David Gordon on "Urban Waterfront Development: Planning, Design and Managing Change"
Three Important Approaches
Change image
Improve accessibility
Control quality in environment over long term
Urban design is specialized art for this type of project; e.g. Ottawa brings in designers from still bigger centres
Venice is good historical example of waterfront as entry point
Sydney, Australia in area leading to Opera House is good example of waterfront as important public space
A. Change Image
I. Historical Preservation - Examples
Toronto warehouse retrofitted to recreation centre and pond
Silted-up Albert Dock, Liverpool, England, was "re-floated" with water and now warehouses are rentable for variety of uses
St. Catherine’s Dock in East End London and Butler’s Wharf on the Thames have been redeveloped into apartments
Granville Island, Vancouver has had low cost retrofitting and pedestrianization done to old industrial buildings
II. Public Access
People go to the site immediately when you open up the water’s edge
Good public walkway is important
III. Managing Symbolic Content
People expect higher design standards along the waterfront
Example - Toronto strongly resented 20-storey apartment towers at the Toronto Island Ferry Terminal. Agency had said that height was not a problem; they didn’t understand public opinion
Must know what is perceived as a public benefit and get that out early, to show that the redevelopment is in the public interest
B. Improve Accessibility
I. Change Image of Isolation
Waterfront expressways are quite common
Do not block public access for the benefit of private development. In London, England this was done and extreme public hostility resulted.
II. Use Existing Facilities
Example is extending transit lines to site
In one case, a special line was put in before demand increased to the point where a regular line was warranted
C. Control Quality in the Physical Environment
Master Plans usually could not be phased, had to be built all at once
Original plan for Battery Park City on Manhattan Island is good example: it had megastructure with moving sidewalk and interconnected buildings that was prohibitively expensive and that had to be built as a unit
In 1979 the plan was changed to one with streets and blocks, integrated into the existing city street network, using smaller developers and capable of being developed incrementally
There were general regulations re height and bulk of buildings, but very detailed guidelines on the components of the public realm
There were high quality public spaces, designed in great detail; floor space ratios and such were left to the agency to settle
Need a phasing strategy: in Toronto tried to do everything at once and only bits got done. Public perception becomes that it will never be completed after 10-15 years of this
Need multiple sites and urban design guidelines: many small parcels, smaller developers, little increments, spread out the work
Design guidelines for view, solar access, wind effects
If done right, can make public spaces useable for most of year
In large cities with waterfront expressways, can use buildings to hide view of expressway from waterfront
Should reserve ground floor for public uses
Urban design guidelines should be general so as not to restrict creative design; the concern is with the building fabric - public space interaction
Some buildings on the site may be more useful than no buildings at all in in an urban design context
Build a high quality public realm: build public facilities first, then parcel is more valuable; e.g. extensive park walkway adjacent to cruise ship terminal in Sydney, Australia
Developer Selection Process
Set up development agency, do public spaces, roll out parcel at a time
Try to separate the quality of building drawings from the costs of building: a two-stage selection process can put detailed design drawings in the second phase of a design competition, to be produced only by the winners of the first phase
The two-stage process will, however, take 6 months longer and be more complicated to run
Operational and Management Practice
Don’t turn public access paths over to developer to do; e.g. in Boston, developers then tried to exclude public in condominium developments
Public agency can design water’s edge in consistent manner
Kingston, Ontario is example of disaster that can result from uncontrolled developer initiatives in public access. After a 1970's urban renewal study, original developer agreed to low-rise buildings but went bankrupt, design controls were not effective, ended up with large high-rise buildings with a concrete tunnel under a building overhang at the water’s edge as a public walkway, and no views of the water.
Start-Up Planning
Involve the implementing agency from the beginning, setting it up before the plan is done
Make sure development is fine-grained: need many small parcels, not a few big ones, spread out work as a good financial strategy plus one that brings a variety of building designs
Use historical resources: recycle if possible; real marine uses help value of property
Address access right at the beginning
Avoid master developers
Planning for Change
Imagine what would happen if project took twice as long as you think it will
Sometimes the particular land uses don’t matter; e.g. offices or housing
Be certain on the public realm at the site level; do low quality park and walkway first and then improve later - ensure space is reserved first
High quality public space is what determines overall image and quality of the whole project, including the value of private lands
Need to manage designers; know where to find them and how to work with them
Never make area to be developed a temporary park
If build something attractive to locals, tourists will like also
Community design charettes are needed to educate the community
![[home]](http://www.atlanticplanners.org/images/back.gif){kind=small}
Atlantic Planners Institute Home Page
This page and all contents are produced by the Atlantic Planners Institute, an affiliate of the Canadian Institute of Planners.