Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Could be that the penalty clauses are rather steep. NPA can't say they're saving a heap of money if the penalty clauses are a slightly smaller heap of money, say.

De Genova is also a classless troll. I'm sure she posted it to stoke anger against Vision, regardless of the reality of the viaducts plan.

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

can / will the new mayor and council ignore the previous decision to tear down?

revise the plans and have them repaired and connected to the widened Malkin & Malkin Connector to Clarke

Yes, that would be the smart thing to do, but i think we need to remember who we are dealing with here.

[Galaxy]

If the city wants to get to Stewart Kennedy's goal of 8500 homes I imagine that space freed up from the removal of the viaducts are probably factored into his plans somewhere. I also think he is just like Gregor in that he too came from the NDP even if the Federal ones, so I am not looking or expecting significant changes to existing municipal policies during his tenure, maybe a few tweaks and maybe as so far as little more co-operation between him and other municipal govs.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

If the city wants to get to Stewart Kennedy's goal of 8500 homes I imagine that space freed up from the removal of the viaducts are probably factored into his plans somewhere. I also think he is just like Gregor in that he too came from the NDP even if the Federal ones, so I am not looking or expecting significant changes to existing municipal policies during his tenure, maybe a few tweaks and maybe as so far as little more co-operation between him and other municipal govs.

Robertson Gregor hasn't even left office yet. Let's wait 'till next year before we start singing "same as the old boss."

[WarrenC12]

Well we have at least one year (assuming Stewart can rally the non-NPA councillors) of a center-left aligned municipal, provincial, and federal government. Let's see if they can do anything with that.

Being a Federal election year in 2019, we can assume JT will have his wallet open, at least in terms of promises, if not firm commitments.

[misher]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Well we have at least one year (assuming Stewart can rally the non-NPA councillors) of a center-left aligned municipal, provincial, and federal government. Let's see if they can do anything with that.

Being a Federal election year in 2019, we can assume JT will have his wallet open, at least in terms of promises, if not firm commitments.

One year later.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Good thing we didn't elect Sim then - we'd've regressed all the way to Fury Road.

[trofirhen]

Opponents of the Viaducts' removal usually envision (and rightly so) a choked, gridlocked Pacific Blvd, at Georgia and elsewhere. IMO what is key is something akin to this:
Not a mega-tunnel but designed to carry through-traffic under the traffic lights, right through to Howe / Hornby. The "super road" is planned 8 lanes, leaving tunnel entry space.
Here, the example used is (again) The Hyde Park underpass, which goes under Hyde Park Coner and the Wellington memorial, then re-integrates into the arterial road system.
___________________________________________________________

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=i...lwOn6-gciK3xD6vDLUH&ust=1552591645052470 as well as
https://wordpress.mediatel.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Outdoor-Plus-The-One.jpg

[Vin]

Not going to happen.

[fredinno]

This topic has probably been beaten dead, but my two cents:

Honestly, removing the Viaducts is just as much about removing the primary symbol of the old Vancouver Downtown freeway, as it is about redevelopment and revitalization.

The viaducts have long been viewed as a scar of that era (and the near-destruction of several Vancouver neighborhoods the freeway would have brought), and of industrial False Creek.

This is the cumulation. To erase that era completely. It doesn't matter if it makes financial sense, considering it would open up maybe 3 blocks total of land to develop.

[officedweller]

Yup - that's how I see it too.
It's politically motivated by the 1970s protestors who need to get it done before they leave politics.

[s211]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Yup - that's how I see it too.
It's politically motivated by the 1970s protestors who need to get it done before they leave politics.

I think the city should close the viaduct for say 3-6 months, watch the hell around it occur, and then after they're lynched, finally see this project for what it is: a vanity ideological social engineering concept.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by s211

I think the city should close the viaduct for say 3-6 months, watch the hell around it occur, and then after they're lynched, finally see this project for what it is: a vanity ideological social engineering concept.

I second that. Shut them down whenever there are games going on, for trial purposes.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Vin

I second that. Shut them down whenever there are games going on, for trial purposes.

or just close them as often as possible for film and TV productions (preferably for a week or two at a time)

dont forget to have traffic monitoring of the nearby streets to get realistic stats of how not having those viaduct lanes will make the other streets unbearable

[retro_orange]

Emergency vehicles get stuck on the viaducts and the roadspace will be replaced whether you like the replacement concept or not. I highly doubt the traffic-pocalype will be anything like the hyperbole on this thread. The planners do have a bit more credibility than some guy with a car who wants to not brake for a few blocks. Once the road is complete and if there are any serious issues; the traffic lights can always be reprogrammed to allow for better flow at certain times of the day. It's not absolutely permanent indefinitely, it can be reworked.

Another big thing, in an earthquake all it takes is one span of one viaduct to fall in one of several particular spots along the lengths of the viaducts and it can not only take out the skytrain guideway but also block the street below. Do you have a helicopter backup for this scenario? The earthquake liability is huge for more than the actual viaduct or the road on the viaduct. Not many other pieces of infrastructure in Vancouver can so easily cause so much disruption to other parts of our transit system if it fails. And no I dont believe they know the consistency of the earth beneath each column holding up the segments above, that's impossible and they are partially built on reclaimed land. For each column that fails, it brings down 2 long road segments with it.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

Emergency vehicles get stuck on the viaducts and the roadspace will be replaced whether you like the replacement concept or not. I highly doubt the traffic-pocalype will be anything like the hyperbole on this thread. The planners do have a bit more credibility than some guy with a car who wants to not brake for a few blocks.

Very well said.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

if there are any serious issues; the traffic lights can always be reprogrammed to allow for better flow at certain times of the day. It's not absolutely permanent indefinitely, it can be reworked.

That capacity of being reworked is somethig I've noticed in London, Paris, Stockholm, and other big European cities. It's not written in stone that it has to remain as is, ad perpetuum.
(.... sorry, but still, I wish they'd build that "Hyde Park Underpass" thing for the through traffic, to lighten surface volume and delays, but that's dreaming, I know...)
*Also, what you say about earthquakes seems right on. That is one aspect that has been given rather token acknowledgement, but not taken deeply enough into consideration.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by s211

I think the city should close the viaduct for say 3-6 months, watch the hell around it occur, and then after they're lynched, finally see this project for what it is: a vanity ideological social engineering concept.

TBF, the viaducts are effectively 2 lanes in one direction due to putting bike lanes on the Dunsmuir Viaduct, and the expanded Pacific Blvd would add 3 lanes on the road, resulting in the loss of 2 lanes overall, so it's not a 1-1 comparison.

The viaducts, like Granville St. Bridge, the other completed portion of the DT freeway plans, were not used to their maximum capacity due to being disconnected from the network they were intended to service.

I think I'll miss them, though.

[Migrant_Coconut]

I'm more concerned about all the New Urbanist half-block grade crossings instead of over/underpasses. People in inner Vancouver generally ignore traffic lights, so at best we have one vehicle turning right every cycle, and at worst a whole lot of accidents. Downtown and Broadway on a bus is a crawl as-is.

Originally Posted by retro_orange

Another big thing, in an earthquake all it takes is one span of one viaduct to fall in one of several particular spots along the lengths of the viaducts and it can not only take out the skytrain guideway but also block the street below. Do you have a helicopter backup for this scenario? The earthquake liability is huge for more than the actual viaduct or the road on the viaduct. Not many other pieces of infrastructure in Vancouver can so easily cause so much disruption to other parts of our transit system if it fails. And no I dont believe they know the consistency of the earth beneath each column holding up the segments above, that's impossible and they are partially built on reclaimed land. For each column that fails, it brings down 2 long road segments with it.

Not disagreeing, but then you've got the Massey Tunnel which has the same problem for the same demolition/construction cost, and the people who want the viaducts gone said "upgrading it is cheaper." Is there something I'm missing, or just ideology?

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I'm more concerned about all the New Urbanist half-block grade crossings instead of over/underpasses. People in inner Vancouver generally ignore traffic lights, so at best we have one vehicle turning right every cycle, and at worst a whole lot of accidents. Downtown and Broadway on a bus is a crawl as-is.

Not disagreeing, but then you've got the Massey Tunnel which has the same problem for the same demolition/construction cost, and the people who want the viaducts gone said "upgrading it is cheaper." Is there something I'm missing, or just ideology?

Where can you turn off the viaducts mid length 20 feet above the rest of the street grid?. There are countless locations in Vancouver missing proper turning lanes and the viaducts don't give you options for a different route once you are on them, you are stuck once on them . Turning lanes could be added in the future, but it's not a problem specific to this project, it's a whole city planning thing. Half block grade crossings can be removed if too problematic and changed to traditional intersection crossings or pedestrian bridge can be built or change pedestrian crossing to every 2 blocks, there are options for change.

Who specifically in the viaduct removal game said upgrading the tunnel is cheaper? They are an idiot and shouldn't be listened to. It's my personal belief that they both have equal importance to be replaced, along with the 'heavy wind' susceptible Pattullo bridge. In all honesty what rapid transit train line would be damaged or road above or below the massey tunnel be blocked if the tunnel collapsed? None. There's no rerouting the skytrain downtown if that section adjacent to the viaducts get's damaged, downtown would effectively be without any rapid transit to most of the suburbs for likely years. The people out in the suburbs have come to rely on that connection for almost 35 years. That would be a bunch of people who would have to buy a car and start driving downtown, how badly would that affect traffic?

I do believe the mayors have been irresponsible with completely shutting down the Massey bridge replacement but the Liberals used it as an election pawn and wouldn't budge on any aspect of it's design so there was a stalemate that resulted in a huge delay with a ton of planning funds already spent. If it wasn't used as an election ploy by the Liberals and had been more reasonable with the mayors' cities' who would be directly affected I believe it would be under construction by now.