Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[Vin]

Never ever seen an emergency vehicle getting stuck on the viaducts, especially since the Georgia viaduct never gets congested! Therefore I'm not sure who first spread the rumour without any basis. If there is a congestion on the Dunsmuir viaduct coming into downtown, an ambulance can simply take an alternate route by going on the Pacific Boulevard. If the viaducts are gone, there won't be such a choice.

For the person who says that traffic planners know best: Explain the congestions along Seymour nowadays when there used to be hardly any back when more of the downtown streets had more travelling lanes. Do they really know better?

As for earthquake dangers, simple answer is to spend the money to upgrade these vital urban infrastructure: way cheaper than taking them down.

Again who are we kidding about the viaduct removal? Word it that the City still doesn't have the money to do so.



Proposed in 2015 and still not happening....

http://www.vancouversun.com/vancouver+un...ia+dunsmuir+viaducts/11418320/story.html

[retro_orange]

See previous page for some credibility.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

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.

In addition:

City of Vancouver turning to Seattle for advice on viaducts demolition

Officials with the City of Vancouver are keeping a keen eye on what has been happening south of the border with Seattle’s very own viaduct demolition project.

The Alaskan Way Viaduct through downtown Seattle was permanently closed last week to commence a three-week-long construction process of linking a new 3.5-km-long, four-lane tunnel burrowed under the downtown waterfront.

Demolition of portions of the viaduct is well underway, and the new tunnel will open once the new links at both ends of the highway route are established.

There have been many lessons learnt from the Washington State Department of Transportation and the City of Seattle for the planned Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts demolition, according to Kevin McNaney, the Director of the City of Vancouver’s Northeast False Creek Project Office.
“Because they are a few years ahead of us, it is an amazing opportunity to get a sense of the types of things we need to be thinking about right now,” McNaney told Daily Hive, who said city staff visited Seattle last year to meet with their counterparts. “It was incredible how much we have in common.”

Before
Existing condition of the waterfront area in downtown Seattle. (City of Seattle)

After
Artistic rendering of Waterfront Seattle. (City of Seattle)

He explained that there are very similar contexts with the viaduct demolition projects in both cities. Both viaducts were built during a similar era, they are located within a tight urban area along the waterfront, and large stadiums are situated on one end and downtown on the other.
Spaces currently occupied by the viaducts will be turned into new public space uses for the most part.

But there are also stark differences too; as a part of State Route 99, Seattlelites have historically depended on their viaduct for their transportation needs, with traffic volumes of about 100,000 vehicles per day and 30,000 bus passengers — about twice as many as the 45,000 vehicles per day on the Vancouver viaducts.
The Alaskan Way Viaduct is also 3.5 km long, whereas the pair of viaducts leading into downtown Vancouver are only about one km.

McNaney says they discovered both cities have similar challenges with viaduct deconstruction and precinct reconstruction.

“Some of the buildings are are literally a foot or two away from the Alaskan Way viaducts. We talked a lot about how we do construction and deconstruction and it really informs some of our thinking,” he said.

For the Vancouver viaducts, traditional deconstruction and construction methods can be used in the easternmost areas of the viaducts and along Pacific Boulevard.

However, he says a surgical demolition approach will be required for the western end of the viaducts around BC Place Stadium and Rogers Arena, as well as the residential towers in the surrounding area. This may involve cutting a section of viaduct and using a crane to lift the piece out of the area to avoid contact with the buildings.

McNaney notes the municipal government has been working closely with adjacent businesses and the stadiums, as events held inside both venues have to continue during the deconstruction and construction process.
However, McNaney said the city’s biggest takeaway from the Seattle project was how project planners there engaged with the public on the planned traffic disruptions and how to mitigate it.

Phasing of viaducts demolition and new road network construction

As for an updated timeline on when deconstruction work on the Vancouver viaducts could begin, he said the earliest was 2020, with early geotechnical soil testing work possibly conducted this year.

The first change that can be expected is the widening of Pacific Boulevard into a two-way, six-lane street between the Cambie Street Bridge and Quebec Street.

This will be followed by the construction of a majority of the two-way, four-lane West Georgia Street extension ramp in the area between BC Place and Rogers Arena — above where Griffiths Way is currently located. Then the section of the Georgia Viaduct will be demolished, and work will be performed as quickly as possible to finish the remaining portion of the ramp between Beatty Street and Pacific Boulevard.

Two-way, four-lane West Georgia Street extension ramp from Beatty Street to Pacific Boulevard — between BC Place Stadium and Rogers Arena. (City of Vancouver)
Only after the opening of the ramp will demolition begin on the remaining portions of the viaducts. Overall, this will take about three years.

“We have really looked at phasing very carefully to ensure the project is self-funding and also to minimize traffic disruption,” said McNaney. “We have really done a lot of careful modelling to ensure the disruption is minimized.”

Overall, the entire viaducts demolition and Northeast False Creek Plan is anticipated to cost $438 million, with the vast majority coming from the future private developments in the precinct.

A total of $1.7 billion will also be largely raised from these developments to help build the area’s new public amenities and spaces.

There will be new homes for 12,000 residents (including 1,800 social housing units for over 3,000 low-income residents), over 30 acres of new and renewed public spaces, and the creation of a commercial waterfront to create a new events and entertainment district.

Rezoning applications for Canadian Metropolitan Properties’ Plaza of Nations redevelopment and Pavco’s BC Place tower, with the latter approved with conditions. City council has yet to deliberate on the larger redevelopment by Concord Pacific.

“Like Seattle we really need to keep reminding people of that long-term vision, what a special place this will be,” he said.

Animation of the Northeast False Creek district design. (CIVITAS Urban Design & Planning / Concord Pacific / City of Vancouver)

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-seattle-viaducts-demolition-advice-january-2019

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

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 .

Sure, but if you want to turn, you're not on the viaducts at all - you're on Pacific or Expo. The problem as I see it is that we're pushing all the express traffic into the local traffic... and that local traffic is going to be negotiating with bikers and pedestrians and idiots like this. Likewise, non-drivers won't have their own free-flowing crossing.

On one hand, it's nice to finally have space for a bus line down Pacific... on the other, that bus line is going to take forever. It's already a 10-15 minute crawl from Drake to Cordova at rush hour.

Originally Posted by retro_orange

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.

Not if there's no space to add because the planning team is high on New Urbanism's Kool-Aid, which involves as many traffic lights and street crossings as possible. Same reason why Metrotown hasn't replaced its SkyTrain overpass yet, because Burnaby Council wants everybody waiting at the lights so that their streets look as busy as downtown's.

I'll point out again that at the last open house the transportation rep intended the streetcar to run down the middle of Quebec and Pacific in mixed traffic, without any separation at all. Makes Surrey's look like a maglev.

Originally Posted by retro_orange

Who specifically in the viaduct removal game said upgrading the tunnel is cheaper?

Robertson and Meggs, I believe. I'm slowly leaning towards pro-removal myself, but much of it still sounds like an anti-"motordom" ideological solution rather than a practical one.

[trofirhen]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c...lantic_Street_overpass%2C_Sept._2018.jpg
https://cdn.archpaper.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/unnamed-file.jpg

For all people looking to Seattle for a way to reconstruct the waterfront road, replacing ugly Alaskan way with a wide, leafy street, please click on the link. You've forgotten something....
Yes! It goes into a tunnel, alleviating surface traffic, lightening up surface traffic volume, making the boulevard more accessible and pedestrian friendly.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Sure, but if you want to turn, you're not on the viaducts at all - you're on Pacific or Expo. The problem as I see it is that we're pushing all the express traffic into the local traffic... and that local traffic is going to be negotiating with bikers and pedestrians and idiots like this. Likewise, non-drivers won't have their own free-flowing crossing.

On one hand, it's nice to finally have space for a bus line down Pacific... on the other, that bus line is going to take forever. It's already a 10-15 minute crawl from Drake to Cordova at rush hour.

Not if there's no space to add because the planning team is high on New Urbanism's Kool-Aid, which involves as many traffic lights and street crossings as possible. Same reason why Metrotown hasn't replaced its SkyTrain overpass yet, because Burnaby Council wants everybody waiting at the lights so that their streets look as busy as downtown's.

I'll point out again that at the last open house the transportation rep intended the streetcar to run down the middle of Quebec and Pacific in mixed traffic, without any separation at all. Makes Surrey's look like a maglev.

Robertson and Meggs, I believe. I'm slowly leaning towards pro-removal myself, but much of it still sounds like an anti-"motordom" ideological solution rather than a practical one.

I was moreso implying what if you made a mistake of driving on to the viaduct but had to turn around. We will just have to see how traffic is once complete. Hopefully self driving cars will negate the impact of bad drivers holding up a bus on the super road. They can also put up barriers to stop people from jaywalking where they shouldn't cross. it's going to be 6 lanes so I doubt many people would jaywalk it, even if they would on a 2 or 4 lane street.

I'm all for creative and adaptive reuse of old things like this. I like the park that New York created on their unused elevated train line and as much as I think it would be great to animate the spaces below the viaducts with retail or whatnot, you know as soon as the fences come down it will become the longest homeless campground in the metro region and unattractive to people setting up a business. There's not enough people living and walking around there to make businesses viable under the viaducts. If I were to set up my business there I would be very weary of success considering what the adjacent area is currently like.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

I was moreso implying what if you made a mistake of driving on to the viaduct but had to turn around. We will just have to see how traffic is once complete. Hopefully self driving cars will negate the impact of bad drivers holding up a bus on the super road. They can also put up barriers to stop people from jaywalking where they shouldn't cross. it's going to be 6 lanes so I doubt many people would jaywalk it, even if they would on a 2 or 4 lane street.

Yeah, I see what you were getting at.

Jaywalkers aren't really a problem (at least the ones who're aware of the rest of the street) - what I meant was that crosswalk users have a habit of crossing even after the light has counted to zero (and sometimes when the light isn't even theirs), so the right-turn lane averages one vehicle per cycle. That's what I find slows bus service down the most.

Originally Posted by retro_orange

I'm all for creative and adaptive reuse of old things like this. I like the park that New York created on their unused elevated train line and as much as I think it would be great to animate the spaces below the viaducts with retail or whatnot, you know as soon as the fences come down it will become the longest homeless campground in the metro region and unattractive to people setting up a business. There's not enough people living and walking around there to make businesses viable under the viaducts. If I were to set up my business there I would be very weary of success considering what the adjacent area is currently like.

That's the High Line. Both planners and public constantly refer to it when talking about what to do with the viaducts - you can see in the render that they're actually keeping one of them for that exact purpose.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

The problem as I see it is that we're pushing all the express traffic into the local traffic... and that local traffic is going to be negotiating with bikers and pedestrians and idiots...

That traffic is "express" for just a few block's worth of distance. Cars that use the viaducts still have to deal with all those other things before and after the actual elevated stretch. The fact that it's express for that limited length is of very minor impact considering that all the traffic on the viaducts has first been throttled by the street grid that feeds it.

A few extra blocks of surface level streets in a journey through the city that's already virtually all at surface level is not going to be as huge an impact as everyone is trying to make it out to be. The bike lane and timed lights on Dunsmuir show how well traffic can be expedited along such streets to accommodate the prevailing flow of traffic while still handling bikers, pedestrians and, yes, idiots.

[trofirhen]

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'd like to say that your definition of it fits it 100%

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

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.

The GMB was pretty supported by Richmond and Delta- they had their own specific versions they wanted, but NDP clearly had no funding for it after the Liberals' funding plan- tolling- was canned.

Originally Posted by Vin

Never ever seen an emergency vehicle getting stuck on the viaducts, especially since the Georgia viaduct never gets congested! Therefore I'm not sure who first spread the rumour without any basis. If there is a congestion on the Dunsmuir viaduct coming into downtown, an ambulance can simply take an alternate route by going on the Pacific Boulevard. If the viaducts are gone, there won't be such a choice.

For the person who says that traffic planners know best: Explain the congestions along Seymour nowadays when there used to be hardly any back when more of the downtown streets had more travelling lanes. Do they really know better?

As for earthquake dangers, simple answer is to spend the money to upgrade these vital urban infrastructure: way cheaper than taking them down.

Again who are we kidding about the viaduct removal? Word it that the City still doesn't have the money to do so.



Proposed in 2015 and still not happening....

http://www.vancouversun.com/vancouver+un...ia+dunsmuir+viaducts/11418320/story.html

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Sure, but if you want to turn, you're not on the viaducts at all - you're on Pacific or Expo. The problem as I see it is that we're pushing all the express traffic into the local traffic... and that local traffic is going to be negotiating with bikers and pedestrians and idiots like this. Likewise, non-drivers won't have their own free-flowing crossing.

On one hand, it's nice to finally have space for a bus line down Pacific... on the other, that bus line is going to take forever. It's already a 10-15 minute crawl from Drake to Cordova at rush hour.



Not if there's no space to add because the planning team is high on New Urbanism's Kool-Aid, which involves as many traffic lights and street crossings as possible. Same reason why Metrotown hasn't replaced its SkyTrain overpass yet, because Burnaby Council wants everybody waiting at the lights so that their streets look as busy as downtown's.

I'll point out again that at the last open house the transportation rep intended the streetcar to run down the middle of Quebec and Pacific in mixed traffic, without any separation at all. Makes Surrey's look like a maglev.



Robertson and Meggs, I believe. I'm slowly leaning towards pro-removal myself, but much of it still sounds like an anti-"motordom" ideological solution rather than a practical one.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Yeah, I see what you were getting at.

Jaywalkers aren't really a problem (at least the ones who're aware of the rest of the street) - what I meant was that crosswalk users have a habit of crossing even after the light has counted to zero (and sometimes when the light isn't even theirs), so the right-turn lane averages one vehicle per cycle. That's what I find slows bus service down the most.



That's the High Line. Both planners and public constantly refer to it when talking about what to do with the viaducts - you can see in the render that they're actually keeping one of them for that exact purpose.

That elevated overpass is put in specifically for pedestrians and cyclists, lowering the number that are going to mix with traffic.

And yes, this is what constant sputtering of 'induced demand' leads to. Congestion.

Also, not that replacing the viaducts with a tunnel is not feasible, because the city wanted to finance the project with CACs- and the tunnel entrances alone would take up most of the potential land gains.

Those fields jutting out into False Creek are...why? Do they really need that much extra field space?

Isn't that the False Creek turning basin?

[logan5]

Aberdeen sums it up perfectly. And eventually the Malkin connector will get built, which will be a short expressway similar to the viaducts. Reintoduce the idea of the Kingsway Connector and we will have even better traffic flow, and better bus route options.

As an urban enthusiast, I see the removal of the viaducts as a huge step towards revitalizing the DTES. The viaduct lands are going to bring thousands of new residents into the DTES. This will certainly elevate Chinatown to "cool neighbourhood" status, and hopefully rejuvenate the Main and Hastings area as well. Main and Hastings is only 4 blocks from the viaduct lands. One of Canada's greatest neighbourhoods lies dormant until those viaducts are removed.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

A few extra blocks of surface level streets in a journey through the city that's already virtually all at surface level is not going to be as huge an impact as everyone is trying to make it out to be. The bike lane and timed lights on Dunsmuir show how well traffic can be expedited along such streets to accommodate the prevailing flow of traffic while still handling bikers, pedestrians and, yes, idiots.

Broadway-Cambie shows that timed lights don't matter if people ignore the lights and cross regardless. The 99 at rush hour spends 2-4 minutes just sitting at the intersection. Multiplied by seven intersections... yeah, I'm not looking forward to that bus ride.

Originally Posted by fredinno

Those fields jutting out into False Creek are...why? Do they really need that much extra field space?

Isn't that the False Creek turning basin?

Aesthetics - personally I think they look nice. Definitely better than the old concept.

I can guarantee that there aren't any barges or freighters in False Creek. Usually, the only boats turning around are small ones, and they don't need much space.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by logan5

Aberdeen sums it up perfectly. And eventually the Malkin connector will get built, which will be a short expressway similar to the viaducts. Reintoduce the idea of the Kingsway Connector and we will have even better traffic flow, and better bus route options.

As an urban enthusiast, I see the removal of the viaducts as a huge step towards revitalizing the DTES. The viaduct lands are going to bring thousands of new residents into the DTES. This will certainly elevate Chinatown to "cool neighbourhood" status, and hopefully rejuvenate the Main and Hastings area as well. Main and Hastings is only 4 blocks from the viaduct lands. One of Canada's greatest neighbourhoods lies dormant until those viaducts are removed.

May I say I appreciate your ideas, especialy about the revitalization of Chinatown and the DTES. However, permit me a couple of questions please.
1) What is the 'KINGSWAY CONNECTOR?" (can't find it on the web)

2) How big and how long would the Malkin Connector be? What about making a crosstown connector through the Grandview Highway to join Hwy 1? Most people reject that idea, it seems.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

May I say I appreciate your ideas, especialy about the revitalization of Chinatown and the DTES. However, permit me a couple of questions please.
1) What is the 'KINGSWAY CONNECTOR?" (can't find it on the web)

2) How big and how long would the Malkin Connector be? What about making a crosstown connector through the Grandview Highway to join Hwy 1? Most people reject that idea, it seems.

1 - Kingsway extending and pushing through to connect to Quebec; that was killed by previous council.

i find it funny how people think the DTES issues are the viaducts and that removing them will somehow fix all of that. that the only reason people dont live there is because of these things, that is hilarious; absolutely hilarious. if only we could live in fairytale land with unicorns and rainbows being the solution to everything.


in good news, i have heard rumours of the project having been at least slowed down with some reevaluations. i.e. not being rammed through asap anymore. i will be interested to follow this and these rumours.


i don't know why the Malkin connector cant connect to the existing viaducts, and then make Pacific & Expo more local in nature with wider boulevards, trees, and traffic calming. keeping all the vehicles off of the park space. i mean, i am not a planner so i guess it is better ramming everything next to eachother, heavy trucks included? i mean, like who doesn't like cycling next to that 53' 18 wheeler right?

[s211]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

i don't know why the Malkin connector cant connect to the existing viaducts, and then make Pacific & Expo more local in nature with wider boulevards, trees, and traffic calming. keeping all the vehicles off of the park space. i mean, i am not a planner so i guess it is better ramming everything next to eachother, heavy trucks included? i mean, like who doesn't like cycling next to that 53' 18 wheeler right?

The end game is the end of anything but public transit, biking and unicorn paths.

[Vin]

Raising 1.7 billion from developers to demolish viaducts and do the reamaining works? Who are going to buy the units from them?

Remember that there is not a single cent pledged yet.

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

1 - Kingsway extending and pushing through to connect to Quebec; that was killed by previous council.

i find it funny how people think the DTES issues are the viaducts and that removing them will somehow fix all of that. that the only reason people dont live there is because of these things, that is hilarious; absolutely hilarious. if only we could live in fairytale land with unicorns and rainbows being the solution to everything.


in good news, i have heard rumours of the project having been at least slowed down with some reevaluations. i.e. not being rammed through asap anymore. i will be interested to follow this and these rumours.


i don't know why the Malkin connector cant connect to the existing viaducts, and then make Pacific & Expo more local in nature with wider boulevards, trees, and traffic calming. keeping all the vehicles off of the park space. i mean, i am not a planner so i guess it is better ramming everything next to eachother, heavy trucks included? i mean, like who doesn't like cycling next to that 53' 18 wheeler right?

Hopefully that's the case. Best scenario: keep the viaducts and build tall around them.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

That traffic is "express" for just a few block's worth of distance. Cars that use the viaducts still have to deal with all those other things before and after the actual elevated stretch. The fact that it's express for that limited length is of very minor impact considering that all the traffic on the viaducts has first been throttled by the street grid that feeds it.

A few extra blocks of surface level streets in a journey through the city that's already virtually all at surface level is not going to be as huge an impact as everyone is trying to make it out to be. The bike lane and timed lights on Dunsmuir show how well traffic can be expedited along such streets to accommodate the prevailing flow of traffic while still handling bikers, pedestrians and, yes, idiots.

The viaducts work as flyovers across busy intersections the world over, and they do work, full stop. Otherwise they won't be built in the first place. The viaducts work better than those single-junction flyovers because they span over multiple intersections that are going to be very busy when everything is built up around them. Moreover, they provide quick access over that "cliff" or escarpment to reach downtown. That's why they are very important roadway links.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

i find it funny how people think the DTES issues are the viaducts and that removing them will somehow fix all of that. that the only reason people dont live there is because of these things, that is hilarious; absolutely hilarious. if only we could live in fairytale land with unicorns and rainbows being the solution to everything.

Hmm. I thought there was a clear understanding that if there is a major shift in demographics in a neighbourhood that a positive change takes place. There are so many examples, it's impossible argue against.Harlem and Brooklyn come to mind. Downtown Los Angeles, Washington DC, and you can even see it Chinatown here in Vancouver. Calling it unicorns and rainbows is putting your blinders on, all for the sake of 1 useless km of elevated freeway.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by logan5

Hmm. I thought there was a clear understanding that if there is a major shift in demographics in a neighbourhood that a positive change takes place. There are so many examples, it's impossible argue against.Harlem and Brooklyn come to mind. Downtown Los Angeles, Washington DC, and you can even see it Chinatown here in Vancouver. Calling it unicorns and rainbows is putting your blinders on, all for the sake of 1 useless km of elevated freeway.

Downtown New Westminster is another great example of what a demographic shift can do.

s211, I don't understand how it will be all for "public transit, biking and unicorn paths" when there is clearly gonna be 6 lanes of roadway for cars. That's the double standard of many hard line automobile drivers though.

Name calling only creates more of a generational divide, remember that huge cost of living increase that happened in the last 5 years or so? That same timeline captured many young people that would have bought a car when they came of age to get their license but they now realize it's not at all realistic for the foreseeable future. Might as well make the city work for future generations instead of the past ones that don't have anything better to do then maintain the status quo until they die. That extra money you now spend on rent could go towards a car but that is not going to change anytime soon and pretending like it's the 70's when these were built is not a productive mindset. We have learned so much more about urban planning since the era these viaducts were built.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by logan5

Hmm. I thought there was a clear understanding that if there is a major shift in demographics in a neighbourhood that a positive change takes place. There are so many examples, it's impossible argue against.Harlem and Brooklyn come to mind. Downtown Los Angeles, Washington DC, and you can even see it Chinatown here in Vancouver. Calling it unicorns and rainbows is putting your blinders on, all for the sake of 1 useless km of elevated freeway.

see, my biggest issue is this;

why must we tear down the viaducts, that are 1/2 way through their life, that take up very limited physical space compared to the amount of empty land around, and that could be integrated into a development with some creative thinking, just to what? sell over priced condos to some offshore buyers who are looking for ways to park their money here?

you make it sound like these things are taking up the only usable land in the area. this area has been under-built and abandoned since Expo-86. and no, it isn't because the viaducts are there.

doing just a rough distance measure in good earth, i get ~24 acres of empty land. this measure is from south of Pacific Blvd to False Creek only. and Cooper lookout to Pacific Blvd. no, i did not include Creekside Park by Science world.

are you really going to tell me that because of, as in your words, a 1km elevated viaduct, that 24 acres of land is undeveloped literally for no reason but that? seriously? this is what you are saying?

being generous, include the empty tree spaces that are by Prior at the Viaducts, they take up about 15 acres. this doesn't include the fact you can build UNDER, and OVER them them with developments. you could create an all-weather market under them for local produce, maybe a skate park, maybe something else i haven't thought of; tons of possibilities.

the last estimate for removal was what, 300/400 million dollars? we are going to spend 300/400 million to remove road space that is good for another 40yrs? even the engineering report from 2011 says they could be seismically upgraded for a small amount.

and what about the other use? you can put all your green unicorns and rainbows on the road below with the cyclists, trees, parks, over priced condos no one lives in, and you can get all of this WITHOUT the trucks driving next to the peds and bikes. WITHOUT a wide paved road and large intersections which are not good for pedestrians either by the way.

not to mention, there is still a 30ft cliff on the eastern end of downtown, that still needs to be dealt with.

it is just insane. such a waste of money, time and resources. and what will it give us? more possible conflict zones with trucks, buses, cars, bikes, peds, more gridlock, more pollution, and longer commutes for people which causes a decrease in health.


the fact is, 24 acres of land is vacant and can be developed WITHOUT removing the viaducts. do that first, then maybe there could be a reason to tear them down.