Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[jlenko]

Reference the "Big Dig" in Boston with I-93..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig

Vancouver SHOULD do this... but they never WILL..

..because they SUCK. And they think everyone should ride bikes.

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by jlenko

Reference the "Big Dig" in Boston with I-93..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig

Vancouver SHOULD do this... but they never WILL..

..because they SUCK. And they think everyone should ride bikes.

Agreed...

[David]

You both want Vancouver to do our own Big Dig? Did you even bother to read the 2nd paragraph of the Wikipedia page? It's never going to happen.

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by David

You both want Vancouver to do our own Big Dig? Did you even bother to read the 2nd paragraph of the Wikipedia page? It's never going to happen.

Absolutely........ do want
Will it happen?...prob not.

[Sir Conga]

Talk about a tunnel to nowhere.

[WarrenC12]

$22 BILLION dollars. And yet lets support that while we rage against a few million on bike lanes.

I've been to Boston a number of times and driven through the tunnels. It isn't even that impressive. And of course there are tolls...

[Echowinds]

22 billion dollars is also enough to make several gold-plated skytrain lines across the entire region, as well as a full streetcar/LRT network, and a bunch of sensible highway/bridge/tunnel (Pattulo, Massey Tunnel, intersections-to-interchanges at 91/SFPR, widening of roads in Surrey, etc) upgrades. Probably enough leftover to even work on that elusive HSR line to Seattle and Portland. It would be glorious if Vancouver had 22 billion dollars to throw around on transportation infrastructure.

[Spork]

Originally Posted by Echowinds

22 billion dollars is also enough to make several gold-plated skytrain lines across the entire region, as well as a full streetcar/LRT network, and a bunch of sensible highway/bridge/tunnel (Pattulo, Massey Tunnel, intersections-to-interchanges at 91/SFPR, widening of roads in Surrey, etc) upgrades. Probably enough leftover to even work on that elusive HSR line to Seattle and Portland. It would be glorious if Vancouver had 22 billion dollars to throw around on transportation infrastructure.

I hear that there is oil underneath Stanley Park.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by jlenko

Reference the "Big Dig" in Boston with I-93..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig

Vancouver SHOULD do this... but they never WILL..

..because they SUCK. And they think everyone should ride bikes.

You got it !! The "hippy-dippy" element of the Vancouver mentality has not burned itself out yet, unfortunately.

Originally Posted by moosejaw

Agreed...

... and seconded .....

Originally Posted by David

You both want Vancouver to do our own Big Dig? Did you even bother to read the 2nd paragraph of the Wikipedia page? It's never going to happen.

The tunnel option in Vancouver would be nowhere near as big or humungous as in Boston ... it's still feasible.

Originally Posted by moosejaw

Absolutely........ do want
Will it happen?...prob not.

I know what you mean, but let's TRY thinking "YES WE CAN." (it worked for another guy, four years back)

Originally Posted by Sir Conga

Talk about a tunnel to nowhere.

.... to NOWHERE? Is smack in the middle of Vancouver, at a critical juncture, NOWHERE ???

[Alex Mackinnon]

According to some of my tunneling friends that was quite gig for the contractors. Their tunneling union has a monopoly on underground construction there. I think something around here would probably be quite a bit cheaper provided it was managed and structured well.

We could probably put a EPB tunnel bore from a Malkin Connector to Hwy 1, a 3rd crossing to the North Shore from Main or Clark and some variety of Clark or Boundary tunnel alignment with a bridge to the 91 for much less than $10 Billion.

Alternatively though, I think some minor surface upgrades connecting downtown to hwy 1, putting a skytrain line to the North Shore over the 2nd Narrows/Hastings alignment and boring a skytrain tunnel to UBC and putting some kind of trenched intersection system in on Boundary would probably fix most the the same problems for less $$.

[moosejaw]

Wow if there was a central tunnel in Vancouver like in Boston, imagine how much traffic would get out of downtown. Its nice what they did with their park where the old I-93 was.

Hell it could be even tolled. Start with the Malkin Connector and bury it at the old viaducts and have it pop out near the post office on Georgia.

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

According to some of my tunneling friends that was quite gig for the contractors. Their tunneling union has a monopoly on underground construction there. I think something around here would probably be quite a bit cheaper provided it was managed and structured well.

We could probably put a EPB tunnel bore from a Malkin Connector to Hwy 1, a 3rd crossing to the North Shore from Main or Clark and some variety of Clark or Boundary tunnel alignment with a bridge to the 91 for much less than $10 Billion.

Alternatively though, I think some minor surface upgrades connecting downtown to hwy 1, putting a skytrain line to the North Shore over the 2nd Narrows/Hastings alignment and boring a skytrain tunnel to UBC and putting some kind of trenched intersection system in on Boundary would probably fix most the the same problems for less $$.

Boston is all about the unions and i would venture to say they are a little more aggressive than the unions in Toronto. I've worked for a GC in boston in the early years of my life. I've had many freinds who have had "unfreindly conversations" with the local union reps.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Spork

I hear that there is oil underneath Stanley Park.

Drill, baby, drill!

[moosejaw]

BTW the $22b figure included the 1-90 tunnel and the Zakim bridge as well as the central artery I-93. That figure also included the monies paid out in all the lawsuits.

[David]

Yes, lets invest anywhere between 10-22 billion dollars on a tunnel that will do nothing to improve traffic and congestion other than funnel it directly onto Terminal/1st Avenue (unless you spend even more money to improve the rest of the road network) when our government can barely afford to maintain our existing transit stock and the demand to expand public transit is higher than ever before.

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by David

Yes, lets invest anywhere between 10-22 billion dollars on a tunnel that will do nothing to improve traffic and congestion other than funnel it directly onto Terminal/1st Avenue (unless you spend even more money to improve the rest of the road network) when our government can barely afford to maintain our existing transit stock and the demand to expand public transit is higher than ever before.

A tunnel would cut traffic out of downtown area. The idea was to replace the viaducts. Im suggesting a tunnel, any improvements to transit would not apply in this area.
You know Vancouvers transit isnt that bad. You're lucky you get a bus every 15 minutes. Most cities dont have it as good as Vancouver. My sister has lived there for well over 10 years, never bought a car.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

Wow if there was a central tunnel in Vancouver like in Boston, imagine how much traffic would get out of downtown. Its nice what they did with their park where the old I-93 was.

Hell it could be even tolled. Start with the Malkin Connector and bury it at the old viaducts and have it pop out near the post office on Georgia.

Originally Posted by moosejaw

A tunnel would traffic out of downtown. The idea was to replace the viaducts. Im suggesting a tunnel, any improvements to transit would not apply in this area.
You know Vancouvers transit isnt that bad. You're lucky you get a bus every 15 minutes. Most cities dont have it as good as Vancouver. My sister has lived there for well over 10 years, never bought a car.

Thank you for that. That's sort of what I'd like to see.
I think most posters here, though, are against the idea of tunnels, though, either for cost (agreed: it is $$$$$) or because they see it as "useless" or "too awkward" or "not politically correct," or .....

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Thank you for that. That's sort of what I'd like to see.
I think most posters here, though, are against the idea of tunnels, though, either for cost (agreed: it is $$$$$) or because they see it as "useless" or "too awkward" or "not politically correct," or .....

I can see why. they are hideously expensive and its hard to envision the benefits.

Seattle is finally burying highway 99. You know what an eyesore that was? You'll be able to get from Qwest Field to Aurora Ave on the North Side in one swoop. Projected cost is estimated to be $4.2B

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

I can see why. they are hideously expensive and its hard to envision the benefits.

Seattle is finally burying highway 99. You know what an eyesore that was? You'll be able to get from Qwest Field to Aurora Ave on the North Side in one swoop. Projected cost is estimated to be $4.2B

Yeah, if it is Alaskan Way they're replacing with the tunnel, that'll be great. But, hey, yes, it's megabucks for Seattle, and unimaginable for Vancouver, where such cost would preclude anything like it right away.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by tybuilding

Outsider's View Of Proposed Vancouver Viaduct Demolition

If the city gets serious and builds a tunnel under False Creek that joins Terminal Avenue at the other end?

Instead of diverting traffic to an upgraded Pacific Boulevard, what if the city really gets serious and builds a tunnel that takes traffic under False Creek and joins Terminal Avenue at the other end? Wouldn't that benefit commuters and the communities along Prior St by providing an alternative route to the city from Highway 1? Wouldn't that also eliminate the need to build the Malkin Connector?

People seem to be rejecting the tunnel option, either scoffing at the idea, or mentioning figures like $22 billion.

If the Seattle replacement tunnel is supposed to cost 4.2bn USD (normally about 5bn+ Cad (??)) ... would the Viaduct Replacement tunnel not perhaps be cheaper? 22 billion seems a bit steep, even for this.

Like to see one built, though.