Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Removing the viaducts NOW is pure and simple political legacy grandstanding. It's just the desire to leave a mark on the city that you can look back and say... "I did that"

..........

ANY argument that makes the claim that the cost of viaduct demolition being covered by the development fees will apply even more so 20 years from now. The only problem with that... is that the people in charge now will be retired or dead and won't live to see this happen. AND THAT is the REAL reason the viaduct removal was being championed now, instead of when they're closer to their end of life.

Very little disagreement there - Vision wanted this as their monument to themselves.

That said, the promise of a park & district is a lot less appealing than an actual park & district. And the parties that pushed the most for keeping the 'ducts (Coalition, etc) got soundly rejected at the polls; the City Council that replaced Vision (and that'll get their name on the plaque) still wants to go ahead - even de Genova's backed down!

So it's not just a politician thing. Most voters seem either supportive or indifferent to the removal. Make of that what you will.

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

IS it REALLY a bad thing to have vacant valuable land close to the downtown core 30 years from now? Leaving the viaducts as they stand forces developers to either get creative with building design or just leave the land vacant. BOTH situations are a WIN for Vancouver. Not EVERY square cm of downtown has to pretty.

Imagine if we had filled downtown with 70s-era skyscrapers because there was vacant land. Do I think the Viaducts NEED to be there? Not necessarily. I think downtown has crept east and will continue to do so (where else would you go). Could people in the 60s imagine the glass towers we have? Could they have imagined the internet changing how office workers work and commute? Could they have imagined self-driving cars? Who knows what 30 years will bring and we've had a LOT of development in the last 20 years. There's nothing wrong with letting some space rest for a couple of decades.

Interestingly enough, the NPA wanted to do something similar in Coal Harbour - three thousand rental units and a hotel. Instead, City Council bowed to COPE and the public, opted for a park and left the rest alone. The result is one of the quietest, most expensive neighbourhoods in Vancouver.

Four Seasons probably wouldn't have solved the housing crisis, but I doubt we'd be fighting tooth and nail over every walkup if we'd developed Coal Harbour instead of sitting on it.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Here you go. There's a tiny pocket of clean space directly east of Carrall, but I don't see the point.



That argument cuts both ways though: "if traffic's decreasing, why keep the viaducts?" It's an ongoing chicken-or-egg argument.

I've mentioned that the NEFC planners' current intent is for the streetcar to run in mixed-traffic. Yes, I know that's a bad idea. TransLink won't even consider a bus route on the viaducts though, likely for the same reason as the ambulances.

Concord's developed section is actually ON the polluted area, on the tar pit no less. The boundary between the new park and the developed lands is a straight line from Carrall St. north of Andy Livingstone- note that Carrall St. is a curving road. The remediation costs are going to be extended to the western half of the site, which is a legitimate concern, though.

https://images.dailyhive.com/20170620152739/concord-pacific-northeast-false-creek-7.jpg

Daily Hive; https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/northeast-false-creek-plan-city-of-vancouver-cost

You keep the viaducts because it actually costs you a lot of money to remove it, and requires significant road recalibration, largely to compensate for lost capacity.

Buses use the False Creek Bridges despite not being able to move into the reverse lanes in an emergency- the Granville Bridge is downright dangerous for pedestrians to disembark onto in an emergency.

It's probably due to the fact it doesn't connect with anything below. It's not a very likely possibility streetcars will be put in the viaducts due to logistical issues and lack of connectivity, but the option is technically there.

Even if it doesn't, you still have more room and lanes on the surface level to put in dedicated bus/streetcar lanes even if road demand does not decrease.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Very little disagreement there - Vision wanted this as their monument to themselves.

That said, the promise of a park & district is a lot less appealing than an actual park & district. And the parties that pushed the most for keeping the 'ducts (Coalition, etc) got soundly rejected at the polls; the City Council that replaced Vision (and that'll get their name on the plaque) still wants to go ahead - even de Genova's backed down!

So it's not just a politician thing. Most voters seem either supportive or indifferent to the removal. Make of that what you will.



Interestingly enough, the NPA wanted to do something similar in Coal Harbour - three thousand rental units and a hotel. Instead, City Council bowed to COPE and the public, opted for a park and left the rest alone. The result is one of the quietest, most expensive neighbourhoods in Vancouver.

Four Seasons probably wouldn't have solved the housing crisis, but I doubt we'd be fighting tooth and nail over every walkup if we'd developed Coal Harbour instead of sitting on it.

I think it's just overshadowed by everything else going on right now. It's one small corner of Downtown most people simply ignore on their commutes.

...what? The lack of development in Devonian Harbour was a symptom and foreshadowing what was to come, not the cause of NIMBYism. Devonian Harbour Park isn't exactly a bad park either, though perhaps slightly redundant by Stanley Park.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Concord's developed section is actually ON the polluted area, on the tar pit no less. The boundary between the new park and the developed lands is a straight line from Carrall St. north of Andy Livingstone- note that Carrall St. is a curving road. The remediation costs are going to be extended to the western half of the site, which is a legitimate concern, though.

That's the one part I don't get. I'm assuming there's a soil analysis that we're not privy to, and it says that Abbott is mostly safe.

The east half was mostly refineries and depots, so a park still makes more sense.

Originally Posted by fredinno

You keep the viaducts because it actually costs you a lot of money to remove it, and requires significant road recalibration, largely to compensate for lost capacity.

Buses use the False Creek Bridges despite not being able to move into the reverse lanes in an emergency- the Granville Bridge is downright dangerous for pedestrians to disembark onto in an emergency.

It's probably due to the fact it doesn't connect with anything below. It's not a very likely possibility streetcars will be put in the viaducts due to logistical issues and lack of connectivity, but the option is technically there.

Even if it doesn't, you still have more room and lanes on the surface level to put in dedicated bus/streetcar lanes even if road demand does not decrease.

And that's why the park and entertainment district are included as part of the deal. They can still build both with the viaducts in the way, yes, but again, it won't be as integrated.

Well, what's the other option for buses? Have every route go all the way around False Creek? Most of the time, the bridge gets closed entirely and the buses are rerouted to the other bridges; much harder than it should be to do that with the viaducts' street grid.

TransLink's got the 23 running N-S through Quebec and Abbott, but I'm really not seeing how you'd create a E-W route without removing the Main Street ramps and at least some road rebuilding. As it is, the 25 on Prior takes a detour north through Gore and Pender just to avoid the viaducts; Pender isn't exactly lacking for transit.

Originally Posted by fredinno

I think it's just overshadowed by everything else going on right now. It's one small corner of Downtown most people simply ignore on their commutes.

...what? The lack of development in Devonian Harbour was a symptom and foreshadowing what was to come, not the cause of NIMBYism. Devonian Harbour Park isn't exactly a bad park either, though perhaps slightly redundant by Stanley Park.

It's a hot button issue, actually. Virtually anybody who goes through downtown knows what they are and has an opinion on it; most just don't care. My family prefers to go through Expo/Pacific or Chinatown instead of fighting the traffic.

What I'm trying to get at is that Neurons' suggestion of sitting on the viaducts and letting their value increase isn't such a good idea; last time we tried that, the end result was condos, a treed lawn, and residents who'll sue you for whistling too loud in the morning .
We've got the land, it's not doing anything, let's put some rentals and cafes and trees on it.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

That's the one part I don't get. I'm assuming there's a soil analysis that we're not privy to, and it says that Abbott is mostly safe.

The east half was mostly refineries and depots, so a park still makes more sense.

More safe than a literal slag pile?

TransLink's got the 23 running N-S through Quebec and Abbott, but I'm really not seeing how you'd create a E-W route without removing the Main Street ramps and at least some road rebuilding. As it is, the 25 on Prior takes a detour north through Gore and Pender just to avoid the viaducts; Pender isn't exactly lacking for transit.

By doing what the image says and following Pacific Blvd and Quebec St?

It's a hot button issue, actually. Virtually anybody who goes through downtown knows what they are and has an opinion on it; most just don't care. My family prefers to go through Expo/Pacific or Chinatown instead of fighting the traffic.

Isn't that literally the exact opposite of a hot-button issue?

What I'm trying to get at is that Neurons' suggestion of sitting on the viaducts and letting their value increase isn't such a good idea; last time we tried that, the end result was condos, a treed lawn, and residents who'll sue you for whistling too loud in the morning .
We've got the land, it's not doing anything, let's put some rentals and cafes and trees on it.

I mean, to be fair, it was COPE that did that. I'd be concerned if COPE came back, period.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

More safe than a literal slag pile?

By doing what the image says and following Pacific Blvd and Quebec St?

Isn't that literally the exact opposite of a hot-button issue?

No idea - maybe they'll set up another barrier wall? Point is, the contimination isn't limited to just Andy Livingstone.

Judging by the lines, I'm guessing the old streetcar plan included the viaduct removal.

EDIT: On further review - thanks Alex - the NPA streetcar is cutting across the Milross-National blocks (undeveloped back then); since that's off the table now, getting to Station Street means weaving through Quebec and Main via National, or just continuing down Quebec to 2nd/GNW (made redundant by the 23 and 84). And we can forget about getting to Prior from Pacific, which would likely be the goal of a new downtown route.
Like it or not, it's easier to make transit work without the viaducts than with them.

I guess not. What's the term for when you end up with two increasingly partisan sides and the middle leaning towards "sure, why not?" Because more or less everybody who could get upset with the removal already is.

Originally Posted by fredinno

I mean, to be fair, it was COPE that did that. I'd be concerned if COPE came back, period.

Hah, wouldn't we all?

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

No idea - maybe they'll set up another barrier wall? Point is, the contimination isn't limited to just Andy Livingstone.

Judging by the lines, I'm guessing the old streetcar plan included the viaduct removal.

I'm pretty sure that's the NPA plan which had the maintenance facilities under the viaduct on that empty lot the VPD uses.

The whole viaduct removal thing didn't come around until Geoff Meggs and Gregor got in. They didn't really do much of anything with the streetcar though.

So... no, the viaducts were retained in the streetcar plan and the land under them was used without their demolition.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

No idea - maybe they'll set up another barrier wall? Point is, the contimination isn't limited to just Andy Livingstone.

Yup. I think Andy Livingstone just has the contaminated soil from International Village.
The areas for the new parks have not yet been excavated - that's why the park can't be built before the redevelopment, because the contaminated soil from the new redevelopment will go under the new park. The new park is located where it is because that's the most contaminated areas (area around the gasometer (coal burner to generate electricity)), so it can't really be excavated for development.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

I'm pretty sure that's the NPA plan which had the maintenance facilities under the viaduct on that empty lot the VPD uses.

The whole viaduct removal thing didn't come around until Geoff Meggs and Gregor got in. They didn't really do much of anything with the streetcar though.

So... no, the viaducts were retained in the streetcar plan and the land under them was used without their demolition.

Originally Posted by officedweller

Yup. I think Andy Livingstone just has the contaminated soil from International Village.
The areas for the new parks have not yet been excavated - that's why the park can't be built before the redevelopment, because the contaminated soil from the new redevelopment will go under the new park. The new park is located where it is because that's the most contaminated areas (area around the gasometer (coal burner to generate electricity)), so it can't really be excavated for development.

Thanks, that's a lot of good information here.

[Vin]

I guess it's time to demolish Cambie Bridge too. This would be the most progressive thing to do yet.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/cambie-street-bridge-earthquake-damage-report

[MIPS]

Okay, serious question here.
It's bothered me for years as to what that little building with the curved roof directly beside the viaducts and the dip in the SkyTrain tracks is for. It's been there for decades. I've heard rumors that it's a pump house for groundwater while others say it's for soil decontamination from back when the area was still industrial land. Either way, if that area is redeveloped that building isn't gonna stay there, so what is it?

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by MIPS

Okay, serious question here.
It's bothered me for years as to what that little building with the curved roof directly beside the viaducts and the dip in the SkyTrain tracks is for. It's been there for decades. I've heard rumors that it's a pump house for groundwater while others say it's for soil decontamination from back when the area was still industrial land. Either way, if that area is redeveloped that building isn't gonna stay there, so what is it?

It's a definitely a pump station for the contaminated groundwater. They capped the contaminated soil at Andy Livingstone with an impermeable barrier, but there's still likely to be groundwater seeps. Making something so large impermeable is very hard to create, so you have to add in contingencies to keep a contaminated plumb from forming.

I think the pump station intercepts those seeps. I'd imagine they also have to do some treatment before they can release it into the sewers.

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by Vin

I guess it's time to demolish Cambie Bridge too. This would be the most progressive thing to do yet.

https://dailyhive. The com/vancouver/cambie-street-bridge-earthquake-damage-report

Don’t give them any ideas.

Only a matter of time before the usual propaganda starts. “Do we really need another crossing into downtown....nobody really drives anymore” etc etc

[Vin]

Originally Posted by EastVanMark

Don’t give them any ideas.

Only a matter of time before the usual propaganda starts. “Do we really need another crossing into downtown....nobody really drives anymore” etc etc

And of course, the "poor emergency vehicles will be stuck on Cambie bridge", and not to mention the "freed up land for social housing on both ends of the bridge" is good for mankind!

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by MIPS

Okay, serious question here.
It's bothered me for years as to what that little building with the curved roof directly beside the viaducts and the dip in the SkyTrain tracks is for. It's been there for decades. I've heard rumors that it's a pump house for groundwater while others say it's for soil decontamination from back when the area was still industrial land. Either way, if that area is redeveloped that building isn't gonna stay there, so what is it?

Now I'm curious (and why that has to be the best view in any of the windows... ).

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

It's a definitely a pump station for the contaminated groundwater. They capped the contaminated soil at Andy Livingstone with an impermeable barrier, but there's still likely to be groundwater seeps. Making something so large impermeable is very hard to create, so you have to add in contingencies to keep a contaminated plumb from forming.

I think the pump station intercepts those seeps. I'd imagine they also have to do some treatment before they can release it into the sewers.

Yep. And they have to figure out what to do with it because of rising ocean level concerns. They either need to figure out how to wrap the entire thing in essentially a bathtub with high walls surrounding it, or they need to somehow raise the entire building. Or build a new one somewhere close.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Yep. And they have to figure out what to do with it because of rising ocean level concerns. They either need to figure out how to wrap the entire thing in essentially a bathtub with high walls surrounding it, or they need to somehow raise the entire building. Or build a new one somewhere close.

Dare I say that doesn't sound at all challenging or particularly expensive?

Flood proofing individual buildings doesn't seem very complicated, especially when it straddles an exit for the water. Flood proofing a city on the other hand...

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

Dare I say that doesn't sound at all challenging or particularly expensive?

Flood proofing individual buildings doesn't seem very complicated, especially when it straddles an exit for the water. Flood proofing a city on the other hand...

They just need to build a sea-level control dam at the mouth of Falsecreek near Vanier Park, similarly to what London had done on their Thames. Sunset Beach all the way to English Bay, as well as Vanier Park all the way to Kitsilano Beach, will be surrounded by dikes like in Richmond. This will keep the rising sea away from Falsecreek and the flats. The rest of Vancouver is relatively high and should be OK, except for The East Fraserlands.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thames_Barrier

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

It's a definitely a pump station for the contaminated groundwater. They capped the contaminated soil at Andy Livingstone with an impermeable barrier, but there's still likely to be groundwater seeps. Making something so large impermeable is very hard to create, so you have to add in contingencies to keep a contaminated plumb from forming.

I think the pump station intercepts those seeps. I'd imagine they also have to do some treatment before they can release it into the sewers.

That's my understanding too.
There' s barrier in place to prevent contaminated groundwater from leaching into False Creek. The pumping station removes the groundwater that collects at the barrier and pumps it into the municipal sewage system for treatment at the Annacis Island WWTP, I think (I think Iona serves westside Vancouver and only has primary treatment).

Originally Posted by officedweller

From the viaduct thread posted May 21, 2012:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=174625&page=107

That area was the site of the former coal gasification plant and storage of coal.

Note in the legend the "Barrier Wall" - that was installed to prevent leachate from reaching False Creek waters
- I think the pumping station near the skate park sends the leachate into the sewer system.
There also looks to be one on the west side of Andy Livingstone Park (which is a repository for contaminated soils).

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by officedweller

That's my understanding too.
There' s barrier in place to prevent contaminated groundwater from leaching into False Creek. The pumping station removes the groundwater that collects at the barrier and pumps it into the municipal sewage system for treatment at the Annacis Island WWTP, I think (I think Iona serves westside Vancouver and only has primary treatment).

Iona treats most of Vancouver, the cutoff is roughly where Still Creek's watershed beings.

Metro Vancouver is investing a lot in their treatment at the moment. Lions Gate is getting replaced. Annacis is getting a fairly hefty expansion and seismic upgrade. Iona should be getting secondary treatment after that.

[Galaxy]

North Langley is getting a new treatment centre as well and Surrey has that very big diameter tunnel for sewage that they are building which will be done I think close to 2023.