Vancouver Park Board sees 60 proposals, including new attractions | Daily Hive

Vancouver Park Board sees 60 unsolicited proposals, including new destination attractions

Cold and hot pools; conceptual artistic rendering of the spa attraction at the former polar bear enclosure of the closed Stanley Park Zoo. (Tony Osborn Architecture & Design)

By enhancing its parks with new and improved attractions and services, Vancouver can become a more vibrant and enjoyable city for residents and visitors while also generating much-needed revenue for the Vancouver Park Board.

That was the conclusion of Park Board senior project manager Michael Marousek during a public meeting last week, when he told Park Board commissioners that they had received around 60 proposals to date from businesses and organizations since opening the intake for the Unsolicited Proposal Process over a year ago.

Are there proposals for a permanent Ferris wheel attraction, a thrilling zipline, a spa destination, outdoor event venues, new restaurants, and expanded recreational and leisure services and facilities, for example? At this very early stage, the Park Board has not disclosed the precise concepts and details of these proposals.

But Marousek did provide a very rough general breakdown of the type of proposals, and the approximate degree of complexity and costs, which would be funded by the private sector and other third parties, not the Park Board.

You might also like:

“There is a tremendous value in the Unsolicited Proposal Process. It has the potential to generate and secure a lot of different funding and avoid a lot of different costs,” said Marousek.

“Folks from the business community feel that there’s an opportunity in Vancouver to add more destination attractions and give more vitality to Vancouver and activate more of our spaces differently.”

La Grande Roue de Montreal Ferris Wheel at the Old Port of Montreal. (meunierd/Shutterstock)

Currently, the Park Board is actively reviewing and processing 15 proposals, with six being deemed unique ideas and nine being duplicate. He noted that, for instance, there are five proposals for the same service or asset and suggested that, at a later stage, this idea could be shifted to the Park Board’s regular solicited process, which is typically a formal Request for Proposal (RFP).

“We have been receiving a number of really fantastic, sort of unique proposals, but we’ve also been receiving a large number of proposals that are duplicate. So that shows us that there is a strong demand for a few very particular services and destination attractions, and that creates the need for a solicited stream so we can really create the best value for the park board that we can,” he said.

Of these 15 proposals now being reviewed, 12 have been classified as a destination attraction, two are a new asset,” and one is a “renewed asset.”

Among these proposals under review, 12 are categorized under “Tier 1” as carrying a lower cost (under $75,000 for services and/or under $200,000 for construction), and three proposals are “Tier 2” of a higher cost (over $75,000 for services and/or over $200,000 for construction).

Another 17 proposals are in the queue due to the higher level of complexity of implementation, the idea being deemed a “low priority” for the Park Board, and/or the financial feasibility, as well as the Park Board’s current limited staffing capacity and experience to review such pitches. But Marousek emphasized, “We don’t want to discount them because they have good merit. They have a lot of potential, but they’re a little bit more complex.”

Those proposals in the queue include 10 services, four destination attractions, two “new assets,” and one “renewed asset.” Six of these ideas are unique, while nine are deemed to be duplicate, with 12 categorized as Tier 1 and three as Tier 2.

But Marousek shared that 13 proposals were returned to the proponents, with suggestions that their submissions be revised to better align with the Park Board’s needs and strategies. In some cases, the proposals were sent back as they were unfunded. He expects the proponents for about half of these 13 proposals will resubmit their ideas with some changes at a later time.

Some of the proposals also encounter some regulatory challenges, including City bylaws, licensing, and zoning.

The temporary zipline atop Queen Elizabeth Park in Summer 2015. (Daily Hive)

Temporary Ferris wheel atop Queen Elizabeth Park. (Ken Hsueh/Instagram)

After Park Board commissioners approved the Think Big Action Plan strategy in July 2023 of opening the door for new business and partnership opportunities to create new revenue for supporting Vancouver’s parks and recreation system, Park Board staff launched the Unsolicited Proposal Process intake in December 2023 on a pilot project basis. Within days of the launch, the first proposal was submitted. Ever since, on average, there has been about one proposal submission per week.

Following the recommendations of Marousek, Park Board commissioners last week approved the extension of the pilot project’s intake period through the end of March 2026, and changes to the application submission and review process, including adding more Park Board staffing resources to oversee the initiative, clarifying eligibility criteria, emphasizing the requirement that all projects be fully funded by the proponents, and creating two different timelines for Tier 1 and Tier 2 proposals.

Tier 1 would continue to be a year-round intake, but the more costly and complex proposals of Tier 2 would see their intake window limited to the first quarter of the year to better align with the Park Board’s annual budgeting and planning cycles.

“We really believe that there’s a lot of value in the Unsolicited Proposal Process. We can achieve value for the public and for the organization, but we need to align more strategically with existing park work processes,” said Marousek.

At least one proponent has publicly come forward with their unsolicited proposal. In May 2023, Tony Osborn Architecture & Design shared with Daily Hive Urbanized their unsolicited proposal to the Park Board to turn the former concrete polar bear enclosure within the former grounds of the Stanley Park Zoo into a Scandinavian-style sauna destination, with indoor and outdoor pools, various other spa facilities and amenities, and a cafe. This remains an active unsolicited proposal.

Existing condition:

The abandoned polar bear enclosure of the former Stanley Park Zoo. (Kenneth Chan/Daily Hive)

Future condition:

stanley park zoo polar bear enclosure spa

Cold and hot pools; conceptual artistic rendering of the spa attraction at the former polar bear enclosure of the closed Stanley Park Zoo. (Tony Osborn Architecture & Design)

Underground cave pool; conceptual artistic rendering of the spa attraction at the former polar bear enclosure of the closed Stanley Park Zoo. (Tony Osborn Architecture & Design)

Cafe in the indoor space; conceptual artistic rendering of the spa attraction at the former polar bear enclosure of the closed Stanley Park Zoo. (Tony Osborn Architecture & Design)

Main entrance; conceptual artistic rendering of the spa attraction at the former polar bear enclosure of the closed Stanley Park Zoo. (Tony Osborn Architecture & Design)

Over the years, there have been several notable examples of both successful and unsuccessful unsolicited proposals.

In Summer 2015, the Park Board approved a pilot project originating from a private company’s unsolicited proposal to operate a temporary seasonal zipline attraction above the quarry gardens at Queen Elizabeth Park. The Park Board received a percentage of the company’s revenue of running the attraction.

In Spring 2024, the Park Board conducted a bidding process seeking proposals for designing, implementing, and operating an attraction-based experience at Queen Elizabeth Park, with the initial operating term being three years with opportunities to extend. At the time, there was an aim to have such an attraction ready as early as later that spring or summer.

In 2008, an unsolicited private proposal by local architect Richard Henriquez to build and operate a 200-ft-tall landmark observation tower atop Queen Elizabeth Park, next to the Bloedel Conservatory, was rejected by the Park Board commissioners in a public meeting. It would have provided 360-degree views of the region.

queen elizabeth park observation tower vancouver

Artistic rendering of the 2008-rejected proposal to build an observation tower at Queen Elizabeth Park in Vancouver. (Henriquez Partners Architects)

You might also like: