mr.x
May 23rd, 2007, 05:40 AM
Proposal – Queen Elizabeth Park
Vancouver Board of Parks and Recreation
Planning Committee Meeting
March 6, 2007
Piet Rutgers introduced John Norton and Richard Henriquez to present a concept proposal to build a privately developed and operated observation tower adjacent to the Bloedel Conservatory and the Plaza at Queen Elizabeth Park. He told the Committee that the views have been progressively obscured by the natural growth of the trees on the site, and that the idea came forward several years ago when the Plaza was designed but was not pursued at that time due to the expense.
John Norton told the Committee that the highest point in Vancouver is located in Queen Elizabeth Park at the top of Little Mountain, and the spectacular view it offered in the past is an asset to the Park Board that has been lost as the trees have grown. He told the Committee that he has reviewed the business case for building an observation tower and marketing it as
Vancouver’s “highest point”, and believes that it is an economically viable proposal that could create a very popular attraction and draw large numbers of people, especially if it is completed by 2010. He would like the Park Board to ask for public input on the concept of an observation tower in Queen Elizabeth Park.
Richard Henriquez explained that the idea for an observation tower began when the Plaza in Queen Elizabeth Park was designed. He presented a concept plan that he recently expanded from earlier sketches, described its features, and noted that although the height in this concept is 150 feet, it will depend on projections of the tower’s life span because trees grow several feet each year.
Piet Rutgers summarized the process that would be followed if the Park Board supports the concept. A Request for Proposals (RFP) will be sent out and responses reviewed and evaluated. Staff would prepare recommendations on the selection of a proposal for the Board’s approval. He noted that the schedule is very tight for completion by 2010.
Discussion
- A member of the Committee asked about fees for entering the proposed tower. The delegation said comparable attractions in the USA charge $10, and noted that many people will be attracted to the highest spot in Vancouver and tour bus business will increase significantly.
- The Committee discussed the integration of the proposed observation tower with the park and asked questions about much parkland would be displaced, shading from the tower, and views of the tower from the rest of the park. A Commissioner suggested that cutting down some trees is an alternative way to recover the view. The delegation noted that cutting trees will provide peek-a-boo views but not reclaim the spectacular views that this location used to offer.
- A Commissioner asked the delegation if a business plan identifying potential revenue opportunities for the Park Board has been developed. The delegation explained that when the Board approves the concept and sends out an RFP, they will include their business plan in their proposal. They expressed confidence that the concept is economical and will be beneficial for both parties.
- The Committee discussed the reduced use of this area of the park and loss of revenues due to recent GVRD, Park Board, and Canada Line construction projects, and acknowledged the need to find ways to encourage people to return to the park.
- A Commissioner identified the contrast between the contemplative nature of the tai chi arbors, the Plaza and the Bloedel Conservatory, and the activity levels of a busy tourist attraction, and asked if this is an appropriate use for the park. A member of the Committee recalled the diverse public response to the development of the Bloedel Conservatory and said that the tower concept should be put out to the public.
- The Committee discussed the integration of an observation tower with the Bloedel Conservatory and the Plaza. The delegation explained that there is not enough time before 2010 to assess and address the technical challenges of the Conservatory.
- Staff explained that a public process on the merits of an observation tower could include these elements: on site signage, a website, stakeholder and user outreach, and an open house. Staff would then report to the Board on the results of the process.
Next Steps
The Planning Committee requested that staff prepare a report on the concept of an observation tower at Queen Elizabeth Park to be submitted to the Board
Next Meeting
The meeting adjourned at 8:15 pm. The next meeting is scheduled for March 20, 2007.
Queen Elizabeth Park tower causes concern
News Features By Matthew Burrows
Publish Date: April 12, 2007
Long-time Riley Park resident and citizen watchdog Ned Jacobs says he is worried that a proposed private observation tower will "severely compromise" the values of Queen Elizabeth Park.
The 56-year-old told the Georgia Straight he has lived in the area since 1980 and was initially drawn to the neighbourhood by the park. Now he is concerned that a potentially "privatized view" from a 40-metre planned observation tower will alter the dynamic of the 53-hectare park and the highest point (at 150 metres) in Vancouver.
"At 10 feet per storey, it's 15 storeys," Jacobs, a part-time Vancouver park board outdoor worker, said of the tower. "The park board is taking this to a whole new realm. This is like putting a balloon up in the sky. The people down below will be like little sticks in the park there. And you can imagine it in the neighbourhood, where you've been used to having this rounded contour of a hill with trees. Suddenly there will be some sort of tower up there."
At the March 6 meeting of the park board planning committee, delegations identified by meeting minutes as Vancouver architect Richard Henriquez and John Norton, both of Observation Tower Inc., explained their idea for an observation tower and presented a concept plan for a "privately developed and operated observation tower adjacent to the [Bloedel] conservatory". The tower, it was claimed, would increase tour-bus business significantly and possibly charge an entrance fee of about $10.
Commissioners–with NPA commissioner Heather Holden as committee chair–allowed the tower concept to come before the full park board, which Henriquez told the Straight is happening "at the end of the month". Park board communications director Joyce Courtney said the date–likely the April 30 meeting at park board headquarters on Beach Avenue–could only be confirmed "one week before", once the April 16 board meeting is done.
Jacobs said he has "lifelong experience of planning and civic issues", thanks to his late mother, famed Toronto urban-affairs expert and author Jane Jacobs. Ned Jacobs said the privatization of part of the Queen Elizabeth Park plaza would be "expensive and unnecessary" and would have no supporting "subway" infrastructure to back it up when traffic increases to the area.
Jacobs said he has helped develop a cheaper "public" alternative to Henriquez's model, with no admission fee, that he claims would clear the tree line currently impeding clearer views of the downtown core.
"Jane called P3s 'monstrous hybrids' of governance and commerce," he said. "Such arrangements can only lead to a conflict of interest. A private company is involved in a monopoly situation, and this could conflict with the public interest over things like extra parking."
NPA commissioner Korina Houghton told the Straight the board "had some concerns" regarding size and the issue of it being in Queen Elizabeth Park. "Frankly, I wouldn't want to see anything too massive."
Independent commissioner Allan De Genova told the Straight he thought the tower looked "edgy" and that "some work still needs to be done". But he said he is not concerned about the potential P3.
"It's private dollars coming in to bring something up to a level I think we need," De Genova said. "To do the [renovation at] Bloedel Conservatory as a whole is half a million dollars. It's been a sinkhole for us. It's old and it's tired and maybe we should be revisiting that."
In closing, Jacobs referred to a May 31, 1999, park board meeting where commissioners–including then–NPA commissioner De Genova–unanimously approved adoption of the Queen Elizabeth Park long-range vision. In the guiding-principles section of the report, they agreed to ensure that any new park buildings or spaces are of a multi-use design and "cater to a variety of different park users and activities". The report also expressed the need to "ensure that all commercial ventures are consistent with this long-range vision for the park".
Publish Date: April 12, 2007
Vancouver Board of Parks and Recreation
Planning Committee Meeting
March 6, 2007
Piet Rutgers introduced John Norton and Richard Henriquez to present a concept proposal to build a privately developed and operated observation tower adjacent to the Bloedel Conservatory and the Plaza at Queen Elizabeth Park. He told the Committee that the views have been progressively obscured by the natural growth of the trees on the site, and that the idea came forward several years ago when the Plaza was designed but was not pursued at that time due to the expense.
John Norton told the Committee that the highest point in Vancouver is located in Queen Elizabeth Park at the top of Little Mountain, and the spectacular view it offered in the past is an asset to the Park Board that has been lost as the trees have grown. He told the Committee that he has reviewed the business case for building an observation tower and marketing it as
Vancouver’s “highest point”, and believes that it is an economically viable proposal that could create a very popular attraction and draw large numbers of people, especially if it is completed by 2010. He would like the Park Board to ask for public input on the concept of an observation tower in Queen Elizabeth Park.
Richard Henriquez explained that the idea for an observation tower began when the Plaza in Queen Elizabeth Park was designed. He presented a concept plan that he recently expanded from earlier sketches, described its features, and noted that although the height in this concept is 150 feet, it will depend on projections of the tower’s life span because trees grow several feet each year.
Piet Rutgers summarized the process that would be followed if the Park Board supports the concept. A Request for Proposals (RFP) will be sent out and responses reviewed and evaluated. Staff would prepare recommendations on the selection of a proposal for the Board’s approval. He noted that the schedule is very tight for completion by 2010.
Discussion
- A member of the Committee asked about fees for entering the proposed tower. The delegation said comparable attractions in the USA charge $10, and noted that many people will be attracted to the highest spot in Vancouver and tour bus business will increase significantly.
- The Committee discussed the integration of the proposed observation tower with the park and asked questions about much parkland would be displaced, shading from the tower, and views of the tower from the rest of the park. A Commissioner suggested that cutting down some trees is an alternative way to recover the view. The delegation noted that cutting trees will provide peek-a-boo views but not reclaim the spectacular views that this location used to offer.
- A Commissioner asked the delegation if a business plan identifying potential revenue opportunities for the Park Board has been developed. The delegation explained that when the Board approves the concept and sends out an RFP, they will include their business plan in their proposal. They expressed confidence that the concept is economical and will be beneficial for both parties.
- The Committee discussed the reduced use of this area of the park and loss of revenues due to recent GVRD, Park Board, and Canada Line construction projects, and acknowledged the need to find ways to encourage people to return to the park.
- A Commissioner identified the contrast between the contemplative nature of the tai chi arbors, the Plaza and the Bloedel Conservatory, and the activity levels of a busy tourist attraction, and asked if this is an appropriate use for the park. A member of the Committee recalled the diverse public response to the development of the Bloedel Conservatory and said that the tower concept should be put out to the public.
- The Committee discussed the integration of an observation tower with the Bloedel Conservatory and the Plaza. The delegation explained that there is not enough time before 2010 to assess and address the technical challenges of the Conservatory.
- Staff explained that a public process on the merits of an observation tower could include these elements: on site signage, a website, stakeholder and user outreach, and an open house. Staff would then report to the Board on the results of the process.
Next Steps
The Planning Committee requested that staff prepare a report on the concept of an observation tower at Queen Elizabeth Park to be submitted to the Board
Next Meeting
The meeting adjourned at 8:15 pm. The next meeting is scheduled for March 20, 2007.
Queen Elizabeth Park tower causes concern
News Features By Matthew Burrows
Publish Date: April 12, 2007
Long-time Riley Park resident and citizen watchdog Ned Jacobs says he is worried that a proposed private observation tower will "severely compromise" the values of Queen Elizabeth Park.
The 56-year-old told the Georgia Straight he has lived in the area since 1980 and was initially drawn to the neighbourhood by the park. Now he is concerned that a potentially "privatized view" from a 40-metre planned observation tower will alter the dynamic of the 53-hectare park and the highest point (at 150 metres) in Vancouver.
"At 10 feet per storey, it's 15 storeys," Jacobs, a part-time Vancouver park board outdoor worker, said of the tower. "The park board is taking this to a whole new realm. This is like putting a balloon up in the sky. The people down below will be like little sticks in the park there. And you can imagine it in the neighbourhood, where you've been used to having this rounded contour of a hill with trees. Suddenly there will be some sort of tower up there."
At the March 6 meeting of the park board planning committee, delegations identified by meeting minutes as Vancouver architect Richard Henriquez and John Norton, both of Observation Tower Inc., explained their idea for an observation tower and presented a concept plan for a "privately developed and operated observation tower adjacent to the [Bloedel] conservatory". The tower, it was claimed, would increase tour-bus business significantly and possibly charge an entrance fee of about $10.
Commissioners–with NPA commissioner Heather Holden as committee chair–allowed the tower concept to come before the full park board, which Henriquez told the Straight is happening "at the end of the month". Park board communications director Joyce Courtney said the date–likely the April 30 meeting at park board headquarters on Beach Avenue–could only be confirmed "one week before", once the April 16 board meeting is done.
Jacobs said he has "lifelong experience of planning and civic issues", thanks to his late mother, famed Toronto urban-affairs expert and author Jane Jacobs. Ned Jacobs said the privatization of part of the Queen Elizabeth Park plaza would be "expensive and unnecessary" and would have no supporting "subway" infrastructure to back it up when traffic increases to the area.
Jacobs said he has helped develop a cheaper "public" alternative to Henriquez's model, with no admission fee, that he claims would clear the tree line currently impeding clearer views of the downtown core.
"Jane called P3s 'monstrous hybrids' of governance and commerce," he said. "Such arrangements can only lead to a conflict of interest. A private company is involved in a monopoly situation, and this could conflict with the public interest over things like extra parking."
NPA commissioner Korina Houghton told the Straight the board "had some concerns" regarding size and the issue of it being in Queen Elizabeth Park. "Frankly, I wouldn't want to see anything too massive."
Independent commissioner Allan De Genova told the Straight he thought the tower looked "edgy" and that "some work still needs to be done". But he said he is not concerned about the potential P3.
"It's private dollars coming in to bring something up to a level I think we need," De Genova said. "To do the [renovation at] Bloedel Conservatory as a whole is half a million dollars. It's been a sinkhole for us. It's old and it's tired and maybe we should be revisiting that."
In closing, Jacobs referred to a May 31, 1999, park board meeting where commissioners–including then–NPA commissioner De Genova–unanimously approved adoption of the Queen Elizabeth Park long-range vision. In the guiding-principles section of the report, they agreed to ensure that any new park buildings or spaces are of a multi-use design and "cater to a variety of different park users and activities". The report also expressed the need to "ensure that all commercial ventures are consistent with this long-range vision for the park".
Publish Date: April 12, 2007