Metro Vancouver Road Infrastructure Discussion

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Pinion

Yeah it's fine going north from the peace arch until you hit CoV borders. Then you wonder what happened and why you're driving on residential streets.

It really shouldn't be any news to you that there are no freeways within the City (except for the extreme eastern border).

[Pinion]

Uh yes it isn't news to me. I was giving the tourist perspective.

[flipper316]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

Curious what was your point regarding this statement?

I dunno. This is an internet forum. Just thought i'd leave my 2 cents just like the other forum members are privy to.

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by flipper316

I dunno. This is an internet forum. Just thought i'd leave my 2 cents just like the other forum members are privy to.

I meant you should elaborate more...
Not meant to be critical. It just seemed random

I do agree its odd that a tourist would arrive at YVR and have to drive city streets/downtown to arrive at Whistler however i imagine that folks that run COV could care less.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

There's no traffic light on the I5 to 99 until Oak St. and West 70th.

Coming from the Horseshoe Bay ferry terminal as well you directly enter a freeway. (There is one small light within the terminal itself but that isn’t odd IMO for helping stage sudden surges of ferry traffic flow).

It is obvious that Vancouver will never be connected by freeway (as many on here know I believe it should be, akin to how it is done in Europe or Asia, not in America) so let’s not even bring that up because it will never happen, but there are a few things that should be done.

First, YVR should have a free flow connection to the 99.

Second, highway 17 should be free flow from the ferry terminal to the #1 (to the new Pattullo at the very least when it opens).

And third, there needs to be something linking the 99 / 91 network with the #1.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Coming from the Horseshoe Bay ferry terminal as well you directly enter a freeway. (There is one small light within the terminal itself but that isn’t odd IMO for helping stage sudden surges of ferry traffic flow).

It is obvious that Vancouver will never be connected by freeway (as many on here know I believe it should be, akin to how it is done in Europe or Asia, not in America) so let’s not even bring that up because it will never happen, but there are a few things that should be done.

First, YVR should have a free flow connection to the 99.

Second, highway 17 should be free flow from the ferry terminal to the #1 (to the new Pattullo at the very least when it opens).

And third, there needs to be something linking the 99 / 91 network with the #1.

First one: It probably requires demolishing almost everything within the rectangle of Bridgeport Road, Sea Island Road, No. 3 Road, and Garden City Road. I am afraid that many won't like that. Also, with the skytrain overpass in the way, and with tunnels infeasible in Richmond, No. 3 Road will have to be cut off at Capstan Way. Again, I don't know how people are gonna like that.

Second one: I agree too. At least the government's considering redoing the connector between that and 91. But yea 17@Golden Ears Connector and 17/15@1 are messy spots too.

Third one: It can be combined with the 2nd one. IMO that's what the SFPR is for.

[WarrenC12]

Vancouver's gridlock isn't that bad after all:

http://www.news1130.com/2018/02/06/vancouver-gridlock-ranking/

I'd say this measure of time wasted in gridlock is better than TomTom's questionable methodology.

LA #1 at 102 hours/year.
Vancouver #77 at 29 hours/year.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Vancouver's gridlock isn't that bad after all:

http://www.news1130.com/2018/02/06/vancouver-gridlock-ranking/

I'd say this measure of time wasted in gridlock is better than TomTom's questionable methodology.

LA #1 at 102 hours/year.
Vancouver #77 at 29 hours/year.

It's based on actual speed vs speed limit, of course Vancouver is going to rate higher on that scale because no one can ever go faster than 50 legally. Our speed limits are ridiculously low compared to most cities, and we have way more stoplights. Just another thing that makes driving so painful.

Like at least put some effort into reading it. Do you really think St John's NFLD has worse traffic than us?

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Pinion

It's based on actual speed vs speed limit, of course Vancouver is going to rate higher on that scale because no one can ever go faster than 50 legally. Our speed limits are ridiculously low compared to most cities, and we have way more stoplights. Just another thing that makes driving so painful.

Like at least put some effort into reading it. Do you really think St John's NFLD has worse traffic than us?

Sure, keep telling me our traffic is worse than LA.

[Pinion]

I never said that. Nice deflection though. So again, do you believe St John's has worse traffic than Vancouver?

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

that does seem like a flawed measure as well. considering roads like Granville, Oak, and Knight speed limits are 50km/h. then there is the 2nd Narrows at 70km/h for a freeway. then 80km/h through the Massey Tunnel and only 90 throughout the whole 99 corridor from south of the Oak Street Bridge until the tunnel when everyone knows it should be closer to 110km/h with its banked curves and wide, divided directions and good sightlines.

both measures are flawed. the only true way to measure using speed limits is having similar roads having similar speed limits. i.e. the 99 corridor would need the speed limit of another freeway built to the same standard. for example, 110km/h as it would match Washington's 70mph on their I5.

if that isn't the case, then the comparison is flawed since you can crawl at 10mph with a limit of 70mph which will make traffic worse compared to crawling at 10mph with a limit of 55mph.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Pinion

I never said that. Nice deflection though. So again, do you believe St John's has worse traffic than Vancouver?

I've never been, maybe it does. It certainly has weird geography which could lead to traffic choke points.

Ottawa certainly has terrible traffic for a smaller city, I've experienced it.

As for the bolded portion, my sincerest apologies, you merely said LA traffic is the same as Vancouver.

FYI here's a live traffic shot, 8:30am on a Wednesday.

Vancouver:


LA:

[Pinion]

"We have LA-level traffic jams with one fifth the population" is not saying our traffic issues are as bad as as LA in totality.

You on the other hand won't back down from the ridiculous claim that St John's, population 205,000 - i.e. about the same as the north shore alone - has worse traffic than Vancouver. A claim that more than throws the legitimacy of your article into question.

Here's a screenshot of St Johns traffic, the city you would post if you weren't deflecting from a BS claim:

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Pinion

"We have LA-level traffic jams with one fifth the population" is not saying our traffic issues are as bad as as LA in totality.

You on the other hand won't back down from the ridiculous claim that St John's, population 205,000 - i.e. about the same as the north shore alone - has worse traffic than Vancouver. A claim that more than throws the legitimacy of your article into question.

Here's a screenshot of St Johns traffic, the city you would post if you weren't deflecting from a BS claim:

LOL easy with the straw man pal. I have no idea what St . John's traffic is like, I've never been there.

By your definition, every city has "LA level traffic jams". Accidents can cause temporary traffic chaos anywhere. That's meaningless.

[Pinion]

You posted an article that said Vancouver's traffic was better than St John's (again, population 205,000) as evidence that we complain too much about Vancouver traffic. That's not a strawman. That's you finding a headline that aligned with your agenda and posting it without thinking about the methodology at all.

You don't have to go to St John's to know that is silly. You're just too egotistical to admit you posted a bad article.

Here's a video from our very own SignalHillHiker to show what it's like there:

• Video Link

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by Pinion

It's based on actual speed vs speed limit, of course Vancouver is going to rate higher on that scale because no one can ever go faster than 50 legally. Our speed limits are ridiculously low compared to most cities, and we have way more stoplights. Just another thing that makes driving so painful.

Like at least put some effort into reading it. Do you really think St John's NFLD has worse traffic than us?

Agreed. The St Johns ranking alone dispels the methodology used.

Good on you for being able to see through it.

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by Pinion

"We have LA-level traffic jams with one fifth the population" is not saying our traffic issues are as bad as as LA in totality.

You on the other hand won't back down from the ridiculous claim that St John's, population 205,000 - i.e. about the same as the north shore alone - has worse traffic than Vancouver. A claim that more than throws the legitimacy of your article into question.

Here's a screenshot of St Johns traffic, the city you would post if you weren't deflecting from a BS claim:

Wow, look at all that traffic...
Must be 3 maybe even 4 cars waiting at a light

**Edit** Actually, the video you posted clearly showed 0 maybe 1 car waiting at a light

[Colin4567]

Originally Posted by Pinion

You posted an article that said Vancouver's traffic was better than St John's (again, population 205,000) as evidence that we complain too much about Vancouver traffic. That's not a strawman. That's you finding a headline that aligned with your agenda and posting it without thinking about the methodology at all.

You don't have to go to St John's to know that is silly. You're just too egotistical to admit you posted a bad article.

Here's a video from our very own SignalHillHiker to show what it's like there:

• Video Link

I've been to and driven in St. John's and it doesn't even really have traffic at all....

[David]

Some of the debates on this forum, I swear to god. A 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 match over who has the worst traffic? Who cares?

[Pinion]

The debate isn't about that, it's about whether Vancouver has an unnecessary traffic problem or not. Warren insists it doesn't.