places to get food.
It’s probably better to reroute the bus route and then nobody has to remember what time of year it is to catch it.
Why only a plaza ? Why not the entire Robson Street from Terry Fox Plaza to Denman ?
you forgot one qualificative, your title should have read
“saying “Yes” to able body people
Feel no shame to celebrate a square keeping senior and more gnerally people with mobility challenge at bay: after all there are many other squares in town for them and they can still book a ride 3 weeks ahead with handidart, isn’it?
Feel no shame either to admit that those transit dependent user, and more generally all transit user will be forced to a detour, when “us”; the cycling community, will never accept for ourselves: such a detour: we will continue to ride thorugh the square which will be defacto split in 2, by a bike path, formal or not (if not, blind people beware!)
Feel no shame: that is just who you are…and that just make me sad.
More generally it make me sad that people can rejoyce at a solution creating second class citizens, when better compromises exist.
You will say “come-on, it is just one block to walk! …”. Do you have any idea how much time and physical exhaustion it means for mobility challenged people? do you even care?
https://voony.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/bordeaux_sq_2.jpg
At least in Bordeaux, where I shooted this picture, the square is inclusive of people of all abilities.
However, I am confident at some point in the future that the decision on Robson square will be reversed, because it is simply the sense of history: place making is good, but place making done at the expense of accessibility is just bad and should not happen in our century.
I am just sad that Vancouver has not matured to this point yet.
My experience is that there are probably hundreds of car free streets in European cities which do not have an on street transit option for every one that does. Surely one cannot expect to have a bus or tram on every street. The big problem we have here is that we have as yet zero car free areas. And it is this lack of attractive walking spaces and the lack of good cycling infrastructure and even the priority of elevators and escalators over welcoming staris that has created so many people who become immobile in their senior years. If we create interesting spaces where people can walk and ride bikes, we will have way less mobility challenged people. I look forward to the first block of car free space in Vancouver and hope to see many more.
Indeed, Arno. Must be a British thing. There are far fewer pedestrian zones in the UK than in Holland, Germany, France, Italy etc ..
Certainly Vancouver needs QUITE A FEW MORE.
A closed off Robson corridor, for example, would be booming with locals, tourists, shoppers and out-of-town visitors alike !
there is a difference between a street (diffuse destination, not well serviced by mass transit) and a square (focal point).
That said, my experience is that there are probably hundreds of car free streets in European cities which have direct transit access (no a block away or so): those place are inclusive, since everyone, whatever its ability can experience it, and explore it more or less accoridng its ability/time
also,
The car free streets in European cities you mention are usually no much wider than 10m…and at such a wide hard choice need to be done…
Norh american urbanists tend to forget that: european cities pedestrianization is not a place making thing, but a transportation thing…and that is the reason why they work well)
As soon as more inclusive compromise are possible (due to street width or /and other configuration),…you will see transit like in my picture (this tram could have circled the squure as stated in this <a href="https://voony.wordpress.com/2012/10/23/transit-as-part-of-the-urban-fabric/" post" but did choose to do!) , …essentially to make the place more accessible and inclusive.
again some could prefer a place to be less inclusive for wahtever reason they could have still to provide: just they have to recognize the tradoff…
If you see a single street the width of Robson street, which is fully pedestrianized (no direct transit access on it): let me know…but you will have better to take your tape…
I’ll Play.
Glasgow. Sauchiehall Street. 10m+ wide, over 500m long, then turns into Buchanan Street (which is even wider) and after another 200m, then you finally get a subway (and then after another 800m you have another subway). But Sauchiehall Street certainly counts, as the analogue is Granville Street = Buchanan Street.
Sauchiehall street is quite wide…but not wide enough to be in the same category as Robon: Robson with two traffic lanes could still present a wider pedestrian realm than Sauchiehall. Then the larger street Buchanan has a subway underneath… (this street also connects 2 major railway stations…As you notice in despite of the bend, Sauchiehall is a prolongation of this street (the pedestrianization of one involve the other)…
artitectus , the pattern you seem to notice: a transit spine irrigating a pedestrain network is exactly what need to be done (but Robson is a natural transit spine)
In fact Wellington (NZ) did the same mistake as Vancouver: It put its buses on a detour to allow the pedestrianization of one of its high street in the 70s (Mammer Mall), before they restored the things as it should have always been:
https://voony.wordpress.com/2012/12/01/pedestrianization-vs-transit-the-wellingtons-golden-mile-case/
It is also what is doing Sydney with its pedestrianization of George street (LRT in the middle as recommended by Jan Gehl):
transit spine allowing a large scale pedestrianization scheme including wide side street such as Martin Place in Sydney.
That is a good model to follow, and Vancouver in some sort follow this model (articulate pedestri space around transit) when it introduces the plaza Jim Deva on Davie: that is a good practice to follow.
Rotterdam is another model: the transit overwhelmy serve the purpose build pedestrian precinct pretty much only on its edge. The precicnt is surrounded by traffic sewage (and besieged by parkade), preventing this pedestrian space to natural breath or be seamlessly stitched to its surrounding (it can’t expand without using underpass and other 70ish solution).
Similarly in Glasgow, beside the couple of pedestrian streets, other streets are also rather uninvitating to pedestrians (but here again traffic has to go somewhere, and Glasgow is constrained by narrow street).
Nowadays, the preferred model is not a one of pedestrian only space,surrounded by traffic sewage: it is one of pleasant boulevard, some shared street, and then pedestrian street…the whole making a continuously pedestrian pleasant experience…without compromising accessibility.
Robson-Denman-Davie is the downtown horseshoe transit spine (required due to the involved distance), from which the pedestrian space should have sprung, instead to be build against it. So those streets, due to their natural transit function/width should fell in the category of pleasant boulevard/shared space.
Then Space like Morton Park (Davie and Denman) should be consolidated, and anchored…then you can start to build a more pleasant city for pedestrian, not only because it has more pedestrian “only” space, but also because it is accessible and inclusive pedestrian space.
Vroony is way off the mark! I have literally dozens, perhaps hundreds of photos of public squares and wide car free streets that are not served directly by transit all over Europe. Many are several blocks from transit. The only reason I have so few examples is I’m a tram junkie and more of my photos focus on those streets with trams.
You don’t need to be verbose, just provide a specific example
(and please don’t throw random city name like in the other post, but be specific and double check first).
Travel more to Europe. There are HUNDREDS of such streets.
If there is hundreds of such streets, you should be ale to cite an example, just one…
Old Towns / city centers
in Munich ( Kaufinger Strasse), Passau, Düsseldorf, Rothenburg, Konstanz, Brügge , Brüssel, Köln ( Hohe Straße ), Stockholm ( Gamlastan Area), Barcelona, Madrid .. Plus a few dozen more.
Google
Fußgängerzone
And your favorite city or without for hundreds of hits incl pictures.
Sigh!
Limiting my search to half an hour, cities similar in size to Vancouver and wide pedestrian streets or plazas in which transit is at least a block away:
Vienna: Stephensplatz, Graben, Karmelitermarkt, Yppenplatz, Wienzeile Markt
Prague: Na Prikope
Koln: Koln Domplatte, Huemarkt
Amsterdam: Oudekerkspleinn Nieumarkt
Rotterdam: van Oldenbarneveltplaatz, Lijnbaan, Oude Binnweg, Binnenwegplein.
Thomas, remember what I was challenging:
1/ the city report mentions central (or more accuratly rather focal) square pionner square in Portland and Yonge#dundas in Toronto, defacto denying the role of Transit to their success since it pretends that Robson square can be like them.
I have exactly asked
Why not have taking an example of a sucessful “central square” not serviced by transit? does that even exists (I mean in a city the size of Vancouver)?
So far, noone was able to provide a single example.
2/ Per extension, I have asked (in this post):
If you see a single street the width of Robson street, which is fully pedestrianized (no direct transit access on it): let me know…but you will have better to take your tape…
And I have asked specific example: you gave 2, none fit the bill.
1/ Hohe Straße in Köln
it is 10m wide (that is a laneway in Vancouver!): that makes the point I was doing in my answer to Arno above.
2/ KaufingerStraße in Munich:
http://www.germanoscope.fr/DE/Bayern/Munich/Altstadt/Neuhauser_Kaufinger/Karlstor08_001.jpg
I put this picture for 2 reasons: First don’t you remember what these U and S sign mean?
and the second reason, is that the throughput of a street is determinated by its narrowest point. So yes the street is similar in width to Robson (~24m), on most of its short length (700m), but its throughput is limited by the pictured gate (so equivalent to a 10m width street).
You could also reply that academically the picture is on Neuhause Straße: experientally it is the same street as KaufingerStraße, (just a name change along its 700m), however, KaufingerStraße has also a U bahn station: Marienplatz station has an entrance right on KaufingerStraße). BTW the station is built right below the Munich “central square”…
I could go with others (I guess you where thinking La Ramblas for Barcelona: it has both bus a and subway…)…
Thanks for trying….
If you find one, I will offer you a beer (to explain you why it can’t apply to Robosn, and if Thomas promises to come on a whobby bus, I will order a pitcher) and I mean it.
To be sure, Per direct I mean, as soon as you leave the transit system, you are in contact, be visually, or feel included in the destination’s environment. Example here below (Marrakech, morocco) :
http://c3.staticflickr.com/6/5303/5628283210_d89ac723d0_b.jpg
the buses in the picture background are not on the square per sei: but you are in contact with it and even more feel invited to experience it: what is pictured is the square grand entrance (the picture shown tourist buses, but the city buses stop also at this location – it is the main city buses terminal and there is another square at the Minaret in the background, Koutoubia, so it is an optimal location minimizing walking for all transit rider, that said I am not sure it is the focal point for the locals…)
So, if there was an exit from the Vancouver City Centre station that opened onto Robson, then would it work?
Indeed. Robson Street, like Munich’s Kaufinger Strasse has essentially TWO stations nearby: one is City Centre (which happens to be Granville @ W Georgia) but could also be accessed via Nordstrom inside .. so we are really splitting hair here .. and the SkyTrain station behind BC Place which is a short stroll from Terry Fox Plaza, which is the end of Robson.
There is really no good reason at all to not close Robson all the way from Stadium to at least top of the hill (Bute / Jervis) or ideally all the way to Denman or Lost Lagoon/Stanley Park. A true gem for the city and a new mega-mecca for strolling, eating, shopping and people watching. But no, we must dedicate 4 lanes to cars (2 for driving and 2 for parking). This is green ? This is “vision” ?
As to the pitcher of beer: anytime, bro, anytime ! (Although I will be in Munich in early May .. but may see you at the Pricetag’s editor party)
Notice, that it was an opportunity to do it when Nordstorm renovated the Sears building, but the city didn’t seized it, because it could have worked against its agenda regarding the Robson bus.
Otherwise, yes, that could help, could that be enough, it isn’t sure:
People come to KaufingerStraße from all the directions (and the street has stations at its both end: that ensures a good distribution of pedestrians on all the street length (it is 700m long).
The problem of Robson, is that only one end is feeded by pedestrians in sizeable volume (mainly the one dropped by the rapid transit lines, BTW Stadium station is on Dunsmuir), and they could not distribute well along the street:
How to resolve that?
Like any other cities do: Transit, not only at one point, but more often than not legible transit all along the “wide” pedestrian street. Typical example will be Bahnhofstrasse (Zurich) or Denver’s 16th street, for streets with surface transit: for the pedestrian, it means he can carelessly stroll along the street, and still be back to its starting point with the same well identified transit route.
…Then you start to realize that an “aggressive” pedestrianization of Robson square, not only is not advancing the case of a pedestrian Robson street on its whole 2.2km length, but it is even working against it…
For the beer, What about having it Tuesday 26 ~ 7:30pm , at the Salt building (craft Beer market) at Olympic village ?
if OK, may be we can ask Gordon Price to advise it on his blog (and/or if he has better dates/location to propose).
That Tuesday would not work. How about Wednesday April 27 ? Same time & place (or by the water / Tap & Barrel).
Yes Stanley Park, Robson, Denman and Davie need better transit than a bus. To get people out of their cars a bus is not an option. A subway (or quiet hanging http://www.skytran.com) loop. Then close 50% to 80% of west-end streets, and toll all cars, both driving there and parking: https://pricetags.wordpress.com/2016/03/07/free-parking-is-like-squatting/
Way back when the line was nothing but drawings I complained about the accessibility of the stations and was told that they were being designed with a minimal number of entrances. Possible second entrances were deliberately blocked with equipment rooms or other impediments. I was told it was for “safety reasons”.
So not only is there no entrance at Robson and Granville, it’s virtually impossible to build one in the future.
The opportunity to help people access the system and connect stations to the neighbourhoods through which the train passes was deliberately ignored. The entire line oozes contempt for passengers, especially those with small children, baggage or mobility issues.
Ron, I reply here. (beer stuff below)
Notice first that I explicitly mentioned a focal square (that is one obeying to the schelling focal point theory), what Robson square pretends to be:.
Dom square in Koln, thought popular with tourists, is not a focal square (however it is also serviced by a tram station (Dom) in addition to sit right beside the railway station…)… Other squares you mention be in Amsterdam or Vienna are neither, save for Stephensplatz:
Stephensplatz, Graben in Wien, -> Stephensplatz station (I already answered to you on that)
Come Rotterdam:
van Oldenbarneveltplaatz, yes a good model for Robson:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8192/8148120760_c09a4c80fd_b.jpg
The picture also illustrates that Lijnbaan is well serviced by Transit (no point in the whole precint is further than 200m of a transit stop, However this street is 12 to 18m wide…
Robson with two traffic lanes + bike lanes could still present a wider pedestrian realm…
Other streets you mention are narrower (save for the Binnenwegplein parklet, full of clutter: a symptom of a place to big for people).
Come Prague:
below Na Prikope, is the intersection of 2 subway lines (the Prague subway, with 3 lines, carries on average 600Millions of p/year, Translink skytrains 120M). So here is the exit of the line B:
https://voony.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/mustek-prague.jpg
it naturally leads to the pedestrianized segment of Na Prikope (350m long), and is part of the same pedestrian precinct (no traffic intersection), however you are right it is a block away of Na Prikope: the block… being the building behind the station egress.
(the exit of the line A is a bit down Na Prikope, but still off the street too).
So I will gladly offer you a beer, and explain to you why the above doesn’t apply to Robson.
Thomas and all,
Wednesday 27th, 7:30pm at Tap&Barrel work for me.
Gordon, Is it possible to invite you and all your blog reader to this” fan club party” ?
My point always was that seniors don’t seem to have a problem in Europe where large swaths are car free and transit is often blocks away. That is still the case and your narrow, limited, self imposed restrictions on what you want to define as a car free environment does not change that.
We need urban motor-vehicle-free space in this city and you will have an excuse why there is not one street in the city worthy of it. We have wide streets everywhere so we don’t deserve motor-vehicle-free streets? Robson, Hornby and Water are great contenders for pedestrian-only and they are all served by frequent bus and/or rapid transit within a block.
Don’t make our wide streets an excuse to force pedestrians to always navigate motor vehicles including transit. There are places for car free streets with transit and places for pedestrian only. But Granville demonstrates how mixing in transit does not create a great environment. And they have to reroute buses every time they want to turn it temporarily into one.
Ron, I have asked 2 specific questions.
You answered first by saying there are hundreds of examples, I asked you to be more specific – Ater countless unsucessfull tries, you end up now to question the validity of the questions…
So let me explain again: It is not me pretending that Robson square can become a focal square like Pionner square.
On the square
I infer that a square to work like it ( in a city similar in size to Vancouver) needs to be serviced by transit…(and ideally at the crossing of transit lines).
This theory is grounded on history and anthropology:
-History teach us that squares emerge naturally at road crossing: it is fundamentally a transportation things.
-Anthroplogy teach us that people will meet at location minimizing the aggregated trip distance/time/effort.
-Nowadays, a dominant mode of transportation toward the city center for urban area the size of Vancouver, tend to be Transit: it is also the more visible and less flexible mode of transportation, so that the focal point is overwelmingly decided by how practical it is reached by this mode.
All that is empirically verified both spatially (in despite of many tries, no counter example has been provided) and temporally:
In a Young cities like Vancouver, the focal point tends to have moved over-time: it used to be at Robson square, but now it tends to be Georgia#Granville, and with the extension of the Downtown Eastward, Robson square will become increasingly irrelevant as a meeting point.
On the width of a pedestrian street
“A failed party in the large living room, can be transformed in a success in the tiny kitchen” said an Gehl in Richmond in 2011.
What is expressed here is also some anthropoligal facts (we are a gregarious species):
– a pedestrian place needs to be fill with people otherwise it is a failure – and some basic mathematical facts: it requires 3 time more people to fill up a 80feet wide street than a 30 feet wide one…and those need to come from somewhere..
Again, nowadays, only transit is able to ensure a sufficient level of pedestrain can occur, onf street as wide as Robson.
Most of the North American pedestrians experience have been a failure: is it a reason to dismiss the concept? absolutely no, but you are better to understand how things work first
The Granville transit mall is also a failure: is it a reason to dismiss the concept when such is working flawlessly pretty much everywhere else? …Here again we have to understand our shortcoming and to learn from Europe.
…
Regarding your point the assertion that “Europe where large swaths are car free and transit is often blocks away is not verfied…the general rule is that pedestrian precinct are always serviced directly by transit,unless topography prevent it (what I have already stated before).
That could be the case of Oudekerkspleinn which is a maze of streets, most not much larger than 5m, and still:
https://voony.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/nationalmonument.jpg
This is the short non fully pedestrian street, but working as a shared street, accessing to the Oudekerkspleinn from Dam square (the focal one in Amsterdam, which is surrounded by rail lines as Pionner square, What a surprise?). You are virtually in the same pedestrian priority environment right from the transit station.
Have you also notice also that the Cenotaph makes a nice meeting point: do you understand why?
Hence: more subways required, less wobbly buses. To fund that the city has the tools, but chose not to use them, namely far higher residential property taxes and far higher parking fees in residential streets. Then we could close Denman and Davie too, (and not only Robson and streets north of W-Georgia) and actually get to Stanley Park without a car or bus and make downtown Vancouver attractive. Once you are off the water downtown Vancouver is not very desirable; it is quite ugly/boxy.
==> To get people out of their cars we need to make car use far more expensive and offer rapid alternatives, not merely buses. Vancouver is an utter failure on both fronts.
The best urban plazas and town squares have activated edges – cafes other F&B – and a built form that creates an opening in the urban fabric but is still contained, usually at a 2:1 ratio. This space would have none of that. It doesn’t even anchor the Robson High Street. It’s not place to be… but a place to flow through.
let’s face, sadly as expected by some, the experiment has turned out to be a disaster, and Charles Gauthier, a reasonable person, is able to recognized it. and now call for the return of the trolley
http://www.vancourier.com/news/robson-square-not-working-as-friendly-public-space-bia-1.23152259
how much more time it will take for the author of this post to recognize his misjudgement?
The plan to close off Robson Plaza to vehicle traffic included a plan to program the area, to manage it. That hasn’t happened yet, as far as I can see. Of course, the plaza hasn’t been built yet either. All that has happened is the first stage of traffic diversion.
The issues there are with an illegal drug market. It is a reason to avoid the plaza at the moment. It isn’t a problem with a lack of transit IMO.