Belleville Terminal Concept | Proposed
Posted 14 August 2007 - 04:45 PM
Posted 14 August 2007 - 04:58 PM
I have emailed the Black Ball Transport company saying that I support them by the way and encourage all of those that don't want to see the Coho move to do the same email@example.com also have emailed the cbc and am working on my letters to council.
Posted 14 August 2007 - 05:52 PM
^ Do you think, zoomer? Given that the current parking is significantly below grade/ street level, would it really be impossible to find (& fund) a plan that would keep the parking there, with walkway/ decking / hotel at grade?
I guess I wasn't being clear, as that was my point - it's not really financially possible to have ferry parking "hidden" as part of hotel parking, and I don't want to see surface parking lots.
Yes, the draft proposals (thankfully they are just that!) are very disappointing. Aastra put it best, when he asked "would anybody bother to take a picture of it?". As I previously mentioned, I would love to have the Coho remain a fixture in the inner harbour, but not at any cost. The current facility and more importantly the surface parking lot and the ineffective use of prime waterfront is a tragedy. Someone should go down there and take some pictures of what it looks like now, including that horrible chain fence and a narrow sidewalk on Belleville.
Can anyone think of other mid to large cities which have car ferry terminals right downtown? If so, please post pictures of their docking facilities to see what they done right/wrong, what we can copy or avoid at all costs. It would be cool if the Coho could drop off the foot passengers at the current location, then turn around and drop off the cars in Esquimalt or somewhere else, but this is unfortunately unfeasible.
Posted 14 August 2007 - 06:09 PM
Imagine if the Coho could pull right up alongside the Coast Hotel and if there was an entrance into the parkade from the water side:
Posted 14 August 2007 - 06:24 PM
A new Coho terminal could be built on the giant parking lots at the foot of Fort St. They could even share shore facilities with the float planes and whale watching etc. which are now housed in embarrassing shacks.
-City of Victoria website, 2009
Posted 14 August 2007 - 06:43 PM
Posted 14 August 2007 - 07:18 PM
... it's not really financially possible to have ferry parking "hidden" as part of hotel parking, and I don't want to see surface parking lots.
The current facility and more importantly the surface parking lot and the ineffective use of prime waterfront is a tragedy. Someone should go down there and take some pictures of what it looks like now, including that horrible chain fence and a narrow sidewalk on Belleville.
Hmmm. I don't think that the Coho's surface parking lot is the worst offender down there, and given what the Coho brings in on the positive side of the ledger, I'm not quite sure what the point is in focusing on its negative balance.
In other words, I don't understand why we're picking on the Coho. It makes me think something else is up.
Maybe ferry parking shouldn't be "'hidden' as part of hotel parking" at all. I guess what I'm saying -- and maybe some others -- is "don't focus on the hotel -- that's small potatoes compared to the larger aspect -- i.e., it's a major transportation terminal -- and instead focus on building a major transportation terminal worthy of the name & location, with services (hotel &/or restaurants) as auxiliary, not as prime driver."
If ferry parking isn't "'hidden' as part of hotel parking" it can be addressed rationally and one can see how it could be hidden/ accomodated.
Re. the "tragedy" of what it looks like now: from the street, with trees in foliage, it's not nearly as bad as what it looks like for arrivals. For the latter, it is the shits, but for residents it's not in any way shape or form worse than what we see when we go to the foot of Fort Street.
I still think that moving the Coho is far too high a price to pay, and that in actual fact the ferry's presence does more to create vibrancy there than its parking lots do to take it away.
We should be focusing on the life that ship brings instead of crying over the parking lots it requires. Heck, that latter bit is a design issue -- one of the world's easier ones to fix (provided, that is, you have a good firm working on it, which I guess is something we still need to work on...).
Posted 14 August 2007 - 07:31 PM
-City of Victoria website, 2009
Posted 14 August 2007 - 07:36 PM
Posted 14 August 2007 - 07:57 PM
Is there any compelling reason why the Provincial government shouldn't find the money to fix that site? They're plowing money into Vancouver, but Victoria is supposed to arrange some half-dick P3 arrangement with local hotel jockeys who in turn are also putting everything on the line in a typical Victoria gamble (the old "One Step, Two Step Victoria Boom and Bust") to fix what should be an international gateway?
But the dilemma is the Coho facility can't be fixed without Provincial money.
Wouldn't that be part of the problem? I.e., that in Victoria, things only make sense if they can be monetized for a small group of resource exploiters (in this case tourism/ hotel operators, and in days of yore the seal and whale hunters and the logging industry), who are themselves working off a shaky footing?
If only that site had value for hotel/condominium developers...
If we're going to have this ridiculous paternalistic Provincial government that keeps us all in tutelage, can we at least spread the pain (and the pleasure) more evenly instead of consistently treating Victoria as though it doesn't rate?
Posted 14 August 2007 - 08:11 PM
I'm not sure if I want a car ferry in the inner harbour, unless they can drastically improve the design and efficiently use the land. You mention "building a major transportation terminal", just how major? Would anyone want a Swartz Bay ferry terminal downtown, likely not. Just how big or small is acceptable then? Do we need a car ferry terminal for any practical reason? Perhaps we could have a similar size passenger only ferry that would still make us feel all cozy, without the guilt and complications the vehicle brings.
Posted 14 August 2007 - 08:25 PM
According to the [url=http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070814/NEWS/708140306:e07b5]Peninsula Daily News[/url:e07b5] (also linked to off the T-C page), the Coho brings in 60% of ferry travelers, and it seems the ratio of cars to people is just about 1:4. In other words, for the sake of getting rid of cars, we're willing to get rid of 3 people who will come to Victoria to sightsee, shop, mingle. It's the people bringing the vibrancy, not the cars, and there are 4 people for each car. From the article:
Black Ball Transport has taken to Victoria 131,000 vehicles and 511,000 passengers on average each year for the past 15 years, Burles said.
Since 1960, it has transported to Victoria more than 5 million vehicles and more than 21 million passengers, he said.
The capacity of the Coho is 1,000 people, he added.
"We have the ability to dump 1,000 people at a time."
The Coho also runs year-round, with four round trips in the summer, and it has a reputation for reliability, he said.
"The last time we didn't run was the snowstorm of '96," he said.
As for what kind of terminal: of course I don't want a Swartz Bay in d/t -- that's ridiculous. All we're talking about is a decent terminal, an upgrade -- including hiding the parking/ car aspect artfully (designers can do that, you know, if they're any good that is!). As aastra has pointed out, the Coho hasn't gotten any bigger, the Harbour hasn't gotten any smaller.
What's this all about anyway?
Posted 14 August 2007 - 08:25 PM
1. Being financially realistic is there any way that you could build the project as proposed based on any return of money from that dinky hotel. No. Ok so financially the plan cannot work. So why propose it?
2. If they really want the Coho to move to Esquimalt or Ogden Point then will it not require just as secure a terminal as the one they are building here? I mean the majority of passengers still come on the Coho so if you move it you need a terminal which needs to meet the supposed demands of Homeland security. Why is that easier or cheaper anywhere else?
3. What are the plans for the Anacortes ferry? And as has been stated before if this is about security then what are the plans for the American side?
4. Why does the JBNEA get to speak for all Victorians as part of this group?
Now I would actually not be too upset if the plan was to move the Coho to Ogden point but to say they should move to Esquimalt I would love to know where? Basically this seems like they want to end the Coho run and I want to know why?
Posted 14 August 2007 - 08:27 PM
Posted 14 August 2007 - 08:32 PM
Posted 14 August 2007 - 08:44 PM
Posted 14 August 2007 - 08:56 PM
Whitehall Terminal - Staten Island Ferry
For project info
Posted 14 August 2007 - 08:58 PM
Posted 14 August 2007 - 09:05 PM
There are many ways of configuring this baby.
That's the [url=http://www.carlngray.com.au/panorama/kangaroo/index.htm:dafab]Thornton Street Ferry[/url:dafab]. It's not exactly what we need, but note the almost circular building in the mid-ground, with its brightly lit ground floor. That could be the terminal, with customs/ office space / whatever above. The boardwalk is partially open to what could be a lower level (parking?). A real city twinkles in the background. I don't know, looks interesting, doesn't it?
Posted 14 August 2007 - 09:41 PM
Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users