Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts? - Page 197

logan5 · #**3921** Posted **Jul 27, 2015, 9:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vin

45 degree angle down the hill to maximize land use and minimize ramp space instead? LOL. And please explain how the connections at Main and Prior are "poor"? And how can a widened Pacific Boulevard actually improve the situation and connectivity? Again, you state something "negative" about the viaducts and then fail to come up with a better alternative, and you expect people to buy to your logic of an improvement after the viaducts are gone?

Even though I know there's a high chance of the viaducts coming down, I need to voice my opposition, and you need to get used to that.

I haven't seen any official alignment for the Malkin Connector, but there is an opportunity to improve traffic flow between Main and Clark Dr. Its almost certain the Malkin Connector will be an improvement over Prior St. Maybe enough of an improvement to offset the loss of the viaducts.

WarrenC12 · #**3922** Posted **Jul 27, 2015, 9:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vin

Even though I know there's a high chance of the viaducts coming down, I need to voice my opposition, and you need to get used to that.

Good luck with your effort.

csbvan · #**3923** Posted **Jul 27, 2015, 9:17 PM**

It will be interesting to see what they do with the parts of the viaduct that they will leave intact for the Aquilini development. I liked the mention of something akin to the High Line park.

trofirhen · #**3924** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 12:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinion

The future Georgia st

luckyday.co

Haha!! Yes!! Except that Lombard Street is picturesque and in a beautiful part of SF, whereas that end of Georgia has the CBC bunker et al for company and looks grey and bleak.
It will be equally efficient as Lombard at the junction of the "Super Road," though. Of that Iam sure. The CoV road enginers are wizards.

WBC · #**3925** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 12:24 AM**

Well if CoV engineers are wrong about this it will lead to an epic traffic jam (picture Georgia clogged from Stanley Park S curve to Main). However, they have not been wrong on many of the bike lane issues so let's give them a benefit of the doubt. But the stakes are high here and if there is a problem it will be harder to fix.

ssiguy · #**3926** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 2:07 AM**

Can someone please explain the difference between a viaduct and a bridge? Granville is just as ugly as the viaducts but will be spared the construction ball because it serves the Westside.

WarrenC12 · #**3927** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 2:43 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Can someone please explain the difference between a viaduct and a bridge? Granville is just as ugly as the viaducts but will be spared the construction ball because it serves the Westside.

A viaduct goes over land. A bridge goes over water. Google is your friend. Your anti-west side reasoning is comical.

radacal · #**3928** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 4:12 AM**

Well they reduced the number of lanes of the viaducts then put in a bunch of right turn restrictions and a bike lane along Dunsmuir (no wonder no one wants to use it), reducing the Burrard Street bridge by two lanes after the next round of bike lanes, planning on removing lanes on the Granville Street bridge for a walkway down the middle leading to nowhere? False Creek will have a super highway and the skytrain lower section blocking access from Chinatown to the waterfront and then all the condos will get built along the waterfront to appease the developers? Just wanting to make sure I got this all straight...

mukmuk64 · #**3929** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 6:08 AM**

Looking at it the other way if the viaducts didn't currently exist would we build them now?

They're simply not terribly useful when you consider the amount of space they take up.

I have a really tough time coming up with a good reason why the viaducts should continue to exist. Commuting ostensibly gets worse without them, but the Globe article stated it'd increase commutes by 1-3 minutes, which is essentially irrelevant. It's frankly absurd to do away with several blocks of great residential and commercial space on Main street just for an ever so slightly better commute for some people.

We know that automobile traffic is declining. It's not appropriate to continue to maintain automobile oriented infrastructure.

Stingray2004 · #**3930** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 6:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

But, they are coming down, people need to get used to that.

Well. Have said it once and will say it again. They are part of Translink's MRN. And Translink has never approved any removal from MRN unless a superior replacement (i.e. something akin to a freeway-standard/underground in this specific instance).

And proposed replacement is certainly inferior. Any traffic engineer, worth his salt, will acknowledge same.

In any event, have never heard a peep from Translink regarding same. Anyone else?

Stingray2004 · #**3931** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 7:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Can somebody help me understand the idea behind the Malkin connector? You get cars off Prior but then where do they go?

Perfect/ straight connection to Clark Drive. Traveling down Clark/1st Ave. would take it in a heartbeat over Terminal Ave. mess.

VancouverOfTheFuture · #**3932** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 8:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Well. Have said it once and will say it again. They are part of Translink's MRN. And Translink has never approved any removal from MRN unless a superior replacement (i.e. something akin to a freeway-standard/underground in this specific instance).

And proposed replacement is certainly inferior. Any traffic engineer, worth his salt, will acknowledge same.

In any event, have never heard a peep from Translink regarding same. Anyone else?

is it true that TransLink has final say in all MRN roads? and if TransLink doesn't let it happen it can't? no one seems to be answering this here/or know and i have looked for that answer.

WarrenC12 · #**3933** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 3:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Perfect/ straight connection to Clark Drive. Traveling down Clark/1st Ave. would take it in a heartbeat over Terminal Ave. mess.

So it would merge into Clark somewhere? There are still train tracks to climb over to get there (the same ones Terminal goes up and over).

That means some property needs to be bought up. Plus I don't see how you get on to East 1st Ave without still requiring a left turn, which is the biggest problem at Quebec and Terminal.

I'm interested in seeing what "the plan" is.

CanSpice · #**3934** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 4:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

is it true that TransLink has final say in all MRN roads? and if TransLink doesn't let it happen it can't? no one seems to be answering this here/or know and i have looked for that answer.

It's in the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act, which is the legislation that governs TransLink. TransLink has the final say on the removal of any capacity to the Major Road Network:

Quote:

Section 21, Limits on municipal authority

(1) Despite the Community Charter, the Vancouver Charter or any other enactment, a municipality must not, without the approval of the authority, take, authorize or permit any action that would reduce the capacity of all or any part of the major road network to move people.

(1.1) For the purpose of subsection (1), an action would reduce the capacity of all or any part of the major road network to move people if the action would result in the alteration of a roadway, as that term is defined in section 119 of the Motor Vehicle Act, of a major road, or of the traffic control conditions on a major road, in such a way that fewer persons would be able to travel on the major road network in a given time period than were able to travel on the major road network in a comparable time period before the taking of the action.

Since removal of the viaducts definitely counts as a reduction of capacity of part of the major road network, the City of Vancouver needs to have the TransLink board pass a bylaw that removes the viaducts from the major road network. I would imagine that this would come with an addition of new or existing roads in the area to the major road network (like the proposed Malkin Connector).

Oh, and looking at the major road network map, the Dunsmuir Viaduct isn't in the MRN, and only part of the Georgia Viaduct is (the part between Beatty and the offramp leading down to Main Street).

WarrenC12 · #**3935** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 4:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Oh, and looking at the major road network map, the Dunsmuir Viaduct isn't in the MRN, and only part of the Georgia Viaduct is (the part between Beatty and the offramp leading down to Main Street).

I see he Granville bridge "loops" are also on the MRN. As I recall those are also on the chopping block as a part of the Granville Bridge updates.

trofirhen · #**3936** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 9:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I see he Granville bridge "loops" are also on the MRN. As I recall those are also on the chopping block as a part of the Granville Bridge updates.

I believe they are. Heading north to downton, I would always use the westbound exit loop and go up Hornby. So convenient (and a pleasant street). Sorry in a way to see it go.

ssiguy · #**3937** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 9:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

A viaduct goes over land. A bridge goes over water. Google is your friend. Your anti-west side reasoning is comical.

So the bridges {such as on Hastings and First are no longer bridges but viaducts, is this what you are saying?

Vin · #**3938** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 10:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinion

The future Georgia st

luckyday.co

Good one! And it's pretty too!

Vin · #**3939** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 10:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by logan5

I haven't seen any official alignment for the Malkin Connector, but there is an opportunity to improve traffic flow between Main and Clark Dr. Its almost certain the Malkin Connector will be an improvement over Prior St. Maybe enough of an improvement to offset the loss of the viaducts.

We're all still waiting for that plan.

Stingray2004 · #**3940** Posted **Jul 28, 2015, 10:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

So it would merge into Clark somewhere? There are still train tracks to climb over to get there (the same ones Terminal goes up and over).

That means some property needs to be bought up. Plus I don't see how you get on to East 1st Ave without still requiring a left turn, which is the biggest problem at Quebec and Terminal.

I'm interested in seeing what "the plan" is.

Yep. Officedweller posted the schematic on here a few years back from the Van City website. Included a short viaduct over the tracks to connect with Clark Dr. Was/is also considered a Van City priority transportation project.

From the viaducts - would be basically free-flow all the way to Clark Drive with an intersection just north of current 1st Ave. Then head south on Clark Dr. and connect with Knight St. Or hang a left on 1st Ave and continue to Hwy 1.

Current Terminal Ave. and Terminal Ave/Main St. intersection is a mess.