Lessons from Vancouver, BC

Image via Wikipedia

The Denver Infill Blog recently had a posting showing some lessons that were learned by a trip to Vancouver, BC.

Lessons from Vancouver

The lessons not only can help Denver but of course be of use to us here in Utah especially as we get closer to the completion of the City Creek project in downtown.

Here is some comments about the priorities in Vancouver:

When asked about the city’s policy and spending priorities within the public realm, the Vancouver planning director said in a very matter-of-fact manner:

1. Pedestrians
2. Bicycles
3. Transit
4. Movement of goods
5. Private automobiles

However, as pointed out in the article it is not just the planning department that has those priorities but also Parks and Recreation, Public Works and from the Mayor down. Vancouver seems to be avoiding the problem that most cities with bickering and different priorities for every department and a lack of working together.

Another interesting comment is that more is expected out of developers than here in the our region or most US cities for that matter. Instead we let developers have free reign and if you try to limit it you always get the cries of "private land rights" and "free enterprise".

The blog also points to the architecture requirements in Vancouver. The buildings are required to be interesting at the top so that buildings have some character. If you look at the new 222 tower and the new residential towers going up in City Creek you will not seeing anything that attracts the eye to the top. In fact the architecture of the buildings is very boring and drab.

Still another benefit of living in downtown Vancouver is the amount of grocery stores and other retailers that cater to the residents of the city. The side benefit of the number of grocery stores in downtown Vancouver is that area residents don't need to drive for quick trips to the store. However, retail isn't forced into every nook and cranny however the ground floors of buidlings must be appealing and pedestrian friendly if it does not have retail.

Finally, and most important Vancouver is more family friendly. Too often all the development in downtown areas is that it primary caters to those without children. However, Vancouver requires a certain number of 3 and 4 bedroom units in condo and apartment complexes that brings more families into the downtown area. In addition Vancouver has plenty of downtown day care centers, schools and other kid friendly spaces.

While Vancouver is unique, there is no reason why we can't take some good ideas from them and apply them to our area.

Suburbs in the Urban Area Part I

Image via Wikipedia

As we draw closer to actually buildings going up at City Creek, there needs to be a basic questioned answered, are the new condos and residential buildings in the complex going to be urban or suburban?

I know what you are thinking; of course they will be urban because they will be in the downtown area. However that is not necessarily true.

When I was in Miami last November for Railvolution, there were a large number of new high rise condominium buildings going up in the downtown area. While this may seem like a good sign, taking a closer look will actually tell you a different story.

While the buildings may look nice from the distance, will they help bring life to the streets and provide easy access to transit service? The answer to these two questions is a big NO.

These high rises in Miami are little more than vertical suburban development.

First of all these buildings are usually several levels of parking followed by the apartments or condos. The sidewalks in front of one building I looked at were nice and wide the only problem being is the building had no real access from street level. While you could enter and exit the building from the first level, it was clear that it was not the front entrance.

While the sidewalk is nice and wide, there are no trees to provide shade from the hot and humid Miami weather. In other words, the residents of this tower are not expected to enjoy Miami’s street life or to take one of several bus routes that pass by the building every hour.

Meanwhile the Miami Metromover has an elevated station right behind the building yet there will be no access from the building to the rail station. If one of the residents was actually going to ride Metromover they would have to walk out that entrance that truly isn’t an entrance, walk around the building then up the stairs to the Metromover.

Despite the fact that there is a major entertainment complex and park right across the street, the building closes off that area to its residents. It is assumed that everyone who lives in this building is totally tied to their automobile and never wants to be away from it.

Buildings need to be part of the community, not segregated from it.

Article Roundup

Top court to hear suit against UTA

City Creek gets updated finish: 2012

LDS-funded downtown SLC revamp aims at 2010 debut

Suburbs, Salt Lake County woo Millcreek

Shuttle system resumes operation in Zion National Park

City Creek Center, Salt Lake City

City Creek Center, Salt Lake City
Originally uploaded by DScott28604

Some have asked the question why should City Creek be designed to blend better in with the community. Some say it is not their responsibility to boost sales along Main Street and help the rest of downtown. While yes, they are not responsible for helping the rest of downtown, it is ironic that they would actually benefit by developing their center so it more integrates with the rest of downtown.

What will City Creek add to the area that it does not already have? Well we do know the area is getting a Harmon's Grocery Store but that is actually separate from the rest of the complex. Beyond that what will set this place apart from say Fashion Place Mall or the new Cottonwood Center?

Actually nothing. In my case if I want to shop at either of the two big retailers that will be in the center, I could do that at Fashion Place Mall. Most of the smaller stores in the center will be the typical chain stores found anywhere else including the new Cottonwood Center which is a half hour walk from my apartment.

So what will draw me or someone like me to the center? Not much. Why should I fight traffic or take two buses just to get to a center that has nothing unique in it? It is ironic that Nordstrom's was also involved in the Riverpark Square in Spokane which is much like City Creek except it is enclosed. It suffers because it offers nothing that the suburban malls do not offer it people have little incentive to shop there unless you live in the downtown area or the immediate vicinity (which I did).

Also notice in the design that the open space only opens up to the Church area to the north and a small section to 100 South. Beyond that there is little focus on the rest of downtown. Instead it is designed for people to drive into the center, do there shopping and leave the area and not share them with the rest of the area. In other words Gateway II.

Now just imagine if the complex was designed so it flowed into the rest of downtown. People would be encouraged to walk around the area instead of shopping there and leaving. It would create new retail opportunities. It would give new life to the stores along Main Street. This would create new marketing dynamics. People would come to the area and spend more time. They would be encouraged to stroll the other streets and find unique shopping opportunities. It would give more reasons for people to travel to downtown.

The City Creek project has the potential to greatly increase the marketability of the area, but not as it stands now.

The Future of Downtown?

downtown Des Moines 061704 (12)
Originally uploaded by SixFive175

Here is a picture of Downtown Des Moines, Iowa. For anyone who listens to the Doug Wright show, you heard him talk about how the downtown street level in Des Moines was dead, dead, dead. The skywalk system much like the one in Spokane killed the downtown street scene.

I know some of you will say that it is only a single bridge. However, City Creek will be the focal point of the "new" downtown. The Skybridge is designed to keep people solely in that development and to move traffic off of Main Street.

To compare look at the Gateway project. That project was also designed to be inclusive and not include the immediate area. Everything is designed to keep people in the complex and does not create an environment that encourages people to walk into neighboring areas.

In fact the most open area is the one that points people to 200 South where the homeless shelter is which also discourages pedestrian traffic.

The city planners should be seeking a complex design that opens out to the neighboring areas, not locks them off. to everything except to what is to the north.

What this must not become is a church or anti-Rocky issue. The issue is, will the City Creek development be like Gateway and lock the neighborhood off or will it become part of the greater downtown area and be an asset that will help bring more life to downtown.

The Problem with Skybridges...

Streets of Reno #6
Originally uploaded by ellen.w

It seems that the sky bridge has become a contentious issue about the City Creek project. Many people seemed to think the sky bridge is wonderful just because Rocky is against it.

I could care less if Rocky loves the thing or hates, I personally think the sky bridge is a very bad idea.

Downtown Reno is the perfect example of what a sky bridge can do. The three main casinos in the are the Circus Circus, Silver Legacy and the El Dorado. All three of the hotels under common ownership are connected to each other via sky walks which you can see to the left of the photo.

The sky bridges are designed for one thing: to keep people in the casinos. On the street level you see a few people but for the most part the pedestrian action is non-existent. In the picture you are looking north toward the Circus Circus. Along the Silver Legacy there is a facade of old looking buildings that are all fake. There is not actually entrances or anything. Even during the day there is very little pedestrian action on the streets.

You can't blame the casinos for wanting to keep all the business to themselves but their actions have largely killed the the rest of the downtown area.

The City Creek sky bridge is also designed to keep people in the development which will choke off pedestrian traffic along Main Street and the surrounding areas.

Another example of what sky bridges do is Downtown Spokane. Spokane built an extensive network of sky bridges during and after Expo 74. What essentially happened was the people moved up. They stopped walking around along the surface streets and only shopped from the sky walks. The street level died as a result and you started getting the impression that Downtown Spokane was dead.

Eventually many of the stores started to close and be turned into offices and the downtown area became a 9 to 5 area. While not all of downtown's problems could be blamed on the sky walks, it was clear that they were a contributing factor to the decline of the area.

It has taken more than a decade for things to start changing in Spokane. There was other issues like a big mall issue but bring back the street life over the last few years has help the downtown area.

While there has been claims that the sky walk at City Creek will have access to the street level, the sky bridge is designed to keep people in the City Creek complex.

People need to not let emotion rule the decision over the sky bridge. Instead let good urban planning that is designed to enhance the entire downtown area, not two single blocks make the decision.