There are many ways to better showcase marine culture and enrich urban living
Bob Ransford
Sun
When I wrote two weeks ago about Metro Vancouver’s public waterfronts and my sense that they are boring and sterile, I expected I would get some feedback.
In fact, I thought most of that feedback would be from people who disagreed with me. But over nine years of writing this column, I have never received the volume of e-mails from readers as I did on this subject.
Surprisingly, only two were from people who disagreed with my assessment. They reminded me that many people do value their ability to escape to nature by enjoying the spacious, almost meditative, open-to-the-sea or river areas along the water’s edge.
I realize there are many other people out there who also value our waterfronts just the way they are.
Former Vancouver director of planning Larry Beasley, whose understanding of city life is unmatched and whose expertise in urban design is sought around the world, is one of those who believes we got it right when we designed Vancouver’s public waterfront. He reminded me the other day that Vancouver’s 22-kilo-metre seawall was designed to be a place for respite and escape to nature, rather than a centre of community activity and commerce, because that is what most Vancouverites indicated they wanted when City Hall consulted them during the planning of the few large developments that make up most of downtown Vancouver’s waterfront.
But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t talk about alternatives.
My thinking about this was stimulated by a recent visit to Vancouver by Dutch urban waterfront expert Rob Vrolijks. I had the opportunity to tour Vancouver with him. Vrolijks has worked over the past 15 years with local governments and developers in Holland, Belgium, France and England in creating public waterfronts that focus not just on the waterfront edge, but on the water side as well.
Vrolijks pointed out many opportunities for both public and private activities to occur on the water and beyond the shoreline — many of them floating on the water — that would enliven our waterfronts, showcase our marine culture and heritage, and make urban living even more enriching.
For example, in his hometown of Breda in the Netherlands, you can dine on small open barges floating on the river, with special barbecue dinners set up during summer months. In Amsterdam, hundreds of boats nudge each other in a canal on a summer evening to enjoy musical performances from bands on a stage floating in the canal — not unlike the Vancouver Symphony of Fire.
In many European communities, community associations run pleasure boat marinas not unlike our onshore community centres. They are active social centres, not just yacht clubs.
Vrolijks questioned the limited number of floating villages, with only two in Vancouver proper. In many European cities, not only are floating communities made up of small purpose-built floating homes, they also have larger floating “villas” and a wide range of live-aboard boats all in the same floating village. And what if we had a floating farmers’ and fishers’ market?
The most important planning principle guiding the redevelopment of our local urban waterfronts was the reclamation of public ownership of the shoreline and the securing of public access to the water’s edge. That access can be protected while also allowing a more diverse range of uses along the shoreline and into the water. For example, why can’t we have offshore restaurants that extend on piles over the water or float on the water?
All of these ideas are worth considering to plan a more diverse, vibrant and culturally rich public waterfront.
Bob Ransford is a public affairs consultant with COUNTERPOINT Communications Inc. He is a former real estate developer who specializes in urban land use issues. E-mail: [email protected]
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun