Waterfront
#1
Posted 22 February 2007 - 03:12 PM
The Waterfront Renaissance:
Waterfronts are inextricably linked to the identity and vitality of cities. As many cities rediscover their roots on the river, lake or sea, we have a remarkable opportunity to create a new generation of great public spaces.
http://www.pps.org/i...r/february2007/
#2
Posted 22 February 2007 - 03:35 PM
I found the pitfalls article connected to the main one very interesting. Our harbour is such a disaster that they did not even consider that there may be a city out there squandering there harbour in worse ways then the examples shown. Those parking lots are the true digrace of this city not some silly tourist ad.
Check it out. Vancouver gets one tick against for the Concert Properties area.
http://www.pps.org/info/newsletter/february2007/waterfronts_gone_wrong
#3
Posted 22 February 2007 - 04:50 PM
I don't agree with these "single use" criticisms of the north side of False Creek. It's a near perfect waterfront residential area. For crying out loud, it can be absolutely packed with people on nice days. Isn't that a fair measure of success? There are playfields, there's a community centre, there are cafes and restaurants, there are even stadiums and big box stores...set back from the water about the distance of one city block, which is very good because if they were right along the water that waterfront would absolutely suck.
#4
Posted 22 February 2007 - 04:52 PM
Mistake #1: Single-Use Developments, Not Multi-Purpose Destinations
Mistake #2: Domination by Autos
Mistake #3: Too Much Passive Space or Too Much Recreation
Mistake #4: Private Control, not Public Access
Mistake #5: Lack of Destinations
Mistake #6: A Process Driven by Development, Not by Community
Mistake #7: Design Statements
#5
Posted 22 February 2007 - 05:08 PM
Victoria's Songhees might just be the best (worst) example in Canada in this regard.
Mistake #2: Domination by Autos
Wharf Street parking lots.
Mistake #3: Too Much Passive Space or Too Much Recreation
Victoria's inner harbour doesn't do too badly in this regard, does it? Then again, Bayview will soon be introducing new passive space on the Songhees (like we needed it).
Mistake #4: Private Control, not Public Access
Victoria is slowly but surely improving in this regard. Redevelopment of formerly private industrial properties has expanded public waterfront access immensely.
Mistake #5: Lack of Destinations
The quashed Songhees marina would have been something of a positive in this regard. Just about anything below Wharf Street would be better than what's there now (nothing).
Mistake #6: A Process Driven by Development, Not by Community
I'm not sure I understand this one. Wouldn't the community groups tend to demand the very things they're calling mistakes? I have no doubt this would be the case in Victoria.
Mistake #7: Design Statements
Makes me wish Victoria actually had a design statement on prime waterfront to complain about. What building are you thinking of, m0nkyman?
#6
Posted 22 February 2007 - 05:15 PM
Mistake #1: Single-Use Developments, Not Multi-Purpose Destinations
Victoria's Songhees might just be the best (worst) example in Canada in this regard.
Mistake #2: Domination by Autos
Wharf Street parking lots.
Mistake #3: Too Much Passive Space or Too Much Recreation
Victoria's inner harbour doesn't do too badly in this regard, does it? Then again, Bayview will soon be introducing new passive space on the Songhees (like we needed it).
Mistake #4: Private Control, not Public Access
Victoria is slowly but surely improving in this regard. Redevelopment of formerly private industrial properties has expanded public waterfront access immensely.
Mistake #5: Lack of Destinations
The Songhees marina would have been a positive in this regard.
Mistake #6: A Process Driven by Development, Not by Community
I'm not sure I understand this one. Wouldn't the community groups tend to demand the very things they're calling mistakes? I have no doubt this would be the case in Victoria.
Mistake #7: Design Statements
Makes me wish Victoria actually had a design statement on prime waterfront to complain about. What building are you thinking of, m0nkyman?
Empress/Legislature fit the bill when you look at the role described:
"Many waterfronts today have become the site of stand-alone, iconic buildings. These buildings stand as design statements that neither foster lively public use nor connect their ground floor activity to the surrounding public spaces. In fact, these projects dampen public activity and diminish any sense of place."
#7
Posted 22 February 2007 - 05:17 PM
#8
Posted 22 February 2007 - 05:20 PM
#9
Posted 22 February 2007 - 06:14 PM
http://www.pps.org/i... ... ont_around
12. Make stand-alone, iconic buildings serve multiple functions...
Stockholm's City Hall is not just the 'seat' of local government...An iconic structure can be a boon to the waterfront, so long as it acts as a multi-use destination. On a recent weekend morning in Stockholm, the busiest building along the waterfront was the City Hall. Surrounded by a plaza, park, and courtyards, the building shares its slice of the waterfront with a major pier where boats offer waterfront tours. Clearly, this City Hall is more than a one-dimensional icon, it is also a good neighbor with a strong sense of place. Today's icons should strive to achieve the same flexibility and public-spirited presence.
BTW... I couldn't resist a walk through Songhees to see the Shutter's and the Bayview sites... this bright sunny am.. (took my own advice...)
Have to digest it a bit, a big bit, more to come...
#10
Posted 22 February 2007 - 06:16 PM
We'll have lots to chat about here..
#11
Posted 23 February 2007 - 03:23 PM
Just some thoughts...
#12
Posted 23 February 2007 - 04:39 PM
#13
Posted 23 February 2007 - 04:46 PM
With regards to Clover Point: loose the ring road and add a small parking area closer to Dallas. Clover Point would be a great gathering spot for a picnic and even events if it where just a patch of grass. Maybe a few trees.
#14
Posted 23 February 2007 - 04:48 PM
#15
Posted 23 February 2007 - 09:42 PM
The passive space on Laurel Point is a bit much, you think?
Not when one looks out from the hotel...
The "destination" is Laurel Point itself...
It's a good viewing spot for Tall Ships and planes etc..
and, on a 24/7/360 basis it's a waterside connection between the Inner Harbour and the Middle Harbour....
My big beef about it is the poorly identified access at Bellville and Pendray.. ? and I guess that applies more so to the narrow access points near Laurel Point Inn and Coast.. - an example of a developement driven access solution as opposed to a community planning one..
#16
Posted 23 February 2007 - 11:16 PM
#17
Posted 24 February 2007 - 09:41 AM
#18
Posted 24 February 2007 - 01:18 PM
#19
Posted 02 April 2007 - 06:10 PM
Right now it's guarding the zodiacs and one of the Ocean Magic class Prince of Whales boats...
Other waterfronts have spent so much effort at opening them up to the public, and Victoria is building fences..
Next thing we'll see an advertising banner like the one at Parkside Spa being installed.. (saucey fellow I am today)
#20
Posted 03 April 2007 - 06:39 AM
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