Skinny Townhouses

20180415_122429.jpg

I love this building. This is three storey walk-up with four units on a typical lot. Half a block long fronting the north-south street.  Typically on this lot arrangement would be one single detached house.  The building matches the style of heritage houses nearby With such great nearby parks and amenities maximizing unit size is the sensible design.

This is the type of “missing middle” development that could work in all neighbourhoods with little fuss.

20180415_122251.jpg

 

Advertisements

Dude where’s my sidewalk?

Today’s walk took me through the Burnaby side of Boundary Road. The cherry blossoms, rain, and daffodils all marked the full arrival of spring. What surprised me was the complete either lack or long gaps of sidewalks in the residential areas. The desire lines of people making it work show in the mud. The pervasive lack of sidewalks in 2018 is really astonishing given the nearby school and no sidewalks on either side of a connecting street. I walked for 15 minutes before finding a connecting sidewalk.

The nearby industrial transition area between the Vancouver and Burnaby residential areas had sidewalks(!) but with newer hydro poles in the middle. The location of these power poles is just awful. For several blocks uphill the let-downs and poles create such a strong deterrent to using the sidewalk, I would never expect anyone carrying or pushing anything to use the sidewalk, which begs the question: who decided the poles should go there?

Such a beautiful neighbourhood with hills and blind corners and no sidewalks. How many of the local children would be allowed to walk to school?

 

20180416_164342.jpg

 

20180416_164346.jpg20180416_164155.jpg

Gentle Density: Duplexes

The new Duplexes in Vancouver have the same massing and height as many of the single detached housing all around them. Unlike the 4-6 storey mid-rise infill projects, these developments have not attracted the usually NIMBY crowd. They raise the question regarding the aesthetic of density: Is it density or the street expression of the density?

The rally against “monster homes” 25 years ago wasn’t about density or height, but rather the aesthetic of housing and the rate of change of neighbourhoods with a strongly English aesthetic. The current fight is against height and the proxy argument for density: parking woes.

So the question remains whether NIMBYism is rooted in anti-change or protection of an aesthetic.

These duplexes incorporate many of the faux heritage treatments the same crowd are defending for single family. If this is the path of least resistance, why not allow them in all RS zones.

20180317_123034.jpg

20180317_123102.jpg

Functional Art

These benches are fantastic. They provide a place to sit down off the main bustle and noise of the nearby street. They are fun nest-like design with wood seats. Kids were playing on them after I took the picture. More of these public spaces would be a great addition to the City.

20180311_132057.jpg

Walk this way

With many changes over the last year this my first post in ages. I love to walk the City without a destination in mind. On this excursion, I found a new sidewalk that works with the trees instead of forcing the straight edge. The City owns the right of way to the fence making this possible. This should be standard practice instead of the exception.

20180325_134730.jpg

Skytrain to UBC

20161203_133746

I have heard a lot of misunderstanding about the decision to terminate the skytrain extension from VCC-Clark at Arbutus. This decision was based on many years of study but can be boiled down to:

  1. The Broadway corridor is the second largest employment area in the province, but tapers off significantly west of Arbutus
  2. The housing densities west of Arbutus do not justify subway service.
  3. Balancing the needs of the rest of the region is a political tight rope  between upgrading existing service and expanding the network south of the Fraser River. The subway could serve as a direct connection to UBC or service the main corridor only. They chose to compromise and choose the later.

This does not make this a good decision, only one made during  anti-urban provincial government and financial uncertainty. This is also a dated decision. Much has changed:

  1. 10 years ago preparing for the Olympics was the focus of all infrastructure projects. The fight over the Canada Line and the deferment of the Evergreen Line preoccupied all the planners and politicians. Despite the issue of capacity and development at UBC accelerating, no strategic visions for the corridor was undertaken. When federal money was promised by the federal liberals, the old plans and studies were dusted off.
  2. The original studies in the 1990s did not anticipate the success of the U-Pass and the B-Line and recommended the west terminus to be at Arbutus. The amount of people taking transit past Arbutus has increased substantially during the off and on again planning for this corridor.
  3. The more recent studies focused on technology and showed routing to UBC, but still built in the option to stop at Arbutus. This in turn gave the policy makers a compromise option, which they took.
  4. UBC identified in the 1990s that a long-term solution for transit would be needed to address future growth in student and campus population.
  5. More recently, the Musquem have released a plan and currently are developing more housing on the eastern borders of campus.
  6. And then last year the out of the blue Jericho Lands sale of federal and provincial properties to local First Nations. The planned development of this site may take a decade to start, but the long-term impact is a massive increase of housing not anticipated in any transportation plan. The conservative estimates would put a huge increase of traffic on the westside without a stronger direct transit service. (The #4 is already full during the commute.)

I am optimistic that the line will go to UBC eventually just as the original Expo Line was built in stages. However this is a great opportunity to catch up service in the east of the corridor and have the service in place before the massive develop in the west. I would suggest:

  1. UBC and the Local First Nations come together and offer to pay for stations at Jericho, East UBC, and Central UBC. They can offset the cost with a transit levy or development just as YVR did.
  2. The senior levels of government fund the tunnelling. The Federal government has an obligation to provide the same services to First Nations as the rest of the population. First Nations rarely receive transit in any form. This would be a great opportunity. If the Province is serious about supporting students, ending the sardine service would not only provide better service, but would free up more buses to be redeployed.

The downside of not extending the line will be traffic in the westside of the City and the bottleneck at Arbutus for the bus transfers. I do agree the subway will make a huge difference but ending at Arbutus will appear short-sighted to all once in service.