Here is the elephant in the room and its called transportation.
Despite popular opinion that subways are the magical answer to transit needs, they are not and far from it.
In the real world (the world outside the metro Vancouver bubble), subways are only built when ridership on a transit route exceeds about 15,000 persons per hour per direction on a transit route. In Europe, this number is over 20,000 pphpd for two reasons: 1) The modern tram can accommodate traffic flows in excess of 20,000 pphpd and the experience that subways built on lightly used transit routes tend to suck money away from other non subway transit routes.
It is also worthwhile noting, that Thales New Release regarding their winning of the $1.47 billion re-signalling program for the Expo and millennium Lines stated the following:
"When the programme is fully implemented, the Expo Line will be able to accommodate 17,500 passengers per hour per direction, and the Millennium Line will be able to handle 7500 passengers per hour per direction, a 32% and 96% increase respectively."
So, the Broadway subway will have a maximum capacity of one half the capacity deemed necessary for building a subway!
For further insult, if one takes the subway to go to downtown Vancouver, one will have to transfer either onto the capacity constipated Canada Line (it can only operate 2 car trains) or travel further to the Expo Line interchange and face a rather long and unpleasant transfer.
Part of the subway plan is to put bus routes like the Fraser St., Kingsway, and Arbutus terminating at subway stations. This means for many, where there was originally a direct service to downtown Vancouver, one will have to make one or two uncomfortable transfers.
Taking the car will be both much faster and much easier.
For those who think the subway will be expanded to UBC, well think again, ain't going to happen, with one exception and that is the abandonment of the Expo Line extension to Langley (cost adjusted for inflation $4.5 billion and TransLink claims that ridership on that part of the line will be less than the current 99-B express bus) and if allowed, funding will be transferred to the UBC subway. it is interest that $4.5 billion will pay for the Broadway extension to Alma, with aerial viaduct to UBC!
Still, the same issues with the Broadway subway will persist, with ridership being mainly $1 a day U-Pass holding students, which means massive subsidies to keep the subway in operation.
It even gets better. The trains used on the Millennium Line are proprietary and there is only one supplier Alstom and now only one customer, TransLink and when the last paid for train leaves the factory back east, production will cease because no one wants the damn thing.
This now means huge maintenance costs, of both the trains and subways will canalize the rest of the transit system, yet almost useless in attracting potential ridership along the massively densified Broadway.
No wonder TransLink is on the stump pleading for more money.
Within 20 years Broadway will be the scene of daily gridlock and congestion, with streets full of electric cars trying to go where transit doesn't.
E-mail from Kent MacDougall, Rezoning Planner, Aug 9, 2021. Quote: "The Urban Design Panel (UDP) does not approve or refuse projects or make policy decisions."
A copy of the email and 7 months of correspondence with Kent MacDougall is available. Just give me an email address and I will be happy to forward.
Um, the criticism I believe was largely that the modeled towers were far bulkier than was possible, creating a false massing, not that the heights were necessarily wrong ... the post above counters the criticism by addressing that which wasn't criticized, while ignoring that which was. This does not refute the criticism, which remains.
Doing the math on the proposed towers ... the average FSR is about 6.5 and the average height is 18.7 ... so the average floor area is maximally about 4,171sf (assuming 100' lot assemblies) whereas the render was for ~6000+ sf lots ... so the renders showed about 50% extra bulk per floor ... so they were wrong, and saying the heights weren't doesn't change their wrongness.
Math here ... and lo ... I was right then when I suggested that the renders were off by 50% (as in, 50% too much bulk):
Ian, I beg to differ. So far towers proposed have largely been bereft of any podium (one of the criticisms of our modelling). Projects such as Main and 5th (?) and the one opposite VSB on 10th are exazctly as our modelling, i.e., no podium at all. The recent proposals on Shape Your City for bldgs along 7th and 8th Avenues are very blocky with minimal podia, as we modelled. The frontages are typically >100' (that's the minimum) so even with high efficiency cores and small units the floor plates are close to the 600 sq.m. we modelled.
If you look at projects underway, such as Birch and Broadway and Alma and Broadway (the latter outside the BP but a small suite 18 storey highrise) you will see that the floor plates are pretty much what we modeled. We looked at specific market rentals under construction or far along in design. The tiny unit sizes result in additional corridor just to service all of the front doors, further ballooning the floor plates.
What we did not do was flesh out the plates with balconies and articulations. If we had done so we would have courted accusations of designing what we were not retained to do—seriously—the accusations against me were so vague that had we provided more to sink teeth into I wold still be arguing.
The renders are as accurate as possible with the limited data available. I feel that early projects such as Main and 5th, approved with no podium, no balconies and no articulation support rather than contradict our massing.
I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one.
We appreciate someone following what is going on at Vancouver City Hall. If the Vancouver City Council had as much background as Brain Palmquist in architecture and construction we wouldn't have as much rubber stamping of projects from those who are not TECHNICALLY qualified to assess the construction of a building or supporting infrastructure. Therefore Rezoning Approvals by members of the City Council and the Mayor is strictly blind faith.
E-mail from Kent MacDougall, Rezoning Planner, Aug 9, 2021. Quote: The Urban Design Panel (UDP) does not approve or refuse projects or make policy decisions. The Urban Design Panel has been muted from City planning.
Ron, thanks for your kind comments. Wondering if your last sentence ("muted") was by Kent or you? I served on the UDP in the 1990s. At that time the UDP "supported" or "did not support" projects, but decisions were by staff. However, at that time great store was placed in UDP comments. If UDP is now "muted", that in itself is worth knowing about.
Here is the elephant in the room and its called transportation.
Despite popular opinion that subways are the magical answer to transit needs, they are not and far from it.
In the real world (the world outside the metro Vancouver bubble), subways are only built when ridership on a transit route exceeds about 15,000 persons per hour per direction on a transit route. In Europe, this number is over 20,000 pphpd for two reasons: 1) The modern tram can accommodate traffic flows in excess of 20,000 pphpd and the experience that subways built on lightly used transit routes tend to suck money away from other non subway transit routes.
It is also worthwhile noting, that Thales New Release regarding their winning of the $1.47 billion re-signalling program for the Expo and millennium Lines stated the following:
"When the programme is fully implemented, the Expo Line will be able to accommodate 17,500 passengers per hour per direction, and the Millennium Line will be able to handle 7500 passengers per hour per direction, a 32% and 96% increase respectively."
So, the Broadway subway will have a maximum capacity of one half the capacity deemed necessary for building a subway!
For further insult, if one takes the subway to go to downtown Vancouver, one will have to transfer either onto the capacity constipated Canada Line (it can only operate 2 car trains) or travel further to the Expo Line interchange and face a rather long and unpleasant transfer.
Part of the subway plan is to put bus routes like the Fraser St., Kingsway, and Arbutus terminating at subway stations. This means for many, where there was originally a direct service to downtown Vancouver, one will have to make one or two uncomfortable transfers.
Taking the car will be both much faster and much easier.
For those who think the subway will be expanded to UBC, well think again, ain't going to happen, with one exception and that is the abandonment of the Expo Line extension to Langley (cost adjusted for inflation $4.5 billion and TransLink claims that ridership on that part of the line will be less than the current 99-B express bus) and if allowed, funding will be transferred to the UBC subway. it is interest that $4.5 billion will pay for the Broadway extension to Alma, with aerial viaduct to UBC!
Still, the same issues with the Broadway subway will persist, with ridership being mainly $1 a day U-Pass holding students, which means massive subsidies to keep the subway in operation.
It even gets better. The trains used on the Millennium Line are proprietary and there is only one supplier Alstom and now only one customer, TransLink and when the last paid for train leaves the factory back east, production will cease because no one wants the damn thing.
This now means huge maintenance costs, of both the trains and subways will canalize the rest of the transit system, yet almost useless in attracting potential ridership along the massively densified Broadway.
No wonder TransLink is on the stump pleading for more money.
Within 20 years Broadway will be the scene of daily gridlock and congestion, with streets full of electric cars trying to go where transit doesn't.
This is the future folks.
Sadly I agree with all of your analysis. Thanks for reading.
E-mail from Kent MacDougall, Rezoning Planner, Aug 9, 2021. Quote: "The Urban Design Panel (UDP) does not approve or refuse projects or make policy decisions."
A copy of the email and 7 months of correspondence with Kent MacDougall is available. Just give me an email address and I will be happy to forward.
No need for the lengthy correspondence, Ron. The UDP function has not changed , the ? Is to what extent is it being listened to. Cheers
Um, the criticism I believe was largely that the modeled towers were far bulkier than was possible, creating a false massing, not that the heights were necessarily wrong ... the post above counters the criticism by addressing that which wasn't criticized, while ignoring that which was. This does not refute the criticism, which remains.
Doing the math on the proposed towers ... the average FSR is about 6.5 and the average height is 18.7 ... so the average floor area is maximally about 4,171sf (assuming 100' lot assemblies) whereas the render was for ~6000+ sf lots ... so the renders showed about 50% extra bulk per floor ... so they were wrong, and saying the heights weren't doesn't change their wrongness.
Math here ... and lo ... I was right then when I suggested that the renders were off by 50% (as in, 50% too much bulk):
https://x.com/ianwrob/status/1522496619748286465?s=20
Ian, I beg to differ. So far towers proposed have largely been bereft of any podium (one of the criticisms of our modelling). Projects such as Main and 5th (?) and the one opposite VSB on 10th are exazctly as our modelling, i.e., no podium at all. The recent proposals on Shape Your City for bldgs along 7th and 8th Avenues are very blocky with minimal podia, as we modelled. The frontages are typically >100' (that's the minimum) so even with high efficiency cores and small units the floor plates are close to the 600 sq.m. we modelled.
If you look at projects underway, such as Birch and Broadway and Alma and Broadway (the latter outside the BP but a small suite 18 storey highrise) you will see that the floor plates are pretty much what we modeled. We looked at specific market rentals under construction or far along in design. The tiny unit sizes result in additional corridor just to service all of the front doors, further ballooning the floor plates.
What we did not do was flesh out the plates with balconies and articulations. If we had done so we would have courted accusations of designing what we were not retained to do—seriously—the accusations against me were so vague that had we provided more to sink teeth into I wold still be arguing.
The renders are as accurate as possible with the limited data available. I feel that early projects such as Main and 5th, approved with no podium, no balconies and no articulation support rather than contradict our massing.
I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one.
We appreciate someone following what is going on at Vancouver City Hall. If the Vancouver City Council had as much background as Brain Palmquist in architecture and construction we wouldn't have as much rubber stamping of projects from those who are not TECHNICALLY qualified to assess the construction of a building or supporting infrastructure. Therefore Rezoning Approvals by members of the City Council and the Mayor is strictly blind faith.
E-mail from Kent MacDougall, Rezoning Planner, Aug 9, 2021. Quote: The Urban Design Panel (UDP) does not approve or refuse projects or make policy decisions. The Urban Design Panel has been muted from City planning.
Ron, thanks for your kind comments. Wondering if your last sentence ("muted") was by Kent or you? I served on the UDP in the 1990s. At that time the UDP "supported" or "did not support" projects, but decisions were by staff. However, at that time great store was placed in UDP comments. If UDP is now "muted", that in itself is worth knowing about.
Thanks for reading.