Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

And again, they are not eliminating the transportation link, they are replacing the viaducts with a different road. The replacement would still be part of the designated networks. Is it really so hard to believe that some sort of agreement might be reached to accomplish this? If a road is part of the MRN then does it mean we can never replace it with something else? If that's really the case, then why are we talking about replacing the Patullo bridge and Massey tunnel?

They are not replacing the viaducts. They completely removing them and realigning expo Boulevard that is all. They ae turning 7 lanes into 2, when looking back 10 years. Looking at today they are replacing 4 lanes with 2. Plus one peak hour curb lane.

This super road or that they will be replaced with another road etc is pure lies from elected officials.

As for the bridge and tunnel they are being upgraded while they continue to be open and used.

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by cornholio

They are not replacing the viaducts. They completely removing them and realigning expo Boulevard that is all. They ae turning 7 lanes into 2, when looking back 10 years. Looking at today they are replacing 4 lanes with 2. Plus one peak hour curb lane.

This super road or that they will be replaced with another road etc is pure lies from elected officials.

As for the bridge and tunnel they are being upgraded while they continue to be open and used.

Based on the best illustration that's currently available, below, which will be refined over the next 18 months now that the project has been given the nod by Council to proceed to detailed planning before it is ultimately approved to proceed, the viaducts' current five travel lanes + one bi-directional bike lane will be replaced with four travel lanes + one bi-directional bike lane. That will represent a decrease of one travel lane leaving the downtown core and no decrease in travel lanes entering the downtown core. Since the morning half of diurnal peak travel periods are more time compressed than the afternoon/evening half, the loss of one of the 'exiting' travel lanes is less significant than the equivalent of a loss of an 'entering' travel lane and more easily made up through the network capacity of the downtown street system.


Source

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

To preface, 3 different types of polling methodologies are extant - CATI (very expensive but very accurate as the Nanos final poll results during recent fed election attest).

And then there is the much cheaper and inaccurate IVR and opt-in online panel, which is inherently biased toward the NDP here in BC as witnessed by the 2013 BC provincial election. Panel recruiting problems in that regard.

In any event, today Insights West (opt-in online panel) released a public opinion poll on the viaduct matter with very interesting results. (With opt-in online panel likely skewed toward the Geoff Meggs crowd). Dig deeper into the numbers though and the thing is on soft political ground - if not quick sand:



http://www.insightswest.com/news/future-of-viaducts-splits-views-in-metro-vancouver/

I wonder what the size of this survey is. FYI, last time I checked, Vancitybuzz's voting sample size is 16,000. And 62% oppose to the teraring down of the viaducts, with only 28% supporting.

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by Vin

I wonder what the size of this survey is. FYI, last time I checked, Vancitybuzz's voting sample size is 16,000. And 62% oppose to the teraring down of the viaducts, with only 28% supporting.

What was their poll's margin of error?

[Archtype]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

What was their poll's margin of error?

Margin of error was 4.2%.

I would generally accept this poll ahead of VanBuzz which really was not a proper poll at all. The headline was "Vancouver viaducts demolition to be the worst transportation policy in city's history" then gave a one sided view to support their point. At the end of this they conducted a poll asking respondents whether or not the viaducts should be demolished. Pretty sure this is not going to get an accurate result.

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by Archtype

Margin of error was 4.2%.

That's a good solid MOE. Good to know. Thank you.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

And again, they are not eliminating the transportation link, they are replacing the viaducts with a different road. The replacement would still be part of the designated networks. Is it really so hard to believe that some sort of agreement might be reached to accomplish this? If a road is part of the MRN then does it mean we can never replace it with something else? If that's really the case, then why are we talking about replacing the Patullo bridge and Massey tunnel?

No they are not. Existing Expo Blvd/Pacific Blvd combo is 3 lanes in each direction and serves a completely different purpose. What this CoV proposal actually is... is just a "realignment" of the existing Blvds... with a few more traffic-lighted intersections along with a steep embankment down from West Georgia St.

Whoever came up with the term "super-road" is def hood-winking someone... and my reaction all along has been...

On top of that, they are removing superior infrastructure, in terms of the viaducts, which also serves a different purpose altogether.

And yes the viaducts are designated MRN/MTR. If a "superior" alternative is proposed (rebuilt free-flow viaducts, etc.) I can see the major stakeholders such as the BC Trucking Association, BC MoTI, etc., etc. having no problem approving the re-assignment of the MRN/MTR designations thereto.

As for replacing the Patullo Bridge and George Massey Tunnel... we are talking about "SUPERIOR" infrastructure... new 6 or 8 lane Pattullo Bridge with higher design standards and a new 10-lane Massey Bridge... also with higher design standards.

To put things into perspective, the CoV's actions are akin to them removing both the existing 4-lane crossings of Pattullo Bridge and George Massey Tunnel with 2-lane crossings. Inferior product. Just won't fly.

[Smooth]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Based on the best illustration that's currently available, below, which will be refined over the next 18 months now that the project has been given the nod by Council to proceed to detailed planning before it is ultimately approved to proceed, the viaducts' current five travel lanes + one bi-directional bike lane will be replaced with four travel lanes + one bi-directional bike lane. That will represent a decrease of one travel lane leaving the downtown core and no decrease in travel lanes entering the downtown core. Since the morning half of diurnal peak travel periods are more time compressed than the afternoon/evening half, the loss of one of the 'exiting' travel lanes is less significant than the equivalent of a loss of an 'entering' travel lane and more easily made up through the network capacity of the downtown street system.

It can be argued that the new Georgia ramp will only have a minor capacity decrease but I think the real choke point will be further east.

Your numbers exclude the existing 2 lanes on Expo Blvd. & 2 lanes on Pacific Blvd. The before & after capacity through the area around Carrall St. will be:

Existing Configuration
Expo Blvd. = 2 lanes (westbound)
Dunsmuir Viaduct = 2 lanes (westbound)

Georgia Viaduct = 3 lanes (eastbound)
Pacific Blvd. = 2 lanes (eastbound)

Total = 4 westbound + 5 eastbound = 9 lanes

New Surface Road (off-peak hour configuration)
2 lanes westbound + 2 lanes eastbound = 4 lanes

New Surface Road (peak hour configuration)
3 lanes westbound + 3 lanes eastbound = 6 lanes

With the current design, we are looking at a 5 lane decrease at off-peak times and a 3 lane decrease at peak times. With additional traffic lights and the reduction in lane capacity, I find it challenging to believe that there will only be a minimal increase to the congestion in the area.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Smooth

It can be argued that the new Georgia ramp will only have a minor capacity decrease but I think the real choke point will be further east.

The current choke points have always been to the east and west of the viaducts. They are underutilized today, that's the whole point.

I think the main consideration is if the lanes replacing the viaducts will be a new choke point. At this stage, I don't see it.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

... On top of that, they are removing superior infrastructure, in terms of the viaducts, which also serves a different purpose altogether. ... Just won't fly.

Well, I guess we'll just have to wait and see...

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Well, I guess we'll just have to wait and see...

Bet you $1000 they come down...

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Bet you $1000 they come down...

Betting on politics is a fool's game.

[Procrastinational]

This whole thing seems pretty overblown. They are just viaducts people!
Personally I'd rather they stay, because they give a gritty, urban vibe, but it certainly won't be the end of the world if they are removed.

Some of the renderings I've seen make it look like there will be a lot of wasted space if the area is redeveloped. I like the idea of more parks, but most of the new park space seems to be in the form of boring, open grassy areas. A nice, narrow waterfront park with walkways and trees would be plenty, and that would allow more space to develop to recuperate the costs of removing the viaducts.

[Sprawl]

• Video Link

Todd Stone now singing a very different tune, talking about working with the City to ensure the removal project is successful.

[the_prof]

Transcript is here for those who don't want to/can't watch:
http://www.geoffmeggs.ca/2015/11/02/late...h-the-city-so-we-get-this-project-right/

[Metro-One]

Maybe the city could give the province the casino space addition that they are building for in site 10....

You know, actually play ball with the province.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Maybe the city could give the province the casino space addition that they are building for in site 10....

You know, actually play ball with the province.

Good idea. Pavco is desperate for ongoing revenue opportunities.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Good idea. Pavco is desperate for ongoing revenue opportunities.

I actually think that would be a good poltical compromise for both parties to get something that they want in return.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by the_prof

Transcript is here for those who don't want to/can't watch:
http://www.geoffmeggs.ca/2015/11/02/late...h-the-city-so-we-get-this-project-right/

I've read it. In conjunction with his previous statements. Understand BC politics very well. For decades. Again. "It's politically D-E-A-D". Politics 101.

PS. Read what Stone says very carefully... the CoV is already on the hook for $200 million for viaduct removal. And as I stated earlier, will undoubtedly require a CoV referendum in the next 2018 muni election.

Now Stone brings up "soil remediation" of viaduct removal and blvd. realignment. Undoubtedly the CoV will be required to cover that cost as well. With the toxic underlying soils... who knows... perhaps another $100 million+ added cost? Looks like the eventual costs of this financial boondoggle are gonna begin to spiral outta control.

And Stone brings up Translink's MRN and MTR designations. Not under his jurisdiction... but Translink's. Ad nauseum I have stated, on numerous occasions, that Translink won't approve same for relevant reasons and BC MoTI is a separate major stakeholder in those separate consultations along with the BC Trucking Association.

Again Stone brings up regional network flows from the viaducts to outlying suburbs and his ministry's obligations to BCers and the region at large, which again reverts back to Translink's MRN and MTR designations.

Sure BC MoTI is committed to sit down to meet with the CoV to "meet these concerns". Nothing new here.

PPS. Again, looks like Stone is playing along with the same political games that Geoff Meggs and his provincial NDP political ilk have brought forward. Ya know... "When in Rome...."

[Hourglass]

Moot point now, I suppose, but thought this article envisioning a 10-acre public space underneath Toronto's Gardiner Expressway was of interest:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toro...h-paths-cultural-spaces/article27280670/

Of course, this doesn't fit the current narrative around the viaduct removal...