The City of Vancouver issued an 89-page RFP on March 1, 2017 for the next stage of the Greenway — final design, to take the form of a Master Plan. It’s a map of many words to describe the Greenway’s transition from yesterday (derelict railroad), to today (the temporary corridor) to tomorrow: the Arbutus Greenway.
At this moment, the CoV should be in discussion with it’s short-listed proponents. Or perhaps wrangling out contracts.
The RFP contemplates timing (selected excerpts):
- Design workshop (charrette) October 27-29, 2017 (optional – to be confirmed)
- Preferred concept December 22, 2017
- Public Engagement Begins Feb 15, 2018 (to be confirmed)
- Draft Master Plan April 9, 2018
- Final Master Plan Report May 11, 2018
And effort (10,000 to 12,000 hours of work over 12 to 18 months).
The preliminary Project Objectives (page 17, B-8) are still subject to more public consultation, but today look like this (excerpted):
a) Enable people of all ages and abilities to safely and comfortably travel using a variety of non-motorized means between False Creek and the Fraser River: The Arbutus Greenway represents a unique opportunity to introduce safe, comfortable, and barrier-free pathways that will provide connections across the City and have limited encounters with motor vehicles. Safety and accessibility for all users will be key design outcomes against which the project will be measured.
(b) Provide opportunities for a future streetcar to be incorporated into the greenway: The City’s Transportation 2040 Plan envisions a local streetcar service using the corridor and, although it may not be added for many years, the design of the final greenway should anticipate and, to the extent possible, incorporate the physical requirements for a streetcar line. Several alignment options will need to be developed and assessed through the greenway planning process, and the greenway should be designed to minimize extensive reconstruction at the time of streetcar implementation. It is envisioned that this streetcar will be integrated as part of the region’s transit system.
(c) Provide a range of public spaces for people to gather and socialize, support community events and enable artistic expression: In addition to supporting active transportation and a future streetcar, it is envisioned the Arbutus Greenway will become a compelling linear public open space with places for people to pause, sit, gather, socialize, celebrate and recreate. Major public open spaces are expected at Broadway and in Kerrisdale, with minor public spaces where major roads intersect the greenway. Additionally there are significant opportunities to enhance public space and provide diverse gathering and socializing experiences where the greenway meets the seven adjacent parks. Art is also envisioned to be a significant element throughout the greenway. The design process will contemplate opportunities for public spaces and art on City lands both within and adjacent to the corridor.
(d) Improve connections within and across neighbourhoods adjacent to the greenway: The Arbutus Greenway project presents an opportunity to provide walking and cycling connections to and from adjacent neighbourhoods and community destinations (e.g., schools, community centres, etc.) that were discouraged, and in many cases prohibited by the former rail operation. A key component of this work is to develop context-sensitive relationships between the greenway and the seven city parks it abuts.
For me, the most fun part is in Part B (City Requirements). Starting with teasing apart the project into sections: and adding the concept of “precincts” and specific planning areas.
Quoting the RFP:
Kerrisdale Precinct (between W 37th and W 49th Ave) — this area is the primary village node along the greenway, and is layered with First Nation and European settlement history. It once served as the administrative office for the Point Grey Municipality, before Point Grey amalgamated with the City of Vancouver and South Vancouver. And during the 1960s, Kerrisdale was considered one of Vancouver’s ‘complete communities’ due to its mix of commercial and residential development, cultural amenities, recreation facilities and transit connections, including the former ‘Sockeye Special’ interurban.
Broadway Precinct (between W 7th and W 10th Ave) — this area will eventually become a key transit hub with the future streetcar line along the greenway connecting to the Arbutus Station of the Millennium Line SkyTrain extension that will run underneath Broadway. This will be a major transfer location for transit users and a hub of activity for foot and bike traffic. The public space here will need to reflect emerging plans for the Millennium Line Broadway Extension and integrate the various transportation uses and any opportunities for gathering space as well.
There are two planning areas outside of the core boundaries (Figure B-1) that frame the former rail corridor but are considered part of the study area for the design work. Understanding how the greenway extends through these areas will play an instrumental role in how well connected the greenway will be with other parts of the City:
Northern Planning Area: This zone includes the area generally from Burrard Street to Granville Street and from W 5th Avenue to False Creek. The master plan will need to include a design for high-quality greenway connections to the South False Creek
Seawall, Granville Island, Granville Bridge (including a proposed Granville Bridge
greenway) and other existing bike routes, and concepts for how the future streetcar
will link to Granville Island and points east; and,
Southern Planning Area: This zone generally covers an area from Fraser River Park, south to the Fraser River, north to Marine Drive, and east to the Oak Street Bridge. Key considerations include how the greenway meets the Fraser River, future
trails/greenways east and west along the river and how the streetcar line extends to
the east towards the Canada Line and possibly further east. This area is also of
significant cultural importance to the three Nations and a location at which they have an extended historical presence, which the greenway design must acknowledge and respect.
A few random snippets from here and there in the RFP, giving hints of scope and design for the project and the resulting Greenway:
- Raised crossings, grade separation
- Connections and linkages to parks, schools, neighbourhoods, businesses, transit and related Greenways (both north and south)
- Both major (@ Kerrisdale, Broadway) and minor (@ major road intersections) public space designs
- High quality landscape furniture (seating and tables), weather protection
- Washrooms, fountains
- Interactive play, fitness, etc.
- Multi-modal network planning
- Integration of public art (optional)
- Heritage landscape planning (Ed: those blackberry bushes?)
- Integrated commercial activity (patios) — Ed: but no mention of special status for Creme de la Creme retail outlets — a.k.a. Smug Shoppes.
Mark Holland and his very accomplished team did this work already, including months of community consultation and buy-in. They even thought of how it could be financed (which seems to be missing from the new RFP?).
http://parkboardmeetings.vancouver.ca/2006/061030/arbutus_corridor_app_1.pdf
This is the work that used to be done by the very capable Greenways team under the masterful stewardship of genius engineer Doug Smith. The team was interdisciplinary and the practices used on the Ontario and other greenways were demonstration projects of best practices that can be used elsewhere. No need to recreate this wheel with external thinkers, it has already been done. This is a puzzling example of not managing great staff internally and building strong internal expertise that strengthens staff and builds teams across departments.Surprising.
The amount of work needed to be done may have necessitated bringing outside help on board due to the workload (and possibly a shortage) of staff. I also don’t believe having people with a quarter century of public sector project management and urban design behind them doing basic drafting and graphic design will be an efficient use of resources. The City professionals will still have a hand in managing the consultants and will certainly have a place at the table in what will likely be a special committee struck for the project.
Non-motorized means no quiet and fast e-bikes ?
But squeaky ( and slower than e-bikes) street cars ??
This is a good alternative to cars ??
A Bombardier Flexity Outlook can make 70 kph, and a Siemens S70 can make 100; the average e-bike can only make 40. We all know you don’t like trains, Thomas – and that’s a valid opinion – but please don’t argue with the numbers.
If it is at grade on a curvy greenway with kids and bikes and a road every block, and many stops ANY bike will go faster. if you want speed you need a barrier ie high fence. Is this the vision here ? As far as I can see it is a flat surface and a leisurely tram. End to end an e-bike will easily beat it. Easily. A tram there is a dumb idea.
When are we digging to UBC or Jericho Lands ?
– The Arbutus ROW has exactly FIVE curves; the rest is straight. But yes, shoulder-height fences are needed.
– We know nothing about the City’s definition of streetcar; I say “economy SkyTrain,” you say “that trolley from the 20s.” Given that the City’s planning to close some crossings and grade separate others, we’re probably looking at something like a B-Line on rails – WAY faster than any bike.
– No, a dumb idea is having a traffic-free transportation corridor that could connect Marpole, Kerrisdale, Kits, False Creek and downtown within half an hour, then deciding to make it exclusively a leisure route.
– The UBC stretch will get built when it gets built. IIRC, we just voted “No” to providing TransLink our share of the funding, so it’s likely a decade or two away.
To be fair, I think the level of detail required here, esp. for rail transit alignment, etc., will be substantially more extensive – and therefore costlier – than people may think. Heavy engineering requirements way beyond concepts, etc.
Important to justify those cushy well paid jobs at city hall … big studies, loads of “consultation”, reviews of engineering concepts, engagement studies, re-alignment options … how about more housinga long the line or fast tracking other housing proposals for rentals or affordability ?
Come on, Thomas. You know that’s not how government works. That’s someone else’s department. Why don’t you ask them to bring peace to the Middle East while they’re at it?