Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[huenthar]

So they are going to combine the traffic from the Georgia Viaduct, the Dunsmuir Viaduct, Pacific and Expo boulevards onto a single surface street - and Meggs says this is going to "really knit the neighbourhood together"?

There's nothing to prevent a park and connector greenway/cycle path being built with the viaducts in place...

I hope TransLink chimes in on this soon...

[DKaz]

5x to 10x as much as grade level roads... says the city that built an extensive network of elevated roadways for the Cordova and Waterfront extensions. They should take these as a lesson on how the viaducts can be integrated into development.

At the same time, if the cost of upkeep will be prohibitively high, maybe it should be scrapped if a seamless road connection between Georgia and Terminal takes its place with no turns required. The current configuration is a bit of a pain. It seems how they envision it is turning from Georgia to Pacific, then onto Quebec or Main, then onto Terminal. That's a big no no to me.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

Now that there is a plan, it looks great. I really can visualize the area without viaducts, and IMO it will be a net benefit.

A few points:

-I think ppl are forgetting the importance of being connected to a grid of roads or bikeways. Traffic flow to pacific will be attenuate IMO by the grid. If you are stuck in car traffic on the viaduct, you lack a grid to detour. The bikewy at carrell will be better utilized
-if people do think that the viaducts should be taken down eventually, we should plan for that now when the whole site is relatively undeveloped. I see more downside and a missed opportunity if we made the land use plan now with the viaducts only to go back 30 yr later to "fill in the space".

Do you think the benefit is mostly from tightening up Pacific and Expo into one street though?

I've taken my sketchup model from the Reconnect competition and shopped out Pacific. Keep in mind that I haven't widened Expo correspondingly, but the difference is rather striking.


With Pacific


Without Pacific

While the Viaducts are still solidly in the middle of the park, they're not disconnecting one side from the other, and could potentially allow for a covered square to be developed underneath them, similar to the already well used skateboard park.

[officedweller]

I really see that park as dividing the neighbourhood.

One thing that it does sort of remind me of is the original 1980s "BC Place" plan that proposed "restored water links" to Chinatown (not feasible due to contamination). However, from what I recall, those plans propsoed a finer grain than an expansive park - so that there were active uses flanking the proposed waterway. I'll try to dig up the brochure.

Who's going to walk across that park in the middle of the night? At least with Pacific Blvd there, there was a safe route along the busy roadway to use. Under this plan, you'd have to detour significantly to walk along the new Pacific Street.

[biketrouble]

Originally Posted by Spikester

Forget about what a nightmare that (a 5% grade) would be on a snowy day for a moment.

Not a good argument. There are at least two sections of Granville Street south of the bridge that are > 5% grade based on a quick check with VanMap. Both 5th to Broadway and south of 16th have elevation gains of 16m over 300m. Somehow we soldier on...

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

Do you think the benefit is mostly from tightening up Pacific and Expo into one street though?

It would play a role, but that highlights a big opportunity cost by leaving the viaducts up - You can't establish a firm plan for traffic management and street lay-out until you know what the long term plan for the viaducts are. Most of you would reconsider demolishing the viaducts at the end of the service life before we sink major repair money in (versus the lions gate, or oak street bridge). But it would seem haphazard to tighten up the surface streets now, build the neighbourhood now, then demolish the viaducts in ? 20-30 yrs.

WRT the size of the park, correct me if i'm wrong but I think the high levels contaminated soil make them lean towards capping it and building a park and preclude building structures, not unlike andy livingston park. of course, the plan is preliminary, they may contemplate building south of pac bvld where it is less contaminated. (edit - the area mentioned seems to be where the viaducts currently run...)



http://www.al.gov.bc.ca/clad/ccs/pacific_place/images/slide21_hazardous_waste.jpg

[officedweller]

Interesting that the above map and the new proposal show similar Expo 86 era layouts of Pacific Boulevard.

I'm thinking that Expo Boulevard may continue to exist in the proposed plan, but instead of branching, it will be accessed from an intersection just east of the Georgia ramp. The render shows a curvey road, which I think is Expo Blvd. i.e. access to Costco must be maintained!

*********

Found this site regarding existing plans for the remaining part of Creekside Park:

http://www.pwlpartnership.com/our-portfolio#our-portfolio/parks-plazas/creekside-park

Creekside Park

Creekside Park / Creekside Park Extension
Vancouver, British Columbia
1989-Present

PWL has been working with the Vancouver Parks Board, Science World and Concord Pacific on Creekside Park and Creekside Park Extension since 1989. The original Creekside Park was developed after Expo 86 to provide park space at the end of False Creek for new residents. The Creekside Park Extension Project went through a public workshop process with residents and park users to determine a program and park concept. The park will be built as part of the remaining lands become developed in Northeast False Creek.

http://www.pwlpartnership.com/our-portfolio#our-portfolio/parks-plazas/creekside-park



http://www.pwlpartnership.com/our-portfolio#our-portfolio/parks-plazas/creekside-park



http://www.pwlpartnership.com/our-portfolio#our-portfolio/parks-plazas/creekside-park

Incidentally - PWL Partnership appears to be involved in the current DIALOG - Beasley proposal:

http://www.pwlpartnership.com/our-portfolio/planning-urban-design/reconnect-visualizing-viaducts

[BCPhil]

The only reason the Viaducts act as perceived barriers is because there are physical barriers underneath them today: FENCES! Which slide 11 makes a nice point of. It's not really the viaduct's fault there are barbed wire topped fences in NEFC. Those fences aren't there to protect the viaducts, they are there because the land is dangerous.

Not only are there fences under the viaducts, there are fences lining Pacific, lining the seawall, lining the parking lots. Fences everywhere you look in NEFC! And Andy Livingston Park's odd layout and landscaping, and it's fences surrounding the playing field, don't help much to the whole "walk past me to the water" vibe.

I've always wondered if the viaducts would be a barrier if, not only was the land under them cleaned and open to the public, but if there was something on the waterfront to go to!

Who in their right mind has this as their plan: "Yes, let me walk from Chinatown to look at a giant parking lot on the water and piles of Concord Pacific Garbage. What?! There are viaducts in the way? Nuts to that idea. My life is ruined!"

Tear down the fences, clean up the garbage and filth, plant some grass, and install some lights, and you'll see incredible change and save millions of dollars. Then we can talk about if the Viaducts are an actual barrier, or just a perceived one.

[BCPhil]

But as far as plans for the viaducts go, at least this one is the best they've come up with. At the least it is serviceable.

The concept of combining Expo and Pacific is decent, and simplifies things concerning Georgia and how you get people between up top and down low. But to do that you would need to widen Georgia past the townhouses at Spectrum. You have to make it so that Georgia can handle what it does now, PLUS, what Dunsmuir handles. And I don't think the presented concept addresses that.

Also, as pointed out, the traffic flow looks confusing. So many turns to navigate downtown. To enter downtown you travel down Terminal, turn right onto Quebec, turn left on New Pacific, turn right onto Georgia? So much stop and go during the day. The area will just be crowded and noisy and not as pleasant as they envision. It will just be clogged with cars.

Plus isn't there a parkade entrance to Rogers Arena right where they propose to have the intersection?

The Quebec and Pacific intersection might be better if it were more like today, and through traffic went between Quebec and Pacific and Quebec/Columbia was the turn. But as drawn it might work if they build the Malkin connector. But there is no mention on that, or traffic flow/volume impacts at all.

The drawings seem to show a streetcar alignment, which is interesting as they've completely turned their back on the streetcar project while in office, so far in that the Downtown Historic Railway has shut its doors this year!

But the Streetcar alignment doesn't show how it would (or if it does) go into Chinatown and Gastown down Quebec/Columbia. So is cutting SEFC off from Chinatown part of this plan too?

Because other than making Carrall straight, and pedestrian only, (and newsflash, that street is there now), they don't remove any "barrier" on getting to False Creek. There is still a big park in the way. People don't use parks when it's raining or at night, so it's a barrier except 3 months a year, and during the day, when it's nice.

It doesn't connect the DTES with Yaletown anymore than proposals that incorporate the Viaducts. Those Concord Pacific buildings will be in that location with or without the Viaducts.

[hollywoodnorth]

I have been so busy with work the last week. BUT ATTENTION EVERYONE ITS ON!!

Open houses will be held on:

June 5, Woodward's Atrium, 4-7 p.m.

June 7, Creekside Community Centre, 3:30-6:30 p.m.

June 9, Central Library Promenade, 10 a.m.-2 p.m.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/Vancouver+ho...s+today/6695720/story.html#ixzz1wy8mL8r8

[jlousa]

I'll be there tonight and report back, might stop by on Saturday as well.

[jlousa]

Just returned, nothing new to add, it certainly looks like a done deal though. Meggs was there as was Toderian. I've seen Toderian at a few events recently and it's odd how chummy he still is with council members considering...
Highly recommend everyone here visit one of the remaining open houses and voice your opinion either way.

Any policy wonks out there know what would happen if Meggs does jump to the provincial level and Vision loses the by-election and no longer have the 2/3rds required vote for capital expenditures?

[p78hub]

So, typical Vision? Did anyone bring up the fact that Georgia Viaduct pretty much belongs to Translink?

[Hed Kandi]

..

[jlousa]

How do you figure the BIG proposal is affected either way by the viaducts?

[Hed Kandi]

..

[hollywoodnorth]

80MILLION DOLLARS IS THE PROJECTED COST ... seems low to me for all they want to do.

ALSO they don't include ANY soil remediation costs .... as to quote to semi-retarded british planner guy that was there answering questions "thats a provincial obligation" ..... ummmm how is that? they want to realign Carall Street RIGHT through the huge mound of contaminated soil ..... oh ya thats smart and the province should pay for that ...... ummmm not.

Expo Street will remain OPEN and connect to a intersection with Pacific. I project a easy 10-15 minute added drive in rush hour traffic for traffic going east out of downtown on prior due to all the added interections along Pacific. CRAZY STUFF

projected traffic increase on HASTINGS STREET ........ 25% ......... in other words 25% more pedestrian strikes than we have now. it will be a crackhead bowling ally down there with cars and trucks as the balls I tell ya!

at the open house there was NO one there in support of the project that I heard talk ... other than "Meggers".

Strathcona people were asking how this would help them .... and they got nothing. MALKIN was brough up by me but it was said that it would work perfectly with the "viaduct removal" and the new Prior connecting to Pacific to the new Georgia Ramp. oh ya with 10-15 minutes added to the trip!

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by hollywoodnorth

80MILLION DOLLARS IS THE PROJECTED COST ... seems low to me for all they want to do.

ALSO they don't include ANY soil remediation costs .... as to quote to semi-retarded british planner guy that was there answering questions "thats a provincial obligation" ..... ummmm how is that? they want to realign Carall Street RIGHT through the huge mound of contaminated soil ..... oh ya thats smart and the province should pay for that ...... ummmm not.

Expo Street will remain OPEN and connect to a intersection with Pacific. I project a easy 10-15 minute added drive in rush hour traffic for traffic going east out of downtown on prior due to all the added interections along Pacific. CRAZY STUFF

projected traffic increase on HASTINGS STREET ........ 25% ......... in other words 25% more pedestrian strikes than we have now. it will be a crackhead bowling ally down there with cars and trucks as the balls I tell ya!

at the open house there was NO one there in support of the project that I heard talk ... other than "Meggers".

Strathcona people were asking how this would help them .... and they got nothing. MALKIN was brough up by me but it was said that it would work perfectly with the "viaduct removal" and the new Prior connecting to Pacific to the new Georgia Ramp. oh ya with 10-15 minutes added to the trip!

Apparently Meggs is under the impression that Vancouverites don't get dinged as provincial taxpayers for his pet project. God help us if he runs and wins for Vancouver Fairview.

I wouldn't want to be a Spectrum resident and have to listen to cars and trucks rev and climb their way up the new Georgia Street ramp.

[wrenegade]

I also stopped by last night, but only had time for stay for a half hour or so. I also found it interesting that environmental remediation wasn't even mentioned as a potential cost, let alone included in the budget. Apparently the land freed up between Quebec and Gore is worth $75M, enough to almost cover the costs. I personally don't see it worth that much, especially with the large, humming Murrin substation immediately across the street.

Also, I personally don't see how the separation, real or perceived, will be that much different with the Skytrain guideway fenced off along Expo/Pacific between Carrel and Quebec. Much of what the city has proposed can be accomplished by realigning and pedestrian-izing Carrel and ending the Viaducts at Main street, without negatively affecting traffic. Creekside Park was already going to exist. I believe the extra money saved should be spent building the Malkin connector and taking traffic off of Prior. The Strathcona neighbourhood would be MUCH better under that plan.

[Zassk]

Couldn't the proposed Pacific Boulevard realignment be built without tearing down the viaducts? Wouldn't that free up most of the land that would be reclaimed under this plan, consolidate parcels, etc.?