Vancouver - Greater Greater Washington

And...

Mon, 12 Nov 2012 09:25:00 EDT

80% of transit-related ballot initiatives passed this year. (Streetsblog) ... Watch a video of one day of Vancouver's transit network. (Human Transit) ... Philadelphia's center city housing market has been more resilient than the suburbs. (Streetsblog)

Comment

Could Vancouver's ferries work in the Anacostia?

Mon, 01 Oct 2012 11:51:00 EDT

by David Alpert

A fleet of tiny ferries zigzags back and forth between neighborhoods and major tourist attractions on both sides of Vancouver's False Creek. Could the same work on the Anacostia River, connecting sites on Buzzard Point, Near Southeast, Poplar Point and Anacostia Park?

Photo by Potjie on Flickr.

When visiting Vancouver a few years ago, Greater Greater Wife and I took a hop on-hop off bus tour. When we got to the city's aquatic center, the guide suggested catching a small ferry to Granville Island, where a major food market draws locals and tourists. After we took in the market, we rode the ferry to other neighborhoods where we could get back on the bus.

Most ferries we're familiar with in eastern US cities are huge 1,000 passenger, car-carrying ferries like the Cape May-Lewes ferry, or 150-250 passenger water taxis like in New York. These ferries are far, far smaller, closer to the size of a van and hold only 12 or 20 passengers.

Top: The Spirit of False Creek 3. Bottom left: Cape May-Lewes ferry.
Bottom right: NY water taxi. Images from Wikipedia.

An operator stands on a platform in the center and drives the boat with a few joysticks and handles, while passengers sit around the edges. It operates a lot like a bus; in fact, the drivers even cruise past some of the docks and won't stop if nobody's waiting to get on or off.

The False Creek ferries only ply a route about 2 miles from end to end as the crow flies, or 3 route miles, zigzagging back and forth across the waterway.

Besides Granville Island and the science museum, they stop at a maritime museum, science museum, and a space museum with a planetarium and observatory. A stop in Stamps Landing takes you to a neighborhood with a lot of restaurants, and another, Yaletown, is a district with many new condo towers.

False Creek Ferries route map.

Each stop is only about 2-5 minutes apart, and costs $3.25 to $6.50 CAD depending on how far you go. The most popular route, the aquatic center to Granville Island, runs every 5 minutes from 7 am to 9 pm, or 10:30 pm in the summer. The other routes run every 15 minutes from about 9 am to 5-6 pm (depending on destination) in the winter and 7-9 pm during summer.

Best of all, the ferries actually operate completely self-sufficiently. In fact, there are 2 ferry companies that compete with one another!

Is this relevant to DC? It turns out that False Creek is about the size of the Anacostia:

False Creek (top) and Anacostia River (bottom) at the same scale. Images from Google Maps.

While not very wide, the Anacostia is a mighty gulf separating two sides of the river. For a long time, there was little on the banks of the Anacostia, on either side. But that is changing. We already have the ballpark, and Yards Park. Buzzard Point could get a soccer stadium.

On the east, Poplar Point is slated for development, possibly including a boulevard from Anacostia Metro to the water's edge. Historic Anacostia is not far from the river. Plus, if DC builds the 11th Street Recreation Bridge, we could have a significant attraction right on the river.

A ferry bouncing back and forth across the river, with stops at all of these attractions, could bring the two sides closer together than ever before and make the water a public space. These 7 stops cover a route about 2 miles long, or about the same length as the part of the the False Creek Ferries route network east of Granville Island.

Potential ferry stops on the Anacostia. Image by the author on Google Maps.

The Buzzard Point stop would be near a future soccer stadium and the Poplar Point stop at the end of a retail-lined avenue leading to Anacostia Metro. A stop at the 11th Street recreation bridge would connect directly to the streetcar and to all of the activities on the bridge, as well as being a short walk to Historic Anacostia.

A set of office buildings is going in the triangle east of the 11th Street Bridge and south of the freeway, and once the freeway segment to Barney Circle gets turned into a boulevard, there could be a pedestrian connection from the water up to Capitol Hill and Potomac Avenue Metro. Sadly, the CSX railroad bridge is too low for boats to travel under, so the ferries couldn't reach Hill East.

None of this precludes other types of ferries, like the longer-distance water taxis from places like Alexandria or Georgetown, or even farther south in Virginia, if those make sense. Those would use larger boats, running much less often.

Could this ferry system work here? I'll give my take in Part 2. Meanwhile, what do you think?

23 comments

Vancouver-style Anacostia ferries and the Water Mall (Oct 2, 2012)
Balance the flow, shorten the leg (Apr 14, 2009)
Development remains elusive at Poplar Point (Dec 7, 2011)
Get the Florida out of the Rhode Island Avenue streetcar (Nov 2, 2009)
Poplar Point planners present possibilities (Jul 23, 2009)

The mixed bag of the Olympics

Sat, 28 Jul 2012 11:19:00 EDT

by Steven Yates

Hosting the Olympics can be costly for cities, like it was for Montreal, but it can also be a catalyst for positive changes, like it was for Vancouver. (Atlantic Cities)

Comment

Vancouver's Larry Beasley talks DC's Height Act in forum Tuesday, live chat Wednesday (May 17, 2010)

A real frequency map

Tue, 03 Apr 2012 09:04:00 EDT

by David Edmondson

Vancouver, BC, has an extensive frequent bus network, and at last TransLink has released a frequent bus map to match. Though DC has experimented with frequency maps before, nothing has come of it. (Human Transit)

Comment

WMATA creates 15-minute bus map (Nov 21, 2010)
Frequency and real-time info help transit riders most (Jan 25, 2012)
Bus frequency map (Apr 14, 2009)
Would personalized "spider maps" be useful for DC? (Aug 18, 2011)
Android phones can now give real-time transit directions (Jul 7, 2011)

Micro living for the masses

Sat, 31 Dec 2011 10:11:00 EDT

by David Edmondson

For only $850 per month, Vancouver renters get 291 square feet of their own in the downtown core. The apartments show just how much demand there is for urban living. (Grist, Dan Reed)

Comment

Low rent for metal tenants (Apr 15, 2006)
Living may actually be cheaper in the region's core (Aug 3, 2011)
Vancouver's Larry Beasley talks DC's Height Act in forum Tuesday, live chat Wednesday (May 17, 2010)

Vancouver tackles homelessnes

Sat, 30 Jul 2011 12:53:00 EDT

by Eric Fidler

Vancouver will offer $44M in land and grants to developers to create 38,000 units of affordable housing. The plan is to end homelessness, but will benefit many others, too. (Vancouver Sun)

Comment

DC poised to relax affordable housing in Waterfront deal (Dec 20, 2010)
Homeless shelters reaching a crisis (Jul 17, 2009)
Delay scuttles affordable housing at 14th and U (Jul 28, 2008)
Still not inclusionary: Council blasts Fenty's inaction (May 1, 2009)
Keep inclusionary zoning housing affordable (Sep 22, 2010)

Just try following speed limits

Wed, 27 Jul 2011 08:24:00 EDT

by David Alpert

A columnist tries obeying all speed limit laws and finds himself the object of much driver scorn. But science says it's false that "keeping up with traffic" is the safest behavior. Can this put to rest the myth that all cyclists are scofflaws and all drivers follow the law? (Vancouver Sun, The Urban Country)

Comment

Speed limits don't match road designs (Mar 23, 2009)
Design for speed, collect the dough (Feb 12, 2009)
Enforce bicycle laws, but the right laws (Jan 16, 2009)
Outrage against enforcement is unsafe at any speed (Sep 22, 2009)
Lower speed limits, wider lanes won't fix the GW Parkway (Jul 2, 2008)

And...

Tue, 09 Nov 2010 08:17:00 EDT

by Erik Weber

Over the weekend DDOT converted the 15th Street cycle track to two-way. (BeyondDC) ... A long abandoned building on H Street in downtown DC will remain empty for the foreseeable future because the Secret Service supposedly can't afford to renovate it. (DCmud) ... Since Vancouver only allows helmet-less cycling if wearing one interferes with religious practices, local activists founded the Church of Sit-up Cycling. (District Citizen Cycling)

Comment

Video for Vancouver lanes

Sun, 20 Jun 2010 10:32:18 EDT

by David Alpert

Vancouver created a video to illustrate their new 2-way separated bike lanes. They are testing three kinds of barriers: parked cars, planters, and bike racks. (Stephen Miller)

Comment

Vancouver's Beasley: Tinker with height limit very carefully

Wed, 19 May 2010 10:32:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Last night, Vancouver planner Larry Beasley praised tall buildings, but also praised Washington's lack of them. He argued it could benefit DC to allow height in narrowly circumscribed areas outside downtown, but cautioned DC to be very mindful of the consequent risk.

Photo by _Tawcan.

Tall buildings transformed Vancouver into a world-class city, attracting tourists, knowledge workers and financial investment and accommodating many people comfortably on a small peninsula. It's created a beautiful skyline, with elegantly sculpted towers piercing the sky, but also walkable neighborhoods and active streets.

Vancouver has achieved this through their own breed of tower-building, "Vancouverism." This involves giving great care to all three parts of a tall building: the base, the tower, and the top. The base must directly address the street, filling space at a modest height compatible with other buildings.

In residential areas, they places townhouses in the base, while in commercial areas maximize the transparency of ground-floor windows. In all areas, they put as much retail into the base as the area can support. As Beasley put it, the base must be "gently giving to the street, rather than harsh, brutal, and awesomely out of scale."

The tower itself is then set back to limit its impact on pedestrians, to make it "float out of consciousness." It must slim down as it rises, rather than blindly duplicating each floor plan on successively higher floors. And the top is where some extra artistry comes in, to avoid the bland flatness of many modern buildings while also not becoming "clownish."

Vancouver also clusters the buildings into "constallations," in an artistic "composition that makes a statement" and also ensures views of the sky through the cluster. Vancouver's clusters of towers seem to point into the sky, but not blot it out.

Photo by CanadaGood.

In essence, Vancouver is what the mid-century modernists like Le Corbusier would have built if they had the benefit of decades of experience. They thought widely-spaced towers beautiful and believed they would enhance the quality of life.

Separated by acres of empty land and interconnected by high-speed expressways, they did the opposite, but in Vancouver, this basic aesthetic lives and succeeds because the towers are only a small piece of the puzzle.

Vancouver does not simply permit tall buildings. They extract significant public amenities from them. Developers can only build if they offer these amenities, and a system of bonus densities along with a more discretionary approval process that gives officials leeway to shape projects has helped Vancouver wring nearly every amenity they could think of out of developing their city in recent decades.

In most cities, Beasley teaches how to manage tall buildings because those cities are inevitably going to build tall. However, unlike most cities, Washington, DC has kept a low skyline through the 100-year-old Height Act.

Photo by joshbousel.

That height limit brings many benefits of its own. For one thing, it makes DC particularly notable and memorable, which Beasley pointed out is increasingly valuable in a world economy where most mid-sized cities are increasingly undifferentiated and unremarkable.

It draws tourism, gives greater prominence to key national symbols, and created a "coherent frame of walls around ceremonial spaces." It also reduces the economic incentive to tear down historic buildings.

Of course, as we've discussed here and one questioner pointed out, the value for tourists and the framing of monuments and civic buildings doesn't require extending the height limit to the entire District. Few tourists venture beyond the central neighborhoods and few viewsheds extend past the L'Enfant City. Rosslyn has tall buildings and that hasn't diminished the uniqueness of downtown DC; in some ways, it's accentuated it.

Beasley argued that should DC allow greater heights, it should create a "no go zone" for certain distances from the monumental core. It should not allow heights in historic areas, or on high points in the city, which should remain either natural or host "important public edifices" like the National Cathedral.

Buenos Aires. Not what DC wants to look like. Photo by Natalia Romay.

More importantly, Beasley cautioned against any allowance for greater heights in random and scattered locations. He showed some very compelling photographs of Buenos Aires, which has allowed a variety of tall buildings in an otherwise low-rise city. They have created an unpleasant effect of "increasing confusion" in the skyline, he argued.

If DC were to allow greater heights, Beasley's suggestion would be to do so in a single, small area where there is substantial community support and a desire for specific amenities. Any increases must be tied to those particular amenities. In addition, DC must engage in "thoughtful planning" and a "deliberate urban design analysis" to sculpt any cluster of towers.

For example, if it's not too close to the core, I could see this making some sense in NoMA where there are already tall buildings and few to no historic structures but a distinct lack of public parkland. Could a constellation of such towers make it economically possible to leave one or more areas completely empty and fund construction and maintenance of parks?

However, any height increase, Beasley argued, will need to be significant. DC could start pushing its envelopes slightly, such as allowing human occupancy space in the mechanical penthouses that current law allows over height limits as long as they are set back from the edges of buildings. It could give small density bonuses here and there in the more numerous areas where zoning, not the height limit, restricts buildings.

However, this would not yield meaningful community amenities. The cost of providing residential use in a commercial building is enough that a developer would probably not add it for only a floor or two of extra height, as Dan suggested.

Residents often oppose tall buildings, both because they can disrupt their "intuitive comfort" with the city and also specifically impact privacy, height, or views. However, in exchange for clear and desirable amenities, along with good design, in his experience many residents can ultimately support these projects.

Still, is it worth the risk? Beasley is not so sure. To him, as a visitor, DC has such unique qualities and such an extraordinary accomplishment in its height limits.

Beasley will be join us to continue the conversation for a live chat at 11:00 this morning. What questions do you have for him?

27 comments

Vancouver's Larry Beasley talks DC's Height Act in forum Tuesday, live chat Wednesday (May 17, 2010)
Live chat with Larry Beasley on DC's height limit (May 19, 2010)
GGW debates: the Height Act (Nov 23, 2010)
Added height with design review proposed for Union Station railyards, Lower Barracks Row (Dec 14, 2010)
Would a residential height bonus improve downtown? (Apr 28, 2010)

Vancouver's Larry Beasley talks DC's Height Act in forum Tuesday, live chat Wednesday

Mon, 17 May 2010 14:28:00 EDT

by David Alpert

One of the perennial topics for debate in Washington, DC is the 1910 Height of Buildings Act, which limited tall buildings and created the current "low-rise" skyline. Now, the Act is 100 years old. Has it served DC well or poorly?

Vancouver's Yaletown.

Tomorrow, former Vancouver Planning Director Larry Beasley will talk about the Height Act at an NCPC forum, 6:30 pm at the Navy Memorial. Then, Mr. Beasley will come online to join us for a chat at 11 am Wednesday.

Vancouver has achieved tremendous success specifically through building high-rises. This has allowed the area to grow and prosper without massive suburban sprawl, and Vancouver neighborhoods have become livable, walkable, and lively.

Supporters of DC's height limit, on the other hand, argue that the limit forces development of areas adjacent to downtown, like NoMA and the Capitol Riverfront for office districts, instead of concentrating jobs in downtown with dead areas and parking lots adjacent.

Who is right? Does the height limit make DC a more livable city or keep it from achieving its potential? Maybe DC should raise the limit in key areas outside downtown? After all, Rosslyn has tall buildings, and it's closer to the Mall than Anacostia or Fort Totten. Or is spreading out office space inefficient?

Sometimes, tall buildings turn into mere "towers in the park", gaining a lot of height but not much density. On the other hand, the limit makes developers mainly build giant boxes, to take maximum advantage of the limited building envelope.

Is it worthwhile to maintain a certain aesthetic of lower buildings? Vancouver's towers don't create "canyon effects" or dark streets, but do form soaring, glass slivers reaching into the sky. Some like that, some don't. How worthwhile is maintaining the look if it increase sprawl? Does it, or do people just want single-family houses even if they're two hours from downtown?

To attend the talk, RSVP at NCPC's page. They anticipate the event filling up, meaning walk-ins might not be able to get in. To attend the live chat, just come online here at 11 am on Wednesday.

In the meantime, please submit questions you'd like to ask Mr. Beasley. We'll also formulate some questions based on the topics that arise at the forum.

38 comments

Vancouver's Beasley: Tinker with height limit very carefully (May 19, 2010)
Live chat with Larry Beasley on DC's height limit (May 19, 2010)
Live chat: Ron Carlee, Wednesday at noon (Aug 24, 2009)
At-large forum Thursday, plus Weaver and Mara live chats (Jan 31, 2011)
Live chat on federal Comprehensive Plan, tomorrow at noon (Nov 15, 2010)

Driverless trains?

Sun, 21 Feb 2010 10:11:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Vancouver has trains without drivers. Vancouver has 5 minute headways late at night. This is not a coincidence. However, driverless trains are really expensive. (Human Transit, Michael P)

Comment

Lock 'em up or build 'em lanes

Tue, 18 Aug 2009 04:07:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Continuing the cyclists vs. those who want cyclists to act differently debate, the Post letters include one non-cyclist who sees bicycle infractions daily (but not driver or pedestrian infractions?) and another calling for buffered lanes ("cycle tracks") (via WashCycle). A Vancouver Sun letter writer takes the "lock up cyclists" mentality through reductio ad absurdum and calls for the arrest of sprawl developers, city planners, SUV drivers, anti neighbors, and everyone else who, besides bicyclists, contributes to traffic jams.

Comment

Giving a lane to bikes makes all traffic better

Fri, 17 Jul 2009 10:27:00 EDT

by David Alpert

Vancouver recently shut down a lane of traffic on a congested bridge for bikes. Despite predictions of disaster, traffic flowed smoothly. (The Province via Freakonomics, RDHD, Stan Y.)

Comment

Transportation across the nation: Hot chicks edition

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:18:23 EDT

by David Alpert

San Jose light rail. Image by alberth2 on Flickr.

"Hot chicks" the canaries in the BRT coal mine: We'll know if Minneapolis' BRT is a success if it draws "attractive young females," claims one project consultant. I'd guess it's really about the young and the female, and talking about looks generates articles and mentions on blogs but really has less to do with it. (Minneapolis Star-Tribune via The Overhead Wire)

Bus riders opposing LA rail expansion: A proposed Los Angeles sales tax to pay for transit will mostly go toward subway extensions through the Westside and to LAX, causing anti-taxers in the San Fernando Valley to join with low-income advocates of the Bus Riders' Union to oppose the plan. But wouldn't reducing vehicle traffic in those central areas make transportation easier for farther-out drivers, too? (LA Weekly)

San Jose plans density along light-rail: The city wants to transform a low-density area of mostly office parks, with a fairly underutilized light rail line, into a denser, more urban, mixed-use community. If there's a place where a new city would make some sense and not rile up too much NIMBYism, this is probably the spot. (SF Chronicle)

Creative living arrangements in Vancouver: With sky-high housing prices, Vancouver residents are breaking the traditional single-family home mold: buying houses in groups, moving in next to friends to share backyards, and raising families in small, urban spaces. (Vancouver Magazine)

Many of these links via Planetizen.

4 comments

Vancouver's Larry Beasley talks DC's Height Act in forum Tuesday, live chat Wednesday (May 17, 2010)
Virginia tea party opposes less government regulation with anti-Smart Growth, "eco-extremist" hysteria (Feb 5, 2011)
Walkability's comeback (Feb 4, 2008)
Families, community, and the West End (Jun 17, 2008)
Westwood Station (Jan 21, 2006)

Juno's neighborhood is the better one

Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:41:44 EDT

by David Alpert

In the (excellent) film Juno, the title character's lower middle class family lives in an old neighborhood with small houses, while the rich potential adoptive parents (the Lorings) live in a shiny new suburb with huge houses on big lots. But as it turns out, Juno's neighborhood is more expensive than the Lorings'! Yup, the areas of Vancouver where Juno's neighborhood was filmed—older areas where you can walk to the store for a pregnancy test and some Sunny D, or run to school—are now more desirable and fetch higher house prices than the eastern gated suburbs where the Lorings' house was filmed. While our films still reflect the ingrained cultural attitude that newer, bigger houses on bigger lots in distant suburbs are more desirable, the reality on the ground is quite the opposite.

3 comments

Vancouver's Larry Beasley talks DC's Height Act in forum Tuesday, live chat Wednesday (May 17, 2010)
"Saving" a neighborhood in order to destroy it (Jun 29, 2007)
Arlington rental proposal brings out immigrant phobia (May 14, 2008)
DC's ridiculous precinct boundaries (Sep 10, 2008)
Not your mother's cities (Dec 30, 2008)