Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I think the biggest issue is that buildings can have frontage on a ground-level street whereas that's pretty difficult to do with the viaducts, particularly given the fact that they won't last as long as newly constructed buildings will.

With that thinking we should also not be building Vancouver House around the Granville Street Bridge because that building will last muchy longer than the bridge... Same with anything around the Expo Line guideway.

Fact is engineering reports conducted by Translink and the Province only a few years ago (just before this debate started) stated that the viaducts were in excellent condition (better than most bridge structures around). Amazingly, the city of Vancouver did their own study (just after this debate started) and stated that the viaducts were in terrible state and need to be torn down (I am surprised no journalist has ever pointed out this amazingly corrupt report).

All tower plans just before this debate were going to build in and around with streetfront retail and plaza access to False Creek. The viaducts are in good shape and simple ipkeep can keep them around for many decades to come (just as we can do with the Granville Bridge and Burrard Bridge).

The city of Vancouver is doing to the viaducts what Republicans in the USA to do transit, choke it off and make it fail.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Given that the viaducts have no points of conflicts (intersections) accidents are very rare on them that will block all 3 lanes. (the new surface roads will likely have many more accidents)

But in the event of a traffic obstacle an ambulance can usually take the opposing traffic lanes. That's not possible on the viaducts because the eastbound and westbound traffic lanes are completely separate structures.

It's an interesting question - I wonder what the policy of the BC Ambulance Service really is?

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Given that the viaducts have no points of conflicts (intersections) accidents are very rare on them that will block all 3 lanes. (the new surface roads will likely have many more accidents)

Also, seeing how many apps there are these days with real time traffic conditions, I am sure any ambulace will have such traffic technology available to them.

If there is an accident on the viaduct, I am sure the surface options that exist today will still be there.

I am sure the viaducts can be retrofited when the new hospital opens to have an emergency vehicle only lane / off ramp. Wont be very hard to do. And there is also the main street off ramp.

Accidents aside, the 2 lanes of whatever off ramp will be occupied by traffic withy no where for them to pull over to get out of the way. Retroffitting a special off and on ramps would be pretty expensive to build. You'd be better off building emergency lanes along Pacific.

GO CANUCKS!!!

[WarrenC12]

I'm not sure what my preference is, but I think you guys give the viaducts too much credit. They take up a heck of a lot of space. They are 4 lanes of traffic, but effectively take up the same amount as a 4 lane separated highway. The space in between them is wasted and useless.

On the west side where they run on either side of Rogers Arena, there is a potential for some usable ground level space. But on the east side where they gradually move down to street level, there is a large area the is pretty much useless underneath.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I'm not sure what my preference is, but I think you guys give the viaducts too much credit. They take up a heck of a lot of space. They are 4 lanes of traffic, but effectively take up the same amount as a 4 lane separated highway. The space in between them is wasted and useless.

On the west side where they run on either side of Rogers Arena, there is a potential for some usable ground level space. But on the east side where they gradually move down to street level, there is a large area the is pretty much useless underneath.

This point would have more credit if Visions plan was not to simply replace that section of the viaducts with a big open green field. Such park space can easily be made with the viaducts in place. The viaducts can even be used as shelter for such park facilities as basketball courts, tennic courts, etc...

If not that, low rise structures can still be built under them.

Our viaducts are actually quite tall and have very few pilars compared to most, making them relatively easy to build around.

That, and they can be utalized more than they are now, again such as directing more traffic onto them while calming (reclaiming) the surface streets.

In all honesty, the only section that will really have developable space gained by their removal is the short section near main street. For me, this small benefit / pro is far outweighed by the cost / cons.

[WarrenC12]

Here it is under a different name...

http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/false-creek-flats.aspx

At least this looks like a more comprehensive approach to the area. Should be interesting... NEFC and the Flats will be the places to watch over the next 10 years, anchored by a new St. Pauls (fingers crossed it happens).

[nefc]

Update - council report is expected in the fall: http://metronews.ca/news/vancouver/1397741/future-of-vancouver-viaducts-to-be-decided-in-fall-2015/

[trofirhen]

This one's going to be a hottie, whichever way the decision goes. If removed, the replacement road will have to have enough lanespace.
Already, noticeable in the Rogers complex, the Viaducts are being ever more "assimilated" into the very urban fabric.
What about speedy access to the proposed hospital? Or maybe more greenspace? Treated how?

[city-dweller]

I thought I would post some of the Georgia St pictures I took recently:
(sorry it is links -I didn't realize google photos doesn't have direct links)

Looking towards the stadium

Looking NW

[jsbertram]

While the Vancouver seems to have lost their "Vision" of life under the viaducts, NYC hasn't :

http://www.streetsblog.org/2015/06/18/un...t-seeks-to-revive-nycs-neglected-spaces/

Its a bit harder for them to just eliminate a major traffic structure and let drivers find alternative routes, so they "reclaim the space".

[Metro-One]

Toronto city council has also just voted to rebuild a large portion of the Gardner viaduct. Instead of simply tearing it down they have come up with a great compromise.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Toronto city council has also just voted to rebuild a large portion of the Gardner viaduct. Instead of simply tearing it down they have come up with a great compromise.

Great!! Got any more info on this? A link? I think we need to look at it, if possible. Thanks, Metro

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Toronto city council has also just voted to rebuild a large portion of the Gardner viaduct. Instead of simply tearing it down they have come up with a great compromise.

Toronto always seems to have a ton of money to throw around. I'll hold my judgement on that decision until we see the result.

[s211]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Toronto always seems to have a ton of money to throw around. I'll hold my judgement on that decision until we see the result.

Must be all those positive-cashflowing companies in Ontario that actually have net revenues, such that they incur corporate income taxes, as opposed to all of the startups and development-stage companies here that never pay a dime?

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by s211

Must be all those positive-cashflowing companies in Ontario that actually have net revenues, such that they incur corporate income taxes, as opposed to all of the startups and development-stage companies here that never pay a dime?

Ontario has been bleeding red since 2008, provincial debt has increased about $100B. It's always easy to spend other people's money:

[nefc]

"Viaduct Study Completion
We are nearing completion of the technical studies we have undertaken on the viaducts over the past two years. We will be consulting with the public over summer 2015 on their progress in advance of Council considering the future of the viaducts in September. We would love to hear your thoughts. For more information please visit vancouver.ca/viaducts."

From: http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/northeast-false-creek.aspx

Also, there are some new slides (I think they're new) under the heading "Viaduct essentials: What you need to know" located here: http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/viaducts-study.aspx

[nefc]

There's also more information at the bottom of the Viaducts Study page, under Progress, including a new timeline:

Progress on this initiative
Advancing towards a decision on the Future of Vancouver’s viaducts
June 24, 2015 - Based on the proposed concept for the area Council voted unanimously in 2013 to move forward with the final phase of pre-planning work for removal of the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts.

Some concerns were expressed by stakeholders, which included the accuracy of the transportation analysis, the length of construction and associated traffic impacts and a commitment on the future of Malkin Avenue as an arterial connection. Council directed staff to undertake a more in-depth analysis of transportation and financial impacts of the viaducts replacement.

Over the past two years (2013-2015) City staff has been busy conducting this analysis. In summer 2015 City staff will be presenting the results of these studies to inform Council’s consideration of the future of the viaducts this September.

Come learn more about Vancouver’s viaducts at the following events
Thursday, June 25, 1 – 7 pm, at Pop-up City Hall, Seawall, 1800 Spyglass Place
Saturday, June 27, 5 – 10 pm, at Farmers’ Night Market Plaza of Nations, 750 Pacific Blvd
Tuesday, June 30, 7 – 11 pm at Greenest City Celebration, Roundhouse Community Centre | Get your free tickets
Saturday, July 11, 7 – 11 pm at Farmers’ Night Market, Plaza of Nations, 750 Pacific Blvd
More to come (check back for updates in July)

[trofirhen]

Done deal, it seems.
I just hope that one the new road sysem there's enough lane space, the least number of traffic lights and that the traffic never gridlocks, not to mention that ambulances must pass often quickly to the planned new hospital.

The smart thing to do, if they're going through with the removal would be
to build the new road first.
If we end up for a while with no viaducts and no new road yet finished ..... need I saymore. . . . except maybe "Yikes!!!"

Perhaps the intersection where Georgia could be adapted planned to meet the new road, the design of which was posted on a thread here recently.
Sort of a diamond or baketweave interchange. Through lanes, on and off lanes (as per Georgia) and nno lights. Would the original poster please step forward? Thanks a lot!

There's one in Calgary, too. We might adapt a more modest version
One big difference here is that no Interstate to deal with.
Something taking certain elements of it might just work

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD-0QnUlLOQ

Hey: engineers and others, please: if it got ithe whole shebang backwards, just tell me!

[s211]

Originally Posted by nefc

"Viaduct Study Completion
We are nearing completion of the technical studies we have undertaken on the viaducts over the past two years. We will be consulting with the public over summer 2015 on their progress in advance of Council considering the future of the viaducts in September. We would love to hear your thoughts. For more information please visit vancouver.ca/viaducts."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Coming from the City, that's just rich, a rich steaming load of fertilizer.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I just hope that one the new road sysem there's enough lane space, the least number of traffic lights and that the traffic never gridlocks, not to mention that ambulances must pass often quickly to the planned new hospital.

I imagine that in congested traffic ambulances are apt to fare better on a surface street where they can go through red lights, use the opposing traffic lane, or divert to alternate streets if necessary.