Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

Here is an excerpt from an article in Business In Vancouver discussing the expected slowdown in the downtown office market and some of its likely causes. One of the potential causes discussed is access to the downtown core:

And of course one has to wonder what the construction nightmare will be as the viaducts are removed. They wont be able to contruct their Georgia Street skijump until the viaduct is gone - how is that going to work?

Its bad enough Vancouver is one of the few cities I've seen that allows developers virtually free reigh to disrupt traffic to suit their needs. The construction mess around Telus Garden was a nightmare. Maybe on Gregor's next junket to New York he should check out how they manage to build skyscrapers without massive closures of active traffic lanes!

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by whatnext

And of course one has to wonder what the construction nightmare will be as the viaducts are removed. They wont be able to contruct their Georgia Street skijump until the viaduct is gone - how is that going to work?

Its bad enough Vancouver is one of the few cities I've seen that allows developers virtually free reigh to disrupt traffic to suit their needs. The construction mess around Telus Garden was a nightmare. Maybe on Gregor's next junket to New York he should check out how they manage to build skyscrapers without massive closures of active traffic lanes!

Maybe he can also ask how they are managing to spend $4 BILLION on the transit station under One World Trade.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by whatnext

And of course one has to wonder what the construction nightmare will be as the viaducts are removed. They wont be able to contruct their Georgia Street skijump until the viaduct is gone - how is that going to work?

Its bad enough Vancouver is one of the few cities I've seen that allows developers virtually free reigh to disrupt traffic to suit their needs. The construction mess around Telus Garden was a nightmare. Maybe on Gregor's next junket to New York he should check out how they manage to build skyscrapers without massive closures of active traffic lanes!

This! This is a major area of frustration for me in Metro Vancouver (not just the municipality of Vancouver). I have never, ever, anywhere, seen such poor practices in terms of construction and road disruptions and road maintenance. I do not understand how they can justify these things in the day time, during peak periods of traffic, and without blinking a eye at the congestion and overall mess they create. Last week I happened to be in Seattle/Portland/Astoria and I found it refreshing that they did not disrupt traffic to such a degree (if at all) and worked hard to maintain road capacity during maintenance and other nearby construction. But the best part was that most of the major road construction/maintenance/etc. took place at night (who would have guessed that this was a good idea).

These disruptions have a real costs to society, for them to probably save $10 on planning/managing/labour they cost society a $100.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

Here is an excerpt from an article in Business In Vancouver discussing the expected slowdown in the downtown office market and some of its likely causes. One of the potential causes discussed is access to the downtown core:

This is Chicken Little dressed up in respectable business clothes. The same kind of "carmaggedon" scare was loudly proclaimed about about the Powell Street closure, but that doesn't seem to have actually stopped people from coming downtown.

[spm2013]

....

[jlousa]

You are right the closure of Powell has increased the trips d/t.
I am able to consistently beat cars on my walk home since the closure, as the back up along Cordova now stretches back to Seymour in the afternoons. I know my home is much more livable now with the cars idling down below. But I know that the desired outcome will come and those cars will eventually disappear as the drivers get fed up over time.

[makr3trkr]

While the Powell closure (or any road closure) may not have caused obvious visible disruption doesn't mean there aren't unintended consequences -

e.g. cars rat running in alleys or residential streets, increased conflict points between pedestrians and cyclists, increased traffic in school zones, trucks taking different or longer routes, increased noise and pollution, effects on local businesses, and probably other things that don't immediately come to mind.

There is black and white thinking on both sides of the issue when it comes to removing the viaducts.

[cairnstone]

If the city is really going to take down the viaducts why are they going to the trouble to replace the joints on the Georgia via duct

[Alex Mackinnon]

Probably liability. Can't skimp on previously scheduled maintenance.

I have to say anecdotally that rat running through Strathcona has increased quite significantly since Powell closed. Lots of traffic takes Pender all the way to Campbell in order to attempt to bypass the mess on Hastings.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

This is Chicken Little dressed up in respectable business clothes. The same kind of "carmaggedon" scare was loudly proclaimed about about the Powell Street closure, but that doesn't seem to have actually stopped people from coming downtown.

The Powell St closure has caused me to choose the equidistant Lions Gate bridge over Ironworkers, so now I drive through downtown all the time to get anywhere west of Main. Pretty sure that isn't preferable to city planners.

If the viaducts are removed my use of Lions Gate bridge may continue after Powell is available again. I already avoid Georgia because it is a constant traffic jam, but no viaducts will make all the other east side routes worse.

It's interesting/sad to watch the two north shore options compete to see which one can get more congested over time.

[jlousa]

In an very unusual move, the city has released two rfps but has not made them public. You need to sign a non-disclosure agreement in order to get them. I can't figure out what could be in those documents that necessitates a NDA. I can see the need for secrecy in ongoing contract negotiations in order to ultimately protect taxpayers interests, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.
Any insight?

NORTHEAST FALSE CREEK TRANSPORTATION STUDY
http://former.vancouver.ca/fs/bid/bidopp/RFP/documents/PS20131164-Non-DisclosureAgreement.pdf

PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF THE GEORGIA RAMP AND STEPS
http://former.vancouver.ca/fs/bid/bidopp/RFP/documents/PS20131165-Non-DisclosureAgreement.pdf

The NDAs seem to be identical... here are a couple of quotes.

5.0 Legal Requirement to Disclose
5.1 If the Recipient or any of the Recipient’s Team is or becomes legally required to disclose any Confidential Material to a government body or court of law, the Recipient agrees, to the extent permissible by law, to give, and will ensure that the Recipient’s Team give, the City sufficient advance notice to enable the City the opportunity to contest the disclosure or obtain a protective order

7.0 Injunctive Relief

7.1 The Recipient acknowledges and agrees with the City that
(a) the secrecy of the Confidential Material is of the utmost importance to the City, and the Confidential Material is of a sensitive and confidential
nature such that monetary damages alone may be inadequate to protect
the City’s interests against any actual or threatened breach of this Agreement

(b) the covenants and conditions of this Agreement are reasonable and
necessary for the protection of the City’s business and security and all
defences to the strict enforcement thereof by the City are hereby waived
by the Recipient to the fullest extent permitted by law, and

(c) a violation of any of the provisions of this Agreement will result in
immediate and irreparable damage to the City, and so the City will, in
addition to any other rights to relief, be entitled to the remedies of
specific performance and injunctive or other equitable relief in respect of
any actual or threatened breach of this Agreement, without proof of
actual damages or the inadequacy of monetary damages.

8.0 General

8.1 Upon the request at any time of the City, the Recipient will promptly
destroy all Confidential Material and any copies or reproductions thereof in the Recipient’s possession or under its control or in the possession or under the control of any of the Recipient’s Team, and will certify in writing such destruction or return of all Confidential Material. If compliance with the foregoing would violate any applicable law or regulation, then such information may be retained provided that it is not used for any purpose
other than to evidence the Recipient’s compliance with such law or regulation, and such retained information must be maintained in
confidence as set forth in this Agreement

The wording of the NDA I'm sure will ruffle some feathers over at cityhallwatch.

[theKB]

Originally Posted by jlousa

The wording of the NDA I'm sure will ruffle some feathers over at cityhallwatch.

Suffice it to say this is a done deal?

[jlousa]

Can't say for sure w/o seeing the rfps. I can't recall any other rfp being issued under a NDA by the COV in the last decade.

[theKB]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Can't say for sure w/o seeing the rfps. I can't recall any other rfp being issued under a NDA by the COV in the last decade.

IMO infrastructure projects should as this should be above board but it just seems as though there is something to hide the way the city has approached this.

[city-dweller]

I agree it appears odd. But for a moment lets suppose its not politics. It is common for NDAs to be used when advance knowledge could lead to increased costs to the city or a third-party can unfairly benefit. Concord is the main player here who will benefit no matter what happens so it would have to be the land to the east of Quebec or Main that would be in play. The original recommendation was to phase removal the viaducts by shortening them to Main Street. Due to the holding cost of land and the uncertainty of this project, an rfp could final provide the certainty to the other developers. As for the issue of creating extra costs to the city, I don't see how the city would incur extra costs beyond the project unless the rfp caused a third-party legal action. So, it may be for political reasons, but it could also be due to other considerations.

[spm2013]

....

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by spm2013

If the advanced knowledge is so valuable they probably already are reading a copy as we speak.

And where is PavCo/BC Place on the viaducts removal. Did they find some resolution to their issues?

Is there not also a concern that if the Viaducts are removed, this will negatively impact downtown office space and construction due to reduced accessibility?
Has there been any feedback from the downtown business community on what seems an inevitable removal of the Viaducts?

[theKB]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Is there not also a concern that if the Viaducts are removed, this will negatively impact downtown office space and construction due to reduced accessibility?
Has there been any feedback from the downtown business community on what seems an inevitable removal of the Viaducts?

I was under the impression that the downtown BIA was opposed to any sort of viaduct removal. PAVCO is also in opposition. I think the aqualini's are for it but one could assume that they like the idea because it opens more land for development.

The viaducts have a lot of life left in them, isn't there other thing the city could spend the money on????

[nefc]

On my way home last night I noticed a Tervita/HAZCO excavator under the viaducts just to the west of the skatepark. There were some large soil stockpiles in the same area, with some smaller covered stockpiles further to the west (adjacent to Carrall). I wasn't able to see the actual excavation, but I assume this is part of some sort of environmental/geotechnical investigation work related to the viaducts. I suppose it could be stockpiled soil from another excavation (One Pacific, maybe?). Anyone know what's going on?

[spm2013]

....