Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[rxp]

Originally Posted by 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!

How would a DDI work there? I am trying to visualize it, but cannot. Anyone able to do a rough sketch?

[WBC]

Originally Posted by 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)

How about instead of those 4 "events" we save some money and instead we have Rene just build a condo sales center under the viaduct and have him run it under the tried and true slogan - "The last Vancouver Oceanfront opportunity". He can build one of those cute mock ups that would also show the new road layout...

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by rxp

How would a DDI work there? I am trying to visualize it, but cannot. Anyone able to do a rough sketch?

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=7080669#post7080669

found the thread; hope it works. (seems to; about midway down)

Thank you, VancouverOfTheFuture

[GlassCity]

Dave White ‏@1130reporter 13m13 minutes ago
Vancouver's Downtown Business Improvement Association told there is a strong likelihood the Viaducts are coming down. City report in Sept.

https://twitter.com/1130reporter/status/621419593396060160

[IanS]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Dave White ‏@1130reporter 13m13 minutes ago
Vancouver's Downtown Business Improvement Association told there is a strong likelihood the Viaducts are coming down. City report in Sept.

https://twitter.com/1130reporter/status/621419593396060160

Not exactly a surprise. Disappointment, for sure. But not a surprise.

[WarrenC12]

The only information I've seen is $40M-$60M to seismically retrofit the viaducts. Does anybody know or remember what has been spent on the Burrard Bridge to retrofit?

DTVBIA is saying only 10% of traffic entering and leaving downtown uses the viaducts. That's pretty low, although I'd rather the number coming from the east, IE not using a bridge to get in.

[GlassCity]

Vancouver council set to make final decision to tear down Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts in September

VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) – The Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts will likely be torn down, that’s what the Downtown Vancouver Business Improvement Association (BIA) tells NEWS 1130 it has been informed by City Hall.

So how would your commute into the city centre change?

Georgia Street would be brought down to an expanded Pacific Boulevard with a schematic Charles Gauthier with the BIA calls similar to Cambie Street leading into downtown.

“The Georgia Street Viaduct would be removed and replaced with what we call a regular network,” he tells NEWS 1130.

Gauthier says the Dunsmuir Viaduct would be replaced by what the city is calling an “active transportation bridge” for pedestrians and cyclists only...

Read more: http://www.news1130.com/2015/07/15/city-...rgia-and-dunsmuir-viaducts-in-september/

[s211]

Originally Posted by IanS

Not exactly a surprise. Disappointment, for sure. But not a surprise.

Likely scenario:

MEGGS (in a bloodlust): just give me a report that says "tear 'em down", or I'll club you with my bike tire pump. Or tell your urbanist brethren that you secretly subscribe to Car & Driver.

PLANNER (pops a retsina to prepare for an extended period of bootlicking): would you like the cover page to show unicorns eating the carcasses of automobile drivers?

MEGGS: it's like you were reading my mind! I like the cut of your jib. Here, let me raise your living wage by 50%.

[WBC]

Originally Posted by s211

Likely scenario:

MEGGS (in a bloodlust): just give me a report that says "tear 'em down", or I'll club you with my bike tire pump. Or tell your urbanist brethren that you secretly subscribe to Car & Driver.

PLANNER (pops a retsina to prepare for an extended period of bootlicking): would you like the cover page to show unicorns eating the carcasses of automobile drivers?

MEGGS: it's like you were reading my mind! I like the cut of your jib. Here, let me raise your living wage by 50%.

The hilarious part is that as soon as you cross Main street and start driving on the Terminal avenue you hit brand new car dealership after car dealership (mind you this was supposed to be Vancouver's high tech center (yet another Vancouver's failed jobs fantasy but that one brought to you by NPA), which has now turned into car dealerships, car washes, drive through Timmy's and Starbucks heaven). Talk about mixed messages. So to sum it up: West of Main street you are supposed to walk and bike. East of Main street you are supposed to drive. It cannot be more clear then that.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The only information I've seen is $40M-$60M to seismically retrofit the viaducts. Does anybody know or remember what has been spent on the Burrard Bridge to retrofit?

DTVBIA is saying only 10% of traffic entering and leaving downtown uses the viaducts. That's pretty low, although I'd rather the number coming from the east, IE not using a bridge to get in.

It has to be pointed out that the Burrard Bridge is a little more essential than the viaducts are. The viaducts have become a bridge over nothing, whereas the Burrard Bridge spans a real geographic obstacle.

[logan5]

Speaking from an afternoon rush perspective, what affect will the removal of the viaduct have on the streets that the viaduct feeds - Main, Prior and Terminal/1st Ave.? During the afternoon rush, these streets slowly crawl along. What good is the viaduct if the surface streets it feeds cannot handle the traffic load coming off the viaduct?

That 1km stretch of expressway will be replaced by an expanded Pacific Blvd, which will likely not be able to move traffic at the same rate as the viaduct, which means traffic will be metered out of downtown at slower rate, decreasing traffic volumes on the streets ahead of it, east and south of the viaduct (Prior and Main etc).

So is fair to say that removing the viaducts would, at worst, smooth out the traffic load instead of the viaduct overloading surface streets as it does now?

[Large Cat]

Originally Posted by logan5

Speaking from an afternoon rush perspective, what affect will the removal of the viaduct have on the streets that the viaduct feeds - Main, Prior and Terminal/1st Ave.? During the afternoon rush, these streets slowly crawl along. What good is the viaduct if the surface streets it feeds cannot handle the traffic load coming off the viaduct?

That 1km stretch of expressway will be replaced by an expanded Pacific Blvd, which will likely not be able to move traffic at the same rate as the viaduct, which means traffic will be metered out of downtown at slower rate, decreasing traffic volumes on the streets ahead of it, east and south of the viaduct (Prior and Main etc).

So is fair to say that removing the viaducts would, at worst, smooth out the traffic load instead of the viaduct overloading surface streets as it does now?

Exactly. Finally someone who understands.

I'm really glad they're planning on keeping the pedestrian/bike connectivity of the dunsmuir viaduct. I'm not sure what that's going to look like though...will they tear down half of the viaduct? Or will they build something entirely different?

[Metro-One]

I love how people against the viaducts will in one hand say that they carry so little traffic that it wont make a difference, and then on the other hand they claim that they are responsible for traffic jams elsewhere in the city... cant have it both ways!

When I left downtown, the viaduct was the only way to go, what will likely happen is new traffic jams along Georgia leaving downtown since it will now come to a T-intersection.

Vision has been caught in the past fudging facts and figures during this entire process (I remember some original display boards having new information on them after the original open house that conflicted with what was stated before).

Again, I dont have to go over how terrible this idea is and how many lies have been said and how the viaducts could actually be used to help traffic calm Hastings and maybe even close Water Street for general traffic.

And how they would perfectly feed the new proposed hospital.

And how they would function far better with the Malcom connector.

Etc...

But, as Meggs told me himself as I cornered him at an open house, "But they are ugly" I kid you not, that became his answer to all my questions. So that is his true motive.

Just to throw dirt into the eye of one of the lies the public was told, you cant build urban space / condos around the viaducts, its dead land! Well, say that to these photos:

Originally Posted by mcminsen

Here's an update on the south tower construction. Not far to go and it will be at ground level.



June 6 '15, my pics

Done!

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I love how people against the viaducts will in one hand say that they carry so little traffic that it wont make a difference, and then on the other hand they claim that they are responsible for traffic jams elsewhere in the city... cant have it both ways!

When I left downtown, the viaduct was the only way to go, what will likely happen is new traffic jams along Georgia leaving downtown since it will now come to a T-intersection.

That makes some sense. Higher traffic volumes in 1 spot means lower traffic volumes in another spot. Net gain/loss = 0. In any event, Georgia Streets capacity is lower than the Georgia Viaducts capacity, so what good is the viaduct if Georgia Street can't utilize it to its full capacity? It's like matching a Ferrari engine with a Honda Fit transmission. Pointless waste of horse power, or in this case pointless waste of freeway capacity.

[WarrenC12]

The viaducts are coming down, might as well get used to it.

I'm not sure I believe either side in the debate. From Yaletown I always take Pacific Blvd out of downtown and it's fine. I'm sure it will continue to be fine.

There is a real divide between the downtown peninsula and the NEFC area. Extending Georgia down the hill and into that area in a pedestrian friendly manner will surely help.

I'm looking forward to finally seeing some change and development in NEFC. If the viaducts have to come down for that, so be it. Life will go on. Just like every other change around here that people claim to be "anti car", after a few months nobody seems to care. I'm so tired of this crowd saying the sky is falling every single time.

For the record, I was against the removal when I first heard of it, as a gut reaction. Now, I wouldn't say I'm for it, more like 50/50, but I am looking forward to some change.

[csbvan]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The viaducts are coming down, might as well get used to it.

I'm not sure I believe either side in the debate. From Yaletown I always take Pacific Blvd out of downtown and it's fine. I'm sure it will continue to be fine.

There is a real divide between the downtown peninsula and the NEFC area. Extending Georgia down the hill and into that area in a pedestrian friendly manner will surely help.

I'm looking forward to finally seeing some change and development in NEFC. If the viaducts have to come down for that, so be it. Life will go on. Just like every other change around here that people claim to be "anti car", after a few months nobody seems to care. I'm so tired of this crowd saying the sky is falling every single time.

For the record, I was against the removal when I first heard of it, as a gut reaction. Now, I wouldn't say I'm for it, more like 50/50, but I am looking forward to some change.

I'm the same way. Neither for or against. But if seismic upgrades are going to cost a fortune, then I guess that would tilt me in favour of demolition.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The viaducts are coming down, might as well get used to it.

I'm not sure I believe either side in the debate. From Yaletown I always take Pacific Blvd out of downtown and it's fine. I'm sure it will continue to be fine.

There is a real divide between the downtown peninsula and the NEFC area. Extending Georgia down the hill and into that area in a pedestrian friendly manner will surely help.

I'm looking forward to finally seeing some change and development in NEFC. If the viaducts have to come down for that, so be it. Life will go on. Just like every other change around here that people claim to be "anti car", after a few months nobody seems to care. I'm so tired of this crowd saying the sky is falling every single time.

For the record, I was against the removal when I first heard of it, as a gut reaction. Now, I wouldn't say I'm for it, more like 50/50, but I am looking forward to some change.

For the record, myself and others who support the viaducts, have and do support other road capacity reductions in the city.

For example i love the new proposal for the Burrard Street Bridge, and i like the ides being floated around for the Granville Street bridge, so no, the sky is not falling.

What has irked me from the get go about this entire situation is the obvious fudging of numbers, the lies, and the other back handed ways this has been pushed through.

Key example was first claiming how many options were being considered, false! It was always full tear down, everything else mentioned was a farce.

Then there was the urban design contest for what to do with the space, now that was a massive dog and poney show! Guess what was picked? The pre-chosen design (which is by far the most boring design, a massive green field...)

Thats the thing, maybe I would not be as upset if at least something interesting was being built in the viaducts place, but nope, big empty field.

Then saying how nothing can be built around them (the entire Rogers complex goes against this).

Also, just before Vision said that the viaducts are in need of big repairs, Translinks own engineering study showed that they are among the most sound bridge structures in the metro! (of course, this was just before the debate started).

So, you can support tearing down the viaducts if you want (honestly I will say this again, keeping them and reducing traffic on Hastings is a far better idea) but please have the balls to admit that the replacement proposal is not the best (or interesting at all) and that some back room sleeze has been part of the process.

[logan5]

How would keeping the viaducts reduce traffic on Hastings Street?

[Metro-One]

Quite easily actually, you build the Malcom connector which would then enhance the viaducts connectivity to the feeding road network on their eastern end. (which was the citys long term plan before this farce started)

Their western end from what I have seen is generally fine (more so before the bike lane was added, but that is another topic. PS, not against having the bike lane itself, but it could have been better designed) Never once had a traffic flow problem east on Georgia myself, the amount of lanes feeding the viaduct matches perfectly. There would be a few minor tweeks needed, but nothing to large.

You then traffic calm East Hastings at the same time. Reduce lanes, make it more pedestrian friendly, etc... And then, if I had it my way, Water Street is closed to all traffic except delivery, emergency, and transit vehicles.

Now, before the topic changes I really just want to see some people on here admit that the decision for full tear down was already made years ago before any of the "studies," public meetings, contests, etc... took place

Just admit that and save some dignity.

[Pinion]

If you close Water street and slow Hastings you force almost all north shore, northern East Van and other northeastern suburbs traffic south. That would be very bad for everyone. I switched jobs in part because of how miserable my commute was during the Powell st overpass construction.