The elevated rapid transit line would start from King George SkyTrain station, the terminus of the Expo Line, into the heart of Langley City, running alongside the Fraser Highway.
Où sont les urbanistes enragés et les citoyens qui vont voir leur quartiers coupés?
Regardez sur maps la Fraser Highway et vous verrez quels milieux “urbains” sont traversés.
Parce que Fleetwood, Clayton et Langley sont des regroupements de fermes? Highway est un peu exagéré si on associe à une autoroute. Selon les comparaisons avec Montréal, c’est un gros boulevard. Genre René-Lévesque, mais avec moins d’intersections.
Je vois des tronçons pratiquement dans la cour arrière des unifamiliales. Ça coupe même des parcs. Bref, c’est dans la ligue du REM de l’Est et celui de Taschereau.
Je connais la station King George, je l’ai même utilisé cette année.
Pour que chacun se fasse un avis:
Début de l’extension:
En plein milieu de Fleetwood:
Cloverdale:
Et terminus Langley (Fraser/203rd):
Le parc traversé… est déjà traversé par la Fraser Highway (entre autres axes routiers). Pour ma part; j’estime que la trame urbaine traversée est bien moins… urbanisée que les troncons centraux du feu REM de l’Est. De plus, l’extension va frôler assez peu d’habitations, encore moins d’immeubles résidentiels; et le parcours est excentré lorsque possible, longeant les espaces industriels/commerciaux/bureaux:
Des TOD vont se développer par la suite; en prenant en compte les désagréments de la ligne. Un peu comme la situation actuelle des 3 dernières stations avant extension:
Donc pas comme Kirkland 
S’ils implémentent un Shinkansen sur la côte ouest, notre TGF va en manger des croutes par comparaison…
Here’s a progress update on the Broadway Skytrain extension.
Elsie and Phyllis begin their journey, if only they could continue to UBC.
Ceci n’es qu’un concept pour la Waterfront Station, mais je le trouve très intéressant si quelque chose de similaire fini par arriver!
Si je comprend bien, en 2009 la ville avait fait un concept de redésigne, en espérant qu’un développeur prennent leurs plan et le transforme en projet concrète?, mais rien ne c’est produit 13 ans plus tard (Il y a même eu des idée de stade de baseball… et ben coup donc!).
En 2022 le conseil de ville on décider de revoir cette planification et 6 mois plus tard, The Vancouver office of global architectural firm Perkins&Will, on sortie se concept.
Avant :
Après :
C’est bien beau tous ces trains à Waterfront station… mais pour ça ça va prendre plus de lignes que le WCE…
Je suis perplexe par le sort réservé à la Granville Square, et même de sa voisine contemporaine la PwC Place. 
je vous confirme que ça a fait grand bruit dans le bureau qui a donné son nom à la tour cette semaine 
Heureusement ce n’est qu’un concept.
Ah oui? C’était quoi les critiques?
Perso j’aime ce que je vois, et j’ai visité le coin plus tôt cette année. Il semble y avoir un parallèle avec Hudson Yards de NYC.
Pas vraiment une critique, juste que l’article du Daily Hive a été partagé partout au bureau en disant “Notre tour va disparaitre” 
C’est vraiment surprenant que ça soit considéré. L’immeuble de la PwC a été construite en 2002 et le GS fait tout de même plus de 120m de haut.
Ironiquement, les plans initiaux pour le Granville Square étaient similaires au projet présenté aujourd’hui.
Ce n’est pas considéré. Ce n’est qu’un concept. Extrait de l’article du Daily Hive:
“It should be strongly emphasized that Perkins&Will’s concept is not an actual proposal — its design was created as a case study to ignite public interest and discourse on the forthcoming discussions on the future of Waterfront Station. Such a concept would certainly carry a multi-billion dollar construction cost.”
Est-ce moi ou le zonage et la densité à Vancouver est plus simple à comprendre que celui de Montréal?
By
Amelia Pollard
January 7, 2023 at 9:00 AM EST
(This story is part of “Look at That Building,” a weekly Bloomberg CityLab series about everyday — and not-so-everyday — architecture. Read more from the series, and sign up to get the next story sent directly to your inbox.)
As drivers head from Vancouver’s suburbs to the city’s downtown, they’re now greeted by what looks like a gravity-defying building. The Vancouver House is a 490-foot high-rise teetering on a narrow base, twisting and expanding as it rises. The torquing tower serves as a new gateway to the city, appearing like a half-formed archway that frames the skyline and British Columbia’s North Shore Mountains beyond.
Designing the twisting apartment complex, which includes nearly 500 units, was no easy feat. The lot came with a laundry list of zoning restrictions: The high-rise couldn’t be too close to the street, it had to be at least 30 meters (nearly 100 feet) away from the Granville Bridge and it couldn’t cast shadows on a nearby park. Those constraints left just a small triangular footprint upon which architecture firm Bjarke Ingels Group could erect a skyscraper.
But architects at BIG found a catch to the onerous restrictions: The building only had to be 30 meters from the bridge up until the skyscraper itself reached 30 meters in height, at which point it could widen and turn toward the Granville Bridge. As a result, the team designed the building to start with a triangular footprint which pivoted and expanded as it rose, so that as it nears its highest point, it transforms into a rectangular shape.
“The project is probably shaped more by constraints than by opportunities because of this very limited footprint that we had,” said Thomas Christoffersen, a partner at BIG and one of the principal architects on the Vancouver House, which was orchestrated by Vancouver-based real estate developer Westbank and completed in 2020. The process took a decade and involved nearly 100 of BIG’s employees.
Because of its twisting design, structural engineering played a large role in the construction. BIG consulted with engineering firms Glotman Simpson and Buro Happold to ensure the tower — which steps out around 80 feet — was stable enough to meet stringent building codes in this seismically active city. (The architect declined to disclose how much the Vancouver House cost to build, while Westbank, the developer, didn’t respond to a request for comment.)
“It’s not only bigger on the top,” Christoffersen says. “It’s also asymmetrical.” To counter the heavier side of the building — and prevent it from leaning over — engineers strung cables through its walls to ensure “post-tensioning.” The post-tensioned steel cables, which are also known as tendons, are anchored to 2- to 3-foot-thick concrete walls of the structure’s core in order to keep the building steady.
On top of that, the building’s facade needed flexibility so that it could move more than a typical building does. Although that didn’t have an impact on material used for the exterior, it meant that the firm had to be deliberate about how the exterior walls were put together, choosing larger joints and gaskets between panels to give them a bit more mobility, Christoffersen says.
So commonplace are shiny curtain-walled towers in Vancouver that it’s earned the nickname “City of Glass.” That holds true for the immediate vicinity around the Vancouver House, with the majority of nearby buildings either featuring glass or a matte finish. BIG wanted something different, a material that would reflect the light of its surroundings — especially the sky and sun, Christoffersen says. The architects opted for a glinting facade of stainless steel that frames the building’s recessed balconies. From some close-up angles, it resembles a gleaming beehive.
“The stainless steel really makes it stand out during certain times of the day,” he said. “It also has this changing appearance depending on the time of day and year.”
BIG and Westbank have teamed up on other striking designs that break Canada’s architectural status quo. The two also worked together on what Christoffersen calls a sibling building in Calgary, Alberta, known as the Telus Sky Tower. Like an inverted version of the Vancouver House, the Calgary building has a dramatic slope that narrows toward the top of the skyscraper. The partners are also working on two other buildings in Canada — one more in Vancouver and another in Toronto.
Limiting the shadows that new construction can cast on parks and green spaces is a phenomenon that has sparked debates in other cities. In New York, the outcry over shadows reached a fever pitch around 2014 as a spate of new supertalls went up near Central Park, but has resurfaced in bouts over the years. For the Vancouver House, BIG had to be deliberate about which portion of the lot the skyscraper could stand on in order to ensure that a nearby park received sufficient sunlight throughout the day. The park prevented construction further south, and as a result, left a chunk of land nearby empty. Christoffersen says he likes the differing terrain: “It breaks up the scale of the lot, so it’s not all one development.”
But the residential tower isn’t the only construction BIG was responsible for on the site. The property also includes two adjacent, triangular lots that are sandwiched by the bridge and its off-ramps. The two buildings house a portion of University Canada West and ground-level retail. Lots that corner bridges are often unused — or at the very least, not creatively used — and BIG wanted to change that. Christoffersen says that the firm didn’t build beneath the underpasses, which don’t get much light, but instead built around them.
“We really tried to make something that feels more like a campus,” Christoffersen says. “We wanted to transform this sort of derelict piece of land under some bridges to something that is active and attractive.”
Pendant ce temps, et certes les besoins en logement y sont encore plus criants, 6000 logements prévus sur 4.5 hectares; avec des bureaux et des commerces à Burnaby; à proximité d’autres nouveaux projets de 1400 et 3400 logements; et sans compter le tissu urbain déjà existant.
“Given this site’s strategic location, in close proximity to major transportation infrastructure, as well as adjacency to both high-density mixed use development and large public open spaces, future redevelopment of the area presents a special opportunity to create a diverse, transit-connected, mixed-use neighbourhood with a focus on creating community, as well as employment opportunities and commercial services,” state City staff in their report, noting there will be “opportunities for signature architecture.”
Et on niaise depuis des années pour 6000 logements sur 23 hectares (43 - 20ha pour le futur grand parc) à Namur. Franchement.
Vancouver réussit bien à construire verticalement dans des zones spécifiques, ainsi qu’autour des transports en commun. Mais je mettrais en garde de leur accorder tout crédit. Leur zonage est beaucoup trop restrictif en général pour leurs besoins en logement. C’est bien qu’ils se construisent quelque part , mais dans l’ensemble ils ne sont pas un modèle à suivre. Plus comme un exemple de ce qui se passe lorsque la majeure partie de la ville est interdite à la densité pendant une crise du logement. où vous pouvez construire, vous devez entasser tout le monde.
