Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by logan5

My observation is that I have not noticed a change on Hastings at all, but observations can be a little distorted or exaggerated. If traffic volumes are higher before Victoria, this means traffic volumes will be less past Victoria. Overall volumes are constant. If volumes are increased in one area, they will decrease in another. So to be fair, how much time savings are there past Victoria?

I think more of the traffic stays on Hastings. Not all that many cars divert after Powell due to the aforementioned crappy left hand turns. 8-12 cars at Clark turning left per light cycle doesn't make for a full Powell St.

They've also gotten rid of the double right hand turn at Nanaimo and Dundas (Powell), to encourage people to go down Hastings. Amusingly most people don't seem to notice that the double right has been removed and do it anyways.

[theKB]

This seems to be Viaduct removal related. Residents angry that BC assessment reassessed concords land at $1.

Some residents in Vancouver’s False Creek neighbourhood say they’re outraged the value of acres of prime waterfront property has dropped to a dollar.

Concord Pacific has promised to develop a nine-acre parcel of land east of The Plaza of Nations into a park and transfer it to the city.

But residents appealed a $400,000 assessment because they say the company currently makes substantial revenue from the property through parking and events like Cirque du Soleil.

Fern Jeffries with the False Creek Residents Association says not only did the appeal fail, the assessment has now been dropped from $400,000 to $1.

cbc.ca

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-co.../bc-concord-pacific-land-assessment.html

Really implied that the whole "redevelopment" is a foregone conclusion as they are most likely waiting for that to happen to commence development.

[spm2013]

....

[officedweller]

The news reports said that the assessed value was higher than $400K, but the assessment was droipped to $1 because of the costs of developing the park on the site.

That's rather odd, and sets a bad precedent in favour of developers who have large sites which will include future parks. It sounds like the developer may be able to appeal to have the area designated for the "future" park dropped to $1 (or at least reduce the assessment for the larger parcel.
i.e. Holborn and the Little Mountain lands...

Originally Posted by theKB

Really implied that the whole "redevelopment" is a foregone conclusion as they are most likely waiting for that to happen to commence development.

That parcel was always going to be a park even before the viaduct removal scenario (it is highly contaminated).

[Jebby]

Do we really need another 9 acre empty grass field?

[s211]

Originally Posted by officedweller

The news reports said that the assessed value was higher than $400K, but the assessment was droipped to $1 because of the costs of developing the park on the site.

That's rather odd, and sets a bad precedent in favour of developers who have large sites which will include future parks. It sounds like the developer may be able to appeal to have the area designated for the "future" park dropped to $1 (or at least reduce the assessment for the larger parcel.
i.e. Holborn and the Little Mountain lands...

That parcel was always going to be a park even before the viaduct removal scenario (it is highly contaminated).

I think that what's galling is that Concord currently runs the land as a commercial enterprise. It should still be assessed on that basis until such time as it actually becomes a park. Beforehand, Concord's getting another corporate handout.

[red-paladin]

Originally Posted by Jebby

Do we really need another 9 acre empty grass field?

Have to build a park in the name of re-unitfying Downtown and the DTES / Chinatown that actually permanently keeps the communities separate you know.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by s211

I think that what's galling is that Concord currently runs the land as a commercial enterprise. It should still be assessed on that basis until such time as it actually becomes a park. Beforehand, Concord's getting another corporate handout.

Agreed. Plus there's no guarantee that the site will all be a park until it has been redeveloped into a park.

[theKB]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Agreed. Plus there's no guarantee that the site will all be a park until it has been redeveloped into a park.

until that point they will continue to make good money off of events at rogers arena and bc place!

[twoNeurons]

I think it's a long time before Concord builds out that land. We're been on the razor's edge for affordability all across Canada and the government's been sending the public warning signs off the bow for some time now in anticipation of a major collapse of housing prices. They're trying to deflate this bubble gently, but it doesn't seem to be working.

RBC just upped their mortgage rate to 3.89% (4th time in the last 2 months). Compared to the spring, that's ~200$ monthly on a $400,000 mortgage.

With the US economy looking good, we're likely to start seeing a return to more sustainable interest rates.

Food for thought... The following have approximately the same monthly payment ($1900):

$400,000 mortgage @ 3%
$265,000 mortgage @ 7%

(For a condo, you can probably add about $400 - $500 monthly in fees and taxes.)

[spm2013]

....

[logan5]

I can hardly contain my excitement either. "Carmageddon North" will be the last nail in the coffin for the viaducts.

[spm2013]

....

[Metro-One]

Ugh, there never are carmageddons, people adapt, similar to how city life goes on when there is a full transit strike, people adapt.

The question is if that new equilibrium is beneficial for the city of not. This is why you can not judge a roadway's / transit line's worth to an area simply by closing it down for a short period.

Again, this has been a farce of a process and a colossal waste of time, money, andenergy that could have been focussed on so many other issues in the city.

[twoNeurons]

Carmageddon North? Back to school? Back to Work? Why would that be the nail in the coffin for the viaducts? Am I missing something?

[spm2013]

....

[Pinion]

I literally took a job transfer in part so I wouldn't have to drive to Vancouver/down Hastings anymore. How's that for adapting.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by logan5

The Powell St. closure seems like a pretty good test for the eventual dismantling of the viaducts. I think the city added a left turn lane and tinkered with traffic signals in order to accommodate the extra volume diverted from Powell St. The underutilized viaducts would be replaced by a rebuilt Pacific Blvd and connecting streets. A much more substantial countermeasure to what was done for Powell St.

All the proponents of the viaducts seem to be conveniently ignoring the Powell St. closure. If you view the cities decision making process in an unbiased manner then you have to look at the Powell St. example and conclude that maybe the closure of the viaducts will not be a disaster like some are predicting.



I think this is a common attitude. An opportunity to bash certain policy makers supersedes common sense and the chance to improve the livability of our city.

How can you support the removal of an elevated structure with evidence from the construction of another elevated structure?

I know what you are getting at with the traffic as it is right now, but the statement is just too ironic for me to take.

[spm2013]

....

[Zassk]

Yes, it'll be much easier for pedestrians/bikes to cross a 6-lane "great street" than to walk underneath the viaducts... sigh.