This past July, Vancouver City Council asked for additional studies to be done on the proposed Whitecaps Stadium on the Gastown waterfront, which will likely delay the project for another two years. (Link to the city's stadium website here, and a pdf copy of the Initial Review here).
Among the issues that still need to be resolved are the following:
- Improve the stadium's fit with the Gastown neighbourhood
- Resolve concerns regarding the stadium's impact on Gastown's livability
- Resolve the future status and potential development of the remaining port lands
- Ensure adequate street access to the stadium
- Deal with concerns about hazardous cargo moving under the stadium
As a result, the initial review urged the Whitecaps to participate in the City's Central Waterfront Hub and Rail Lands Study, which will be completed in 12 to 18 months' time. This report aims to develop a "detailed Urban Design and Transportation Plan for the Hub area", covering the entire waterfront lands from Howe Street to the foot of Cambie.
It's worthwhile to note that an earlier study from 2005 has already determined that the CPR railyards "are critical to the economic function of the Port and must be retained."
While the Whitecaps said that they were happy with the results of the initial review, some observers believe that the team will have a tough time going ahead with their plans.
As for our opinion, we're coming out against the stadium proposal for two significant reasons.
First, although some of the standard NIMBY arguments are indeed quite weak (ie: noise and crowds will disrupt the neighbourhood), there is merit to concerns that the stadium will have a negative impact on Gastown's revitalization.
While stadium supporters argue that it will bring people into the area, it's well known in urban planning that stadiums create dead zones, sucking life out of neighbourhoods when they're not in use, and forming barriers that discourage pedestrian traffic between lively areas.
(Click on photo for larger picture.)
Indeed, with only 30 potential matches during the summer soccer season, the stadium zone would likely become quite dead during the winter months, when outdoor concerts aren't likely to be booked. It would even be lifeless on most summer days, if events are scheduled in the evenings.
Second, and more significantly, it's worthwhile to consider whether a soccer stadium would be making the best possible use of these prime waterfront lands.
A 1994 study proposed a mix of office and residential buildings in addition to park space over the Port lands. Without question, there is a need for more office space downtown, which could be met by new buildings over the railyards.
Furthermore, the combination of new office buildings, condominiums and park space would probably create a more aesthetically pleasing skyline rather than another box-like structutre along the Gastown waterfront.
Although it remains to be seen what the eventual design and location of the stadium would look like, it's difficult to imagine how such a large, wide structure would be able to integrate with the surrounding neighbourhood and extended seawall walkways.
That's our two bits, anyway. We're interested in hearing arguments to the contrary, since there is a lot of public support for the stadium out there.