Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[Metro-One]

Vancouver sure does know how to pick the low fruit. I am currently in Japan now (again, sorry for always using the Japan reference, but it is something I know personally), and it is amazing being in a city (Osaka) that has been able to thrive and seamlessly integrated thousand of km (I am not exaggerating) of elevated freeways, roadways, metro-guidways, bullet train guide-ways, monorail guide-ways, pedestrian guide-ways and even some elevated biking lanes into the city fabric.

Vancouver has only 1 true kilometre of an elevated road structure, that is actually quite nice looking and elegant as far as elevated structures go (and high), and yet people here seem to find the only solution is to tear it down because they are unable to be creative (o except the fact they live in the heart of a metro-area).

There are so many other solutions present besides tearing it down (which will also be a big waste of money given how much integration has already taken place, such as the stadiums, spectrum, parts of the international village, the skate park and even the dip in the skytrain guideway).

Actually, to me that is the funniest part is even if they take down the two road viaducts, the most intrusive guide-way will still remain, the skytrain guideway. It is much lower and harder to work with.

I dont know, as others on here said, unless it is being replaced by a tunnel or some other guideway the area is going to remain a busy thoroughfare (the ground level even more so with the viaducts gone) so good luck having a quiet greenway street. Instead the will probably simply get a busier stretch akin to Kingsway.

We have presented so many solutions, using he area under the ducts as a OMC for the streetcar, parks, walkway/bikeways that are sheltered from the rain, a multi level stadium parking facility, night market, etc...

That land with the viaducts in place has so many uses it is not funny, and it especially has uses for facilities and functions that would otherwise be to expensive to have due to Vancouver's insane land prices.

Sigh...

IMO Vancouver thinking is very 1 dimensional (figuratively and literally in this case).

Not to mention they would service a new St. Paul's very well (directly landing at the Hospital's base from downtown), and enable the surface streets to be calmer for a neighbourhood and be more easily street calmed.

[Millennium2002]

The guideway structure is elegant? =S

Unfortunately when my eyes look at it they think of the opposite.

Although I may be one of the people that dislike the viaducts at least I'm not thinking of leaving no alternate route to downtown... = \

[Metro-One]

Well they are as elegant as a viaduct can be, many in North America have 4 square pillars per joint every 10 meters or less and have the roadway low to the ground, while ours in Vancouver have one rather nice looking pillar per joint spaced every 30+ meters or so (just judging by eye, could be slightly more or less) and are quite high, in fact high enough to allow a decent amount of sunlight underneath.

Essentially, they are about the easiest possible viaducts to work with in a urban fabric, which makes it even more funny that people here see the only option is to tear them down.

Now I respect your opinion to tear them down because you are saying we should replace them with a tunnel, that i would support, not the simply "tear them down just because and replace with only neighbourhood streets."

Although I still think the easiest option is simply just to keep them and build around them, simply because this process has already started, the structures are only mid lifespan and pose no safety threat, such money to do so can be better spent elsewhere, and because even with them gone the skytrain guideway will still remain and it is the most intrusive of the bunch.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

IMO, the mods have done a reasonable job of encouraging good debate while allowing most of the energy to show. Good information, venting of spleens, there is a lot for everyone here on SSP.....

In contrast, Frances Bula's excellent blog on local issues has become unreadable of late due to the post responses. Just read her posts on NEFC to see what commentary oblivion is...

If you listen to CKNW's civic affairs panel (I think Tuesday mornings), they have Francis Bula, Jim Green and Daniel Fontaine in there arguing on the air. Same thing but much more entertaining. The best is when one accuses the other of a personal attack, because they all do it.

[Millennium2002]

ah. true. the skytrain guideway... and I don't think a lot of people have thought of that.

For me... I'm thinking of having the whole section between Stadium and Main St rebuilt such that it's flat and not dipping around the viaducts. Then the space underneath can be utilized or even incorporated into developments...

Your post does make me think though... we can work around the viaducts somewhat... maybe the only issue now is the poor interface between the viaduct and the connecting streets.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by allan_kuan

The guideway structure is elegant? =S

As far as elevated highways go - I would say it's elegant - i.e. compared to the Gardiner Express way in Toronto or others built with bents (post and beam supports).

The viaduct lampposts (and the railing) are the most modern in town and put the ones along Pacific Blvd to shame.

The most elegant part though is the overpass over Main Street.
The viaducts cantilever out from berms without vertical support columns. That creates an impressively wide open space below the overpass with excellent sightlines north and south. It looks like they used to have uplighting along each edge that has fallen into disrepair (as has the landscaping).
Nowadays, what you'd see is round or square concrete support columns adjacent to each sidewalk.

The colourful steel V-shaped supports for the overpasses on the Upper Levels Highway also rate highly to me.

*******************

Of interest - came across this book preview while Googling - talks about the freeway fight, etc.:

http://books.google.ca/books?id=tchh...age&q=&f=false

[Locked In]

^ Great find! The author doesn't pull any punches in the first line: "Over the past 25 years, Vancouver has been going steadily downhil... Vancouver was blessed with one of the most beautiful settings in the world. The wasteland it is becoming is all the more striking in contrast." It's like reading the comments section of the Vancouver Sun today.

The start of Chapter 3 is just completely foreign:

You cannot go downtown in Vancouver these days without seeing at least five high-rise office buildings under construction... it will add to the growing congestion and pollution in the downtown peninsula.. it will further contribute to the monotony and anonymity of the architecture... Just who is downtown for anyways?

The flood of office buildings is shocking compared to the meager amount of moderate-income housing being provided by those same developers... but office buildings are much more profitable, even if half-empty, so that developers will continue to build those and ignore our housing needs.

How times change...

[Pennywise604]

I haven't contributed to this thread since the viaducts actually never affect me, but I was at the Canucks game on Friday night with a good friend and a long time VPD officer. I told him about the cities idea about tearing down the viaducts. He literally thought I was on crack when I told him. He has been around the area of GM Place all his life, since their station is at Cambie @ 2nd. (We parked in the police parking lot, and walked over the Cambie Bridge, since it's free and the walk isn't that bad) He has worked the skids for many years down there, and told me, that they are an absolute necessity to downtown. He was shocked! He has been working down there way before GM Place was around, and knows the s***hole the area used to be. He also said that the area has no more real room to develop anymore. So where would the next area of development go? It would go to Mount Pleasant. Especially the 2nd, Main, Kingway, and Broadway corridors. So if Mt. Pleasant starts to develop in the next 3-5 years, wouldn't the viaducts be an absolute necessity into downtown?
He laughed and said maybe they should get rid of them, than move all the major sports franchises, and concerts, etc. to the suburbs. Since Vancouver is trying to eliminate traffic through downtown so bad, this would be the only way to do it. Get rid of everything that makes people want to go downtown. (Gm Place area, where the viaducts are needed) Than businesses will be screaming for customers, and there you go. But him telling me that really made me think, since Mt. Pleasant will be developed considerably by 10 years from now. It's needed so bad that it's impossible to imagine Vancouver without them.

[Spoolmak]

This is the worst idea. What next, tearing down the Iron workers because it's "ugly"

[jlousa]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

Death of Dunsmuir and Georgia viaducts could revitalize Strathcona

Doing away with the viaducts will release at least 100,000 square feet of city land, according to Thom. “If you took four or five city blocks, and if you have the density of let’s say seven, which is what’s in the downtown, and say, ‘Okay, it’s $50 a square foot,’ or whatever, you probably get a few hundred million dollars of real estate,” he said. “That’s just sitting there as a potential, which we could put to better use and create more housing and make things more affordable for working people.”
http://www.straight.com/article-2709...ize-strathcona

Let's go with these numbers, mine are in the same ballpark. 100,000sqft of developable land at an FSR of 7.0 is 700,000 at the current price of $50psf of buildable size gives us a sale value of $35Million. The cost to demolish them will take up a nice chuck of that price, not to mention you'd have to do something to replace them with something.
Another issue that they are overlooking is that those 700,000sqft are not lost, All almost every one of those pieces an fsr of 7.0 could still be obtained by varying building shape and consuming floorspace via height where it is able to pop thru them. On the few parcels where it's not possible some of the density could be transfered to the sites where it could be consumed. Leaving the viaducts in place would amount to a very minimal loss of developable floorspace using a fsr of 7.0. There are reasons to remove them but using economics is not one of them.

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Of interest - came across this book preview while Googling - talks about the freeway fight, etc.:

http://books.google.ca/books?id=tchh...age&q=&f=false

An interesting visual comparison of what 54 years of growth did to downtown Vancouver:


Source: Vancouver Ltd. (care of Google Books) pp.8-9


The CPR land grant was just astounding, yet completely worth it for bringing the railway terminus to Vancouver. The land grant is probably as large as all of Port Moody at the time of its loss of the terminus.


Source: Vancouver Ltd. (care of Google Books) p.12



The second CPR Hotel Vancouver. The current one is actually the third.

Source: Vancouver Ltd. (care of Google Books) p.16



Check out those prices.

Source: Vancouver Ltd. (care of Google Books) p.18


The numbers Walter Hardwick quoted proved to be pretty dead on, which is remarkable considering the recession that hit not long after this prediction.

Source: Vancouver Ltd. (care of Google Books) p.22

[officedweller]

So the black towers with the current Ramada Renaissence was called "Columbia Centre"? (described as such in the second pic's legend) Never heard that name before.

[Stingray2004]

Doing away with the viaducts will release at least 100,000 square feet of city land, according to Thom.

If the City believes the lands are of value, then just sell the air-rights to same or something of a similar nature.

The viaduct for Expo Line goes though the Vancity Tower:



Source: www.bosaconstruction.com

And a highway viaduct runs through an office buildinG in Osaka, Japan:



Source: www.neatorama.com

Just think outside the box.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by officedweller

The most elegant part though is the overpass over Main Street.

The colourful steel V-shaped supports for the overpasses on the Upper Levels Highway also rate highly to me.

My thoughts exactly!

When one sees the dual Main St. overpasses, after turning down Main from Terminal, they also provide a certain 'big city' feel, IMHO.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

If the City believes the lands are of value, then just sell the air-rights to same or something of a similar nature.

Side note - came across this abandoned monorail at the Monorail website.
Some cars are going to be restored, but the line has been chopped up and built on with some guideway still in place
- including a station under a building (like Vancity but moreso).

Himeji Monorail

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ca...imeji_monorail


http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...shogun_stn.jpg


http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...onorail_01.jpg

[SFUVancouver]

Bare concrete really does not weather well, does it?

Interesting building. Thanks for posting.

[officedweller]

The vines take to it really well though - unlike some local attempts at trellises (Yaletown Park).

[geoff's two cents]

Wow, there are some fantastic posts here! I particularly enjoyed SFU's.

Despite my railing against the viaducts, car culture, etc., I have to admit that we are still faced with the same difficulty confronting planners in the 1970s - that it is not feasible to reduce road capacity (thereby making space for valuable land development) without a more comprehensive transit network. That is, if the viaducts ever do come down, I imagine it won't be until well after there is a Hastings corridor subway, and a significant shift in transit mode share. By the time this happens, I will most likely be living elsewhere, and the viaducts will be near the end of their lifespan anyways, which might make an economic argument for their removal more compelling.

Hopefully, whether this happens in the end or not, we can put what we have to much better use, a la MetroOne's earlier pictures from Japan. I have to say, however, that I find the roads-through-buildings idea pretty aesthetically repulsive (I know not everyone feels this way), though they're certainly intriguing from an engineering perspective. When I think of something like this being built beside the NEFC waterfront, the following picture comes to mind: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fdrgoesunder.JPG

[deasine]

Originally Posted by geoff's two cents

When I think of something like this being built beside the NEFC waterfront, the following picture comes to mind: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fdrgoesunder.JPG

The viaducts aren't built right at the edge of False Creek. There could be buildings built in front of the viaducts to cover the viaducts.

[geoff's two cents]

Originally Posted by deasine

The viaducts aren't built right at the edge of False Creek. There could be buildings built in front of the viaducts to cover the viaducts.

You're right: This would be an improvement on the FDR scenario, but I'm incorrigible. Hidden from the waterfront or not, I'd still find them hideous. Mind you, as you already know, I'm also arguing in my own narrow-minded, hippie way from the standpoint of one who'd eventually (40 years down the road) like to at least have the option of tearing these viaducts down. This might be less feasible if we constructed architectural masterpieces on top of them - as opposed to, say, building around and underneath.