ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

RTS NO. 03227

CC File No. 4151

Meeting: April 24, 2003

TO:

Standing Committee on Planning & Environment

FROM:

General Manager of Parks and Recreation, in consultation with the General Manager of Engineering Services, the Director of Current Planning, the Director Social Planning and the Director of Risk and Emergency Management

SUBJECT:

DEVELOPMENT OF A DOWNTOWN SKATEBOARD FACILITY - QUEBEC & UNION STREETS

 

RECOMMENDATION

CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS

The City Manager notes that in addition to the $195,000 Capital Cost, the annual cost impact on the revenue budget is $14,800 plus lost parking revenue of approximately $40,000. This is a Park Board initiative to provide an increased level of service, therefore, the City Manager recommends C in addition to A and B.

COUNCIL POLICY

The Street and Traffic By-law prohibits skateboarding on streets, except if permitted by Council. On December 11, 2001, Council approved that the Street and Traffic By-law be amended Ato permit the use of skates, skateboards, and push-scooters on minor streets, meaning streets without lane lines or directional dividing lines, and designated bike routes@ for a one-year trial period.

The Parks Control By-law prohibits skateboarding in parks, except in areas where such activity may be designated or permitted. Designated skateboarding facilities currently exist in two parks: China Creek South Park and Hastings Park.

BACKGROUND

The Board=s 2000-2002 Capital Plan included funding to develop skateboarding facilities, including a street- style skateboard >plaza= in or near the downtown core. The creation of such a facility was proposed partly in response to a growing demand for this kind of recreational outlet and partly to mitigate an emerging problem situation.

Since the 1960s, skateboarding has undergone rapid growth throughout North America as a recreational activity, a recognized sport, and a significant component of youth culture. In fact, Vancouver has emerged as an internationally recognized centre of skateboarding, and is the host city for the annual ASlam City Jam@ professional skateboard competition, which attracts about 200 world-class professionals and close to 20,000 spectators.

In the late 1970s, Vancouver built one of the first skateboard bowls in Greater Vancouver at China Creek Park, which today it is considered very small and dated in design. Since then, and primarily over the past decade, skateboard parks have been developed in Burnaby, Coquitlam, Delta, Langley, North Vancouver, Surrey, White Rock and West Vancouver, with several of these municipalities working on or considering second, third or even fourth locations. There are now over thirty skateparks in the Greater Vancouver region.

In 2001, Vancouver opened its second skateboard bowl at Hastings Park, which quickly became a very popular facility. The organizers of ASlam City Jam,@ a major skateboard competition taking place annually at the Pacific Coliseum, have stated that ASlam City Jam is blessed to be located within ollie [i.e. a >skateboard jump= or short] distance of the now world famous Hastings Skate Park.@

A junior skateboard bowl C designed mainly for pre-teen users C is included in the Strathcona Park redevelopment currently in progress. Existing demand could easily warrant the further construction of bowl-type skateboard facilities in other parks, particularly in the south and west sides of Vancouver. In the opinion of staff, however, the more immediate priority is to provide a facility suited to the emerging >street= style of skateboarding, in which participants attempt to negotiate various obstacles of the sort found in downtown plazas and public spaces - e.g. ledges, benches and staircases.

Although not formally sanctioned, street style skateboarding takes place C and is tolerated to a greater or lesser degree C in sections of Coopers Park, Cathedral Square, and Andy Livingstone Park. An additional small installation has been proposed as a component of the Victory Square redevelopment. However, in all these parks, skateboarding is acceptable only to the extent that it does not displace other established uses, or put other users at risk. Demand far exceeds capacity. As a result, many youth skateboard illegally in inappropriate locales and, in the process, cause damage to public and private property.

This report proposes the development of a dedicated skateboard >plaza= similar in appearance and function to other downtown locations where skateboarding takes place, but is in conflict with other established uses. Such a facility will support more effective and consistent enforcement by City Police of the skateboard control by-laws and provide a highly desired amenity for city youth and young adults.

DISCUSSION

Site Selection Criteria
The proposal to develop a street style skateboarding plaza at the intersection of Quebec and Union Streets (appendices A, B & C) is the outcome of a lengthy investigation and analysis involving several candidate sites. Parks, Planning, Police and Engineering staff worked in conjunction with a number of agencies and with the skateboard community to conduct this search. In the process, a list of key criteria were refined and tested with respect to finding an appropriate location:
_ Site in or near the downtown core and immediately developable, within the available budget, either on a temporary or permanent basis,
_ adequate size for proposed use (minimum of about 10,000 square feet),
_ served by public transit,
_ ready access to public washrooms, telephone and drinking water,
_ does not result in displacing a valuable use or group of users,
_ visible from nearby streets and buildings in order to minimize illegal activity or nuisance behaviour at the facility,
_ located in the context of other active and compatible recreational uses,
_ at a sufficient distance from housing, so that residents are not negatively impacted by noise created by skateboarding.

This last criterion effectively limited the site search to a small number of areas in or near downtown which are buffered from existing or potential residential uses. These areas, and the conclusions of staff evaluations pertaining to the feasibility of each, are as follows:
_ the Southeast Shore of False Creek: A number of sites were examined on city-owned lands in South East False Creek, but these proved to be either in conflict with the track layout for the Molson Indy or just too remote from the downtown core and critical amenities such as washrooms, water, and telephone.
_ the False Creek Flats: At the present time and for the foreseeable future, no publicly-owned sites are available for a skateboard plaza in the False Creek Flats, although staff may reexamine this area once some of the planned parks and public open spaces are closer to being developed.

_ the heart of the Central Business District (bounded by Thurlow, Robson, Seymour and Burrard Inlet): Only a handful of publicly-owned sites are available in the heart of the Central Business District: the Hornby Plaza (between Hastings and Cordova Streets), Portal Park (Thurlow and Hastings Streets), Discovery Square (at Burrard SkyTrain Station), Centennial Square (Georgia and Howe Streets) and Robson Square. The first three sites mentioned are too small and the latter two are prime open spaces for public gatherings and events, and therefore all are unsuitable for accommodating a full skateboarding facility.
_ the area near GM Place and Andy Livingstone Park: The proposed site is located in this area on City street under the viaducts near the southeast corner of Andy Livingstone Park Other locations in this general area are either not immediately available, are used for other purposes, or would be extremely costly to develop.

Site Analysis
The proposed site (appendix B) is a triangular section under the Dunsmuir and Georgia Viaducts bounded by Expo Boulevard, Quebec Street and Union Streets. In terms of the siting criteria listed in the previous section, the subject site scores very well, as summarized on the following table:

Site Criteria

Site Scoring (High/medium/Low)

Site in or near the downtown core and immediately developable within the available budget, either on a temporary or permanent basis.

High: Site is mainly a usable hard surface and is wholly on road allowance C Engineering Services has consented to this use.

adequate size for proposed use (minimum of about 10,000 square feet)

High: Area between sidewalks is 40,000 ft2 C assume 50% loss through setbacks, spectator space, etc. = +20,000 ft2 developable

served by public transit

High: The location is easily accessed from the #3 (Main Street) bus and from the Expo SkyTrain line. It is roughly equidistant to two SkyTrain Stations: Stadium (1500 ft) and Main Street (1800 ft).

ready access to public washrooms, telephone and drinking water

High-medium: Andy Livingstone Park fieldhouse is located directly across Union Street. Washrooms are now only open with permitted play on the Park sport fields; active use of the skateboard site will enable these hours to be extended.

does not result in displacing a valuable use or group of users

Medium: The site is currently used as a pay-parking lot, with a capacity of 56 vehicles, generating about $40,000 net annually to the City

visible from nearby streets and buildings in order to minimize illegal activity or nuisance behaviour at the facility

High: Can be monitored by Parks staff and Police on a >drive-by= basis from all sides

located in the context of other active and compatible recreational uses

High: Site is adjacent to Andy Livingstone Park, which has facilities for field sports, tennis, basketball and three children=s playgrounds, and already attracts considerable skateboard activity as well. The wider area is evolving into an entertainment & recreation precinct, some components of which are the Stadiums, Tinseltown, the Seawall, and the park itself.

At a sufficient distance from housing, so that residents are not negatively impacted by noise created by skateboarding

Medium at present time: The site is partially screened by overhead viaducts, and there is a high level of ambient noise, mainly generated by traffic, that will mask the sound of skateboarding. The distances to closest residences are:
_ Citygate (1088 Quebec) 700 ft
_ Solheim Place 900 ft.

_ Europa (International Village) 1000+ ft

Scoring will change to Low in future: Residential unit under construction at Quebec (400 ft distant). Rezoning of former Greyhound property at 900 Quebec will likely place residential units diagonally across Quebec and Prior Streets from the site, within 4-5 years.

Some of the above points require more in-depth discussion:

Site availability: As the site is on road allowance, Engineering Services has jurisdiction over it. Engineering Services has agreed to give Park Board permission to use land inside the sidewalks for the purposes of building and maintaining a skateboard plaza, subject to the following provisions:
_ Engineering to review and approve all works prior to commencement; Park Board would be responsible for obtaining any necessary permits for site development and construction;
_ Engineering would be guaranteed immediate access to all underground services, viaduct columns, and the area in general for viaduct related maintenance;
_ Park Board will be responsible for any costs associated with the installation, operation and maintenance of the site as recreation facility, including garbage cleaning, graffiti removal, and site supervision;
_ Engineering may reclaim all or part of the assigned property to provide for future development of the Viaduct Right of Ways, potential alignment of the Downtown Streetcar line or any other Engineering requirement that may in future arise and, under such circumstances, may terminate the agreement at any time upon 30 days written notice, with the site being returned to previous condition or a condition acceptable to the City Engineer within 60 days of termination;
_ Formal terms of the transfer agreement will be drawn up to the satisfaction of the General Manager of the Park Board, the General Manager of Engineering Services and the Director of Legal Services.

Current use of the site: The pay-parking lot reaches capacity only a handful of times each year; usually the parking lot is half-full or less. In 2001, the parking lot generated $38,000 in net revenue to the City (gross revenue was $56,000). Should Council agree with the conversion of the subject parking lot to a skateboard plaza, part of this revenue would continue to accrue to the City because some parking would relocate to nearby on-street parking meters.

Impact on residential neighbourhoods: A noise level survey conducted last summer at Cathedral Square, with and without skateboarding activity, found that the sound of skateboarding added very little to the ambient noise, which was mainly generated by road traffic. However, the impact to be considered is not just the noise created on site, but also that generated by those choosing to skateboard to and from the site. The route between the site and the Main Street SkyTrain Station passes by several residential towers, and over sections of pavers which generate higher noise levels than asphalt or untextured concrete surfaces. It is therefore preferable that the dominant access to the site be from the Stadium Station, along the south edge of Andy Livingstone Park and removed from existing or potential residential units.

There is already considerable skateboarder use of the ledges, ramps and rails in the park along this route. The ledges on either side of the Carrall Street overpass in Livingstone Park are, for example, very attractive from a practitioner=s perspective. Some reconfiguration of park benches, play apparatus and pathways in the park will be done as part of this project to reinforce the connection between the Stadium Station and the skateboard plaza. >Skateable= surfaces and edges will be hardened appropriately to withstand skateboarding use without aesthetic or functional deterioration. The design imperative with respect to the access route will be to ensure that skateboarding activity meshes safely with other established park uses, including basketball, children=s playgrounds, pedestrian and cycle through-traffic, and casual relaxation.

Similarly, the potential skateboarding routes towards the Main Street SkyTrain Station will be evaluated, and possible modifications identified to discourage skateboard use by those who choose to access the site from this direction.
Trial installation

This report proposes the installation of the downtown skateboard facility on a trial basis, subject to review and evaluation after two years. This review would assess the success of the installation in relation to a number of hoped-for outcomes, including the following:
_ The skateboard facility should be well used and well regarded by skateboarders, and there should be a reduction of skateboarding in inappropriate locations elsewhere in the downtown core.
_ Neighbours should experience the facility as an asset to the community, or certainly not a detriment, comparable to other park amenities. The site should be kept clean, in good order and well maintained. It should be welcoming to both spectators and practitioners.
_ The Police should find that the facility assists their enforcement of skateboard by-laws.

Measurable indicators of the above will include usage statistics, number of police or other emergency calls to the site, and trends with respect to skateboard-related complaints generally. If this project does not have a positive impact, both in terms of service provision and problem reduction, the service can be terminated and the installation dismantled with relative ease.

A second reason for a review after two years is the expectation of significant land uses changes to come in and around the downtown core, and the prospect therefore that a superior location might become available. The review may prompt the relocation of the facility with C if possible and if seen as desirable C more features and an expanded footprint. One possible option may be to move the skateboard plaza west to a city-owned location under the viaducts by Carrall Street when this land is free of its current obligations (estimated to be in the 2005 - 2007 range) with respect to soil remediation.

The objective is to create an attractive gathering place for skateboarders and others who may simply wish to watch the skateboarders exhibit their skills. However, since the installation may be temporary, the component elements should lend themselves to be disassembled and moved, or be of sufficiently low cost to be written off at the end of the trial period. It is envisioned that a number of these components could be >recycled= structures, street furniture and fixtures of the sort already found C and skated on C in the urban environment. Appendix C shows the concept for site development as currently envisaged. All elements would be mounted on the existing asphalt surface, which may need to be re-coated in whole or in part.

To summarize: the proposal is to create a temporary skateboarding facility while continuing the search for a long term solution, either at the subject site or elsewhere. A temporary amenity will address the immediate needs of downtown skateboarders, and at the same time help build public awareness and acceptance of this kind of facility.
Site Use Management

Site Monitoring: Park Board recreation staff will be assigned to monitor the site on a regular basis, develop a rapport with users, and to respond to and mitigate any problems that may arise. There will also be designated responsibility to respond to issues and concerns raised by other park users and local neighbourhood residents.

Graffiti Control: Park Board will contract for daily monitoring and immediate removal of unauthorized graffiti at the site and areas immediately adjacent. Such a practice has been successful in other jurisdictions, most notably at the Shaw Millennium Skateboard Park in Calgary which, after two years of operation, remains graffiti-free. Parks staff will be exploring -- with due public process -- possible installation of youth-created public art or/and a designated Agraffiti wall@ at or near the skateboard plaza.

Consultation Process
There has been and shall continue to be consultation on the design and operation of the skateboard plaza with interested individuals and groups, including:
_ Neighbourhood residents, (see appendix D to this report);
_ Chinatown Merchants, via the Chinatown Revitalization Committee;
_ Downtown business community interests, via the Downtown Business Improvement Association;
_ Other users of Andy Livingstone Park;
_ Skateboarders, via the Vancouver Skate Park Coalition;
_ City staff working in the Downtown East Side, via the DTES Core Staff Committee.

As a result of this public process, and media coverage of the initiative, 28 letters, e-mails and faxes have been received commenting on the proposal. Six (including an e-mail sent on behalf of the Citygate Inter-Tower Committee Afor the 2000 residents of the Citygate Community@ expressed strong opposition. Twenty-two written messages -- mainly from skateboarders, but at least three from local residents -- endorsed the concept of a street-style skatepark at this location.

The concerns of those opposed to the proposal focus not on the idea of a downtown skatepark, but with the location specified. In general, the issues raised fall under two main headings: (1) belief that the site is too close to a residential community and skateboarding and connected activity will have a negative impact on the quality of life in the local community; (2) assertions that the site is inappropriate and unsafe from a user perspective, being not well serviced and exposed to criminal activity, traffic, and other potential hazards.

The skateboarding community is very much supportive of the proposal, but not without some reservations about the site. The principal worry is that a single facility, particular one that cannot be expanded, will not be adequate in relation to demand. Related to this point is a fear that the provision of a limited -- and possibly inadequate -- opportunity for skateboarding will give rise to a police crackdown on skateboarding everywhere else. Most of the comments received describe the proposal as Aa good start,@ but also observe that more skateboarding opportunities are needed in the city. It should be noted that skateboarders, too, are concerned with personal security, but feel that this is an issue almost anywhere in the downtown core, where most of those who commented are already skateboarding.

Discussions on this issue with various groups and individuals, along with inputs subsequently received both for and against the proposal, have been considered and factored into the development of this report. Furthermore, the consultation process will not be limited to soliciting initial reaction to the project and its design elements. An effort will be made to build and sustain a communication bridge between skateboarders and the rest of the local community. The specific objectives of this ongoing communication are to achieve the following:
_ to identify and secure agreement on management policies and operating practices;
_ to identify and secure agreement upon criteria of success, and methods for measuring same;
_ to anticipate and mitigate any downsides to the design and operation of the facility;
_ to maximize the potential benefit of the facility for users, spectators and the community at large; and
_ to ensure public oversight of the project through its planning, construction and operation phases.

Of the more than thirty skateboard facilities which now exist in the Region, none appears to have been built without some initial degree of opposition. However, park and recreation planners from other jurisdictions who have confirmed this fact also note that once such a facility is in operation, public support tends to build. Critical to project success is that both the end users and the broader community are engaged with design at the outset and operating decisions on an ongoing basis so that the end result is a facility which is attractive, fun and safe.

A number of technical decisions and operating protocols remain to be finalized in the context of the project design and construction phases. Park Board staff will involve other departments and the public in these decisions where appropriate. Specifically, monitoring arrangements, operating hours and a graffiti response protocol will be finalized based upon inputs from the public consultation, and with advice from Police, Planning, Social Planning and Engineering Services. Planning to protect City liability and ensure participant safety will be developed with reference to the documented experience from other jurisdictions, and with guidance from the City=s Risk Management Division.

Financial Implications

The capital cost of the project is $195,000. Operating costs, including Park Ranger site monitoring, garbage pick-up, cleaning and maintenance, are estimated at $10,000 per year. Contracted service for graffiti control has been preliminarily costed at $400/month, or $4,800 annually. The annual operating cost of the facility, as of 2004, is therefore estimated to be $14,800 per year, subject to verification in the context of the 2004 Operating Budget Review of Added Basic requests.

CONCLUSION

Council is asked to approve the development, on a trial basis, of a street-style skateboarding facility on a portion of road allowance bounded by Expo Boulevard, Quebec and Union Streets. Responsibility for maintaining and operating the skateboard plaza site will be transferred from Engineering Services to Park Board for the duration of the project. The installation will be coupled with the addition and designation by Park Board of skateable elements in Andy Livingstone Park, in order to create a desirable route for skateboarder access from the Stadium SkyTrain Station to the facility. Park Board will manage the site with a view to ensuring harmonious relationships between the users and the surrounding community and conduct a review of the success of the initiative after two years of operation.

* * * * *

Link to Appendix A

Link to Appendix B

Link to Appendix C

Link to Appendix D

 

pe20030424.htm

Comments or questions? Send us e-mail at info@city.vancouver.bc.ca
© 2002 City of Vancouver