Downtown's Future

Sunday, June 26, 2005 03:45 AM

by Jack deWit

Over the 20 years that I have lived in Prince George there has been talk, plans, more talk, and more plans, of how the downtown area of this city might be revitalized. In that 20 years I have watched many businesses leave this downtown core for more favourable commercial centers. This alone must tell our city governors that the environment downtown is contaminated.

There are many reasons for the sluggish physical improvements to the area. The major problem, in my opinion, is the lack of local ownership of the property. Absentee owners who hold the land and buildings for investment purposes are reluctant to make improvements because of the downturn cycle the business area is experiencing. Furthermore, as a result of the downturn, the values of their properties have not appreciated, making it more difficult to sell. So the catch-22 situation drags on and on.

The taxpayers of Prince George have made the only real investment to the downtown core. The sidewalk and lighting improvements did make a significant difference in appearance and during the regular business hours helps to improve the ambiance on 3rd Avenue. However, come the close of business hours the entire area takes on a new mood as if watching the next scene in a performance at the Playhouse.

It is of the writers opinion that the only sure way to achieve a genuine commitment of property owners is for the city to take control of the situation and follow through with a long term plan. This can be accomplished in a few different ways. My favourite would be to expropriate the land and establish a taxpayer owned corporation to develop the area. You may think this is extreme and perhaps even undemocratic. However, if a consensus cannot be reached amongst the independent ownership to make the necessary adjustments to improve the downtown, and our leadership doesn’t possess the guts to force the issue, then we may as well forget the existence of the ill-fated quarter.

I vision a five or six block area turned into a multi-story covered mall with underground or adjacent covered parking. A structure that would be open to pedestrians 24-hours a day and the freedom of tenants to do business at will. I would promote all types of retail shops, restaurants, theatres, banks, entertainment sites and other services. This would service the residents with a large shopping complex that would provide protection from the elements in the winter and a cool center in the heat of summer. In addition it would be much easier to police a development like this than it is to patrol the existing structures with all the alleys and irregular individual rear entrances. I would even consider the use of video cameras for surveillance. If one has nothing to hide what is the problem of being taped?

Will we ever rid the downtown of the homeless and less attractive segment of our society? I doubt it. However, we can discourage unacceptable behavior and help provide an environment that gives all sectors of our society the opportunity to enjoy a vibrant shopping district. No, my plans do not include a homeless shelter, soup kitchen or pawnshops. Why? As the saying goes, “If you build it they will come”. These services that are so widespread at the present time only help to attract those that utilize them. If we want a viable downtown we must attract those that will make it workable.

OK, so what do we do with the areas surrounding the development? The easiest way is to let the private sector develop a combination of commercial and residential neighborhood that would complement the open mall. It is City Hall that issues licenses and permits that could be used as a tool to manage the types of businesses, size and specifications for residential suites or condos. Tax the hell out of buildings in disrepair. Give incentives to those who really wish to participate in building a prosperous downtown core. Discourage disreputable businesses and support those who want to be good civic participants. A growth in downtown population would provide the accommodations for those who prefer an urban type lifestyle. Once a positive environment is created, other developers will be eager to participate if they see that it is a first-rate investment. So what we need is a favourable start to downtown reconstruction and I believe City Hall holds the best hand in the game.

Without all the details, this is my perspective of what could be done to improve downtown. No development plans have been successful in the past and I don’t say my imagination is superior to all the rest, but if we don’t get input from local residents nothing will ever change. It is our city and we must make the decisions and live with the consequences.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Sunday, June 26, 2005 03:45 AM in Views by Jack deWit

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: shawnpetriw on June 26 2005 3:10 PM

Jack,

You have to remember the biggest single landowner downtown is the City. Shouldn't they be leading by example?

Shawn Petriw

Posted by: Wilbur on June 26 2005 9:48 PM

I could not agree more with the notion of ridding our downtown of the bum, drunk, drug addict, criminal magnets. Namely, the shelters, needle exchanges, soup kitchens, booze can hotels, and pawn shops. Most of these street people are not from PG, and we should not feel guilty about encouraging them to move away by not providing the resources they need to continue destroying our downtown. It would also help alot if the police would toss the boozers and druggies in the drunk tank for the night everytime they're found intoxicated in public. And, cite the hotel pubs that over-serve these chronic substance abusers.

Currently, our downtown is a blight on our city. Friends and business associates who come to town revile that the largest "business" hotels are in a skid road area.

The city should have expropriated the old booze can hotels and other undesireable businesses a long time ago. Just imagine how vibrant the downtown could have been if the playhouse, casino hotel and CN Place were in the downtown core along with the art gallery and civic centre. How many more restaraunts, coffee houses, and unique shops would that increased traffic have supported?

The downtown is too fargone for the private sector to clean-up. No investor in his right mind would sink a nickle into that area without the city first exercising firm control over a clear, comprehensive, and wholesale re-development plan.

Posted by: owl on June 26 2005 10:15 PM

The proposal to develop a downtown mall owned by the City of Prince George is certainly an intriguing one worthy of a renewed look.

You may be aware of the previously failed effort by Cadillac Fairview to turn four blocks of downtown into such a mall. Those Councillors for the proposal lost their seat on Council in the subsequent election.

In my opinion, there were many things wrong with that proposal, including that they picked the wrong four blocks and that the mall would have been a typically inward looking mall instead of one which had stores opening to the street as well. In addition, it came at a time when the boom went to bust in 1981.

I am not sure whether a large mall is viable in this community at this time or in the forseeable future. However, the concept of a City building which essentially creates a predominately interior pedestrian precinct with adequate exterior vistas and a major anchor or two and not turning its back to the adjacent streets, as a similar mall in Victoria does, is one worthy of further exploration.

Of course, the Eaton Centre in Toronto is the preeminent example of such a mall in Canada. It is now some 30+ years old and is still a major attraction. One can learn many things from that example. It has been refurbished recently to open it up to the adjacent streets more than it had been. That, as well as the open 24/7 concept would be essential.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f9/751px-TorontoEatonCentre.jpg

We are a smaller community and would have to look at a development of a considerably smaller scale. In fact, the scale may be one which would run between 3rd and 4th or 3rd and 2nd for a block or two length so that the “interior” street would be located where we presently have lanes.

None of this is really new, even to this community. In 1981, several city blocks were looked at for four or five proposals to City Council of the day. No further action was taken. That information would be available at the library as well as from City Hall.

Of course the Ramada and BC Government Building on George was a joint effort by the City and the Province to revitalize that part of town. Known as Plaza 400, it was built to accommodate an interior shopping precinct which was designed for some 40 or so stores, anchored by a hotel which had not yet been built and a twin motion picture theatre. The hotel’s main entry lobby and public facilities were to be on the second floor with a pedestrian bridge to the parkade on 5th . When the main floor did not fill up with the expected stores, the Holiday Inn was constructed with facilities on the ground floor, diminishing the viability of any reasonable retail happening. The rest was eventually filled in by temporary courts and other government functions.

The result is a building which "kills" 4th and 5th avenues as well as much of George Street since there is no retail activity as was originally planned.

In addition, there was a proposal for a single block multi-use development bridging 3rd and 4th avenue which would have made a wonderful connection between two potential shopping streets. That too came on the wrong side of the boom/bust of 1981.

Then, of course, we have the most recent pie in the sky proposal of a few years ago by aliens from Vancouver presenting an absolutely insane proposal to the BIA. I have never seen a more gullible audience nor incompetent planners in my life.

Peterborough, Ontario, a community of similar size to Prince George, but with different regional relationships, is an example one must be very careful not to copy. The centre city mall has been facing major difficulties. Creating viable, lively, ever changing and interesting downtowns is more than simply building a downtown mall paterned after suburban malls. The dynamics for succesful downtown commercial developments are considerably more complex.

http://www.peacefulcommunities.ca/2004/September/Sep17.htm

Posted by: owl on June 26 2005 10:31 PM

It might be worthwhile reading about how "green" the grass is on the other side of the hill and possibly be reminded that the problems we are facing are common and part of a natural growing phase in urban North America.

So let us find the community which has been best able to solve similar problems we are facing.

Back to Peterborough Ontario

http://www.grassrootsreviewpeterborough.ca/2005/May/May30.php

Posted by: Chadermando on June 27 2005 12:50 AM

Jack I agree City Hall holds the best hand in the game. The problem is they are getting bad information IMO.

I view PG as a half built house with only its essentials in place. The circle that will make PG whole is Cranbrook Hill Crest. PG is a city that only utilizes 60% of its natural potential due to a lack of innovative political leadership.

When Cranbrook Hill Crest rises the crest will carry all others to new heights including our downtown. I can't say the same about our downtown.

I think PG has the potential to double in population over 10-15 years. This is a nightmare for our downtown infrastructure.

If zoned and planned accordingly a well developed urban residential mixed with street level business for the Cranbrook Hill Crest would lead to the completion of the PG circle with PG's Towncenter along the Crest of Cranbrook Hill. Upscale and high class all the way.

Cranbrook Hill Crest as the Towncenter would boast one of the worlds’ greatest urban parks and most spectacular urban post cards anywhere in Canada selling our city in a positive image at no cost to the tax payer. A fully developed Cranbrook Hill Crest would likely create an opening for the downtown in a residual contribution margin of the activity generated as a result of a successful city that would make our past history look like a sad parade of losers.

The problems with our downtown never end. My dad built the Plaza 400 among other buildings downtown, and all of them are below the 200-year flood plane. This problem isn’t going away anytime soon. This has huge implications for insurance, as well as infrastructure that needs to be above the flood plane, meaning no basements for electrical, parking, storage, and all the other essentials that any developer would take serious consideration of before making any investment. Facts are these are serious risks and as such require a much higher discount rate than other investments in other cities. The big question for me is why should we as the public take on these risks that clearly the private sector wants no part of?

Maybe a once in 200-year flood would do us some good at the moment, but we can’t count on that.

If we were to look at just the parking aspect then we can get a better picture. This is a serious issue today when nobody uses the downtown. If we can’t go underground because of location this leaves us little in the way of affordable and cosmetic solutions in the future. Above ground parking three blocks away in –30 is not an acceptable solution. Not every square block project like the Plaza 400 gets to have another square block for parking next to it.

IMO every successful city center I have ever seen has a natural boarder that restricts its growth at its climatic point that builds the critical mass necessary for dynamic growth trends in the area. Vancouver has the mountains and water front, Calgary has the river, and even smaller communities like Quesnel benefit from this situation. In Prince George our current downtown is to far from the river, and the CN Rail yard is just not as effective as a waterfront or mountain crest. In addition to that it is strategically located in the fall out zone of a couple of pulp mills. These are not things that attract happy residents of PG much less visitors.

IMO its not time we abandon our sunk cost into the downtown, but rather that we provide an alternate Towncenter location that will ad maximum value to our community in terms of quality of life and growth potential. This alternate location is at the geographical center of Prince George along the cities greatest asset the crest of Cranbrook Hill.

In the meantime the city council should ensure that the downtown is connected directly to the economic heart of the city with a bridge directly to the pulp mills that can also act as a dangerous goods route for bi-passing the city. This would enhance the partnership between the economic driver of the city and the downtown while simultaneously freeing up bottlenecks in the infrastructure in and out of the downtown for future growth.

The social issues are another matter. They are citizens as well and we should all respect that. I do not think a police state is the solution. I do agree with the notion that if you build it they will come. That is what got us to where we are today, and for very good reasons that an older generation would rather not address due to the sunk cost aspect of the whole situation.

Eventually a sunk cost has to recognized for what it is. Prince Georges’ future possibilities are only as open as we the citizens are willing to accept.

Time Will Tell

Posted by: owl on June 27 2005 1:55 AM

Another interesting notion - recentering the centre .....

Broadacre City, al la Frank Lloyd Wright ...

follow the centre, now you see it now you don't ...

the throw away society ... the throw away city centre ....

if only it were that easy to re-orient the road network and all the services associated with those ......

but still worth some consideration ....

A linear town centre along the crest of Cranbrook hill - facing east ... beginning at Peden Hill and ending at Otway Road .....

stepped housing and offices up the escarpment, Switzerland-like ..... most with an uninterrupted view of the distant Rockies ....

maybe even a suspension structure to cross the Nechako to the North Nechako escarpment ...

hey ... we could even dam the Fraser River as was proposed in the mid 1900's I believe and look out onto Lake Prince George filling up the bowl and sell the electricity to California ....

double our population in 10 to 15 years, eh?????

Well, the other stuff is possible sometime in the future ... but double the population in 10 to 15 years ..... now we are dreaming strange dreams .... :-)

Posted by: owl on June 27 2005 2:12 AM

BTW ... Plaza 400 is not in the 200 year flood plain

Much of the property south of 7th Avenue, up to Patricia Blvd. and along that to Winnipeg, then Carrie Jane Gray Park area; Strathcona Park and along the slew there back out to the Fraser .....

The Court House is also in the plain, and was built higher to suit ...

One of the few newer buildings not to be built higher is the Civic Centre ... which famous City Architect do we blame for that stroke of genius???

Underground parkades?

Who wants them? Unsafest areas in the world anywhere in the world!

Posted by: ontwin on June 27 2005 9:19 AM

Eleven yrs I've lived here and we're still beating the downtown revitalization horse.What has been done? Removed the wood roofing over the sidewalks,planted a few tree's and flower pots?Changed the traffic pattern so its not all one way streets?With the exception of one restaurant we frequent,I do not go downtown..there is nothing there!!We're one good fire away from revitalizing the downtown.

Posted by: green_walls on June 27 2005 11:45 AM

Everyone who lives in our city shares in the responsibility for and opportunity in turning around the current state of the downtown.

City Hall could be more carefully analysing proximities of competing businesses before handing out any business licence to anyone who applies.

Property owners who have had their buildings paid for 10 times over in rents, could deal with the exteriors of their buildings and make them even remotely more attractive than they are now.

Tenants could find some free marketing and merchandising advice online, and make their presentation more professional.

Shoppers could think about whether they want their purchase to profit the Walton family, or a local retailer who will re-spend those dollars here.

Voters could think about who they mark on their ballot and ensure it's someone who is qualified or brings some skills to the table, not just someone who's name they've read in a few letters to the editor in the weeks leading up to the elections.

The media could look beyond 3rd and George to see what other progressive and pleasing to the eye things exist in the downtown.

Everyone plays a part and if we all play along, things would improve.

Posted by: Chadermando on June 27 2005 11:20 PM

Ben I don’t think even a throw away society can throw away its city center. It would probably cost billions. The downtown will always be there, but they would have to compete and hold their own during the transitional period towards a vibrant city that benefits all. Probably the best way to support the downtown is to make it the only area zoned for public or institutional purposes involving government. Other than that we live in a market economy.

That said, this isn’t a blame game IMO. Facts are that 40 years ago when PG was presented with the option to have the pulp mills it was the logical choice to accept the significant investment that this represented to the community. The pulp mills aren’t going anywhere and so other arrangements need to be made. In addition to that I think the city has done a good job in setting up the city for its future potential.

IMO there is a pent up demand for the kind of city that Prince George has the potential to become. As PG develops toward that kind of city it will soon reach a critical mass that will take on a life of its own. People will look at PG for its clean water, affordable housing and land, as well as all our big city amendments, not to mention our number one asset of geographic and natural location.

To reach this critical mass it will be necessary for PG to put an emphasis on the quality of life issue. This means a towncenter that is vibrant and appealing, as well as a community vision that has a mission to create the kind of city that PG has the potential to become. If PG was to grow by 40,000 that would be all that is needed to provide the critical mass of a world class city that is the envy of all other cities. Most of this growth would occur in the horseshoe of Beaverly to Otway complimenting a Cranbrook Hill Crest Towncenter. To grow by 40,000 in 15 years is a mere mean average population growth of a little more than 2500 per year. I think we can double that. If a city of nearly a 100,000 can’t grow by 2500 people a year with the resources we have than the political leadership has a problem.

PG needs a major face lift to its image and how it is perceived. Focusing on our downtown is a defeatist attitude that undermines the cities potential.

The road networks of Prince George are clearly oriented toward Cranbrook Hill Crest from Ospika to the University. This has the most traffic capacity for future growth and is fully serviced.

IMO the option of expanding beyond the university towards Otway is not available at this time. That is all developed private land in the agriculture reserve as well as Forest for the World. The city does however have huge options for parkland along the crest which is city owned with the most spectacular views of the city, the river, and the Rocky Mountains. IMO if zoned correctly you would work on development from the university just above the crest one block at a time until it reaches Ospika. The crest itself should be reserved as parkland with the exception of a staircase linking the end of Massey Drive to the university.

As for Bens suggestion of a suspension bridge across the Nechako I think it should be pointed out that we already have a pedestrian bridge across the Nechako in the Carney Street bridge, but our city council wants it torn down. I like the idea of a suspension bridge though, but if we want to orient ourselves towards tourism and quality of life I would suggest 5th Avenue canyon or maybe Ochakwin canyon overlooking the 80 foot water fall would be ideal locations to provide a top notch center piece of a park system that provides tourism access to PG’s best viewing locations. Maybe this can be done with government dollars as in the case of Kamloops and Kelowna, but it would be even better if done at a grass roots level with local business help. I’ve always been an advocate of a Cranbrook Hill Crest trail system that goes downhill from UNBC across the hill to Moores Meadow and from there to Wilson Park.

Time Will Tell