Metro Vancouver Road Infrastructure Discussion

[Klazu]

Those are bad excuses. It would be cheap and easy to six-lane the section between Kingsway and Highway 1 where most of the traffic is. It should already be widened today.

Street parking on main arterials is one of the stupidest things in this city and should be banned. Applies to every single arterial road we have an it's a joke right now.

River District should actually add to the priority of this new crossing as it will introduce so many new cars on Marine Drive as well as Knight Street and Queensborough bridges.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Street parking on main arterials is one of the stupidest things in this city and should be banned. Applies to every single arterial road we have an it's a joke right now.

Agreed.. And actually it isn't just a Vancouver thing either. In Winnipeg (yes, I'm a transplant), they allow street parking on their major arterials as well which blows my mind considering that Winnipeg is more car-centric than Vancouver is.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by libtard

Boundary is a terrible arterial road with a steep hill, street parking , and only 4 lanes. They will never ever connect a bridge to it

The hill gives designers an opportunity to reduce the hill grade and avoid a long climb to bridge deck elevation by building an elevated section starting partway up the hill and extending to the bridge. It would be ugly as heck for the River District, though...

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

what should be built, instead of scramble corner, is a path network under Broadway and cambie so people can go any direction, to any building, right from transit while avoiding the pollution and noise from cars/trucks/buses and also the rain/snow/etc.

[osirisboy]

Yes let's put everyone underground to avoid the pollution on the streets?! Is there that much pollution
/noise that it's uncomfortable for people to cross an intersection?

I agree that it's good to have buildings to connect directly to stations but frankly everything around Cambie broadway is so small.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by libtard

Boundary is a terrible arterial road with a steep hill, street parking , and only 4 lanes. They will never ever connect a bridge to it

Considering Boundary road is a major arterial truck route. It vastly increases the chance that a bridge from Boundary road to No 8 road would be built.

As for Hwy 91 if they were to straighten out the S bend in the highway that would help the flow of traffic. A lot of the backup of traffic is caused by people slowing down for the curve. Which causes a ripple effect of traffic slowing down then speeding up.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by cabotp

As for Hwy 91 if they were to straighten out the S bend in the highway that would help the flow of traffic. A lot of the backup of traffic is caused by people slowing down for the curve. Which causes a ripple effect of traffic slowing down then speeding up.

Unlikely - just look at SFPR with all its curves to the ferry terminal (to minimize cutting through farmlands.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Unlikely - just look at SFPR with all its curves to the ferry terminal (to minimize cutting through farmlands.

Is that one of the reasons that Highway 17 was realigned around Ladner? To me, the obvious path was to go through Ladner with a diamond interchange at Highway 10 and a free-flowing one at Highway 99 then curve toward Tilbury.

[officedweller]

It was diverted around Ladner to calm traffic within Ladner. The old highway now 17A divided neighbourhoods.

But the new SFPR route follows the railway and avoids cutting through farm plots. All the curves force a lower speed limit (80km/h versus 90km/h on the old route)


https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0919705,-123.0415869,16171m/data=!3m1!1e3

[Dengler Avenue]

Wow B.C. sure knows how to slow people down.

I mean, Ladner’s already divided anyway. The sound barriers have been up the entire time. B.C. might have as well put in an interchange at Highway 10 to acknowledge that. (Obviously, that ship has sailed.)

Could it also be due to the concern that the original route (now 17A) was too close to the tunnel (aka the choke point)?

Also, could B.C. be excessively strict about ALR? For example, Highway 91 and TCH (through Chilliwack) go through farmlands, but both have very narrow ROW and require a median Jersey Barrier. This is unthinkable in Ontario, where we would completely divide the roadways with a wide median.

[libtard]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Wow B.C. sure knows how to slow people down.

I mean, Ladner’s already divided anyway. The sound barriers have been up the entire time. B.C. might have as well put in an interchange at Highway 10 to acknowledge that. (Obviously, that ship has sailed.)

Could it also be due to the concern that the original route (now 17A) was too close to the tunnel (aka the choke point)?

Also, could B.C. be excessively strict about ALR? For example, Highway 91 and TCH (through Chilliwack) go through farmlands, but both have very narrow ROW and require a median Jersey Barrier. This is unthinkable in Ontario, where we would completely divide the roadways with a wide median.

It’s not Highway 10 until east of highway 91. You’re talking about Ladner Trunk Road

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by libtard

It’s not Highway 10 until east of highway 91. You’re talking about Ladner Trunk Road

Lol sorry I got lazy. On my phone, it’s much easier to write Highway 10 than Ladner Trunk Road.

(Here’s the thing though: When I took the 404 from Ladner back to Richmond back in the days <August 2013>, the bus stop was called “Highway 17 @ Highway 10”.)

Anyway, any thoughts about my other questions?

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Could it also be due to the concern that the original route (now 17A) was too close to the tunnel (aka the choke point)?

Also, could B.C. be excessively strict about ALR?

Even with the cancelled bridge, 17A would have had a big interchange, so probably not because of proximity to the tunnel.

Yeah, ALR is really strict. That's also why the Province wanted the bridge - to preserve as much ALR land as possible.
Now with a tunnel, more will be eaten up because with a bridge, the land under it could be used.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Even with the cancelled bridge, 17A would have had a big interchange, so probably not because of proximity to the tunnel.

Yeah, ALR is really strict. That's also why the Province wanted the bridge - to preserve as much ALR land as possible.

Lol, maybe in Ontario, we just have too much arable land to have to worry.

Now with a tunnel, more will be eaten up because with a bridge, the land under it could be used.

I don’t agree. In Europe, freeways get tunnelled near farm fields here and there too, so I deduce that both means should preserve ALR no problem.

Personally, I prefer a bridge replacement though. The mayor council’s really done a disservice big time.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

what should be built, instead of scramble corner, is a path network under Broadway and cambie so people can go any direction, to any building, right from transit while avoiding the pollution and noise from cars/trucks/buses and also the rain/snow/etc.

Agreed. What may be "small" right now will only get bigger. City Square will be connected, and the underground concourse extended as this major node grows in size and necessity.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Lol, maybe in Ontario, we just have too much arable land to have to worry.


I don’t agree. In Europe, freeways get tunnelled near farm fields here and there too, so I deduce that both means should preserve ALR no problem.

Personally, I prefer a bridge replacement though. The mayor council’s really done a disservice big time.

The loss of more ALR land would be specific to this case.
The bridge would have been built straddling the existing tunnel not adjacent to it - so no major side-by-side increase in RoW width at grade and the bridge approaches would have been so tall that some shade tolerant crops could be grown under the approaches.
With the new tunnel, there's talk of keeping the old one, so there might be a an increase in width at grade level for roadway approaches with side-by-side tunnels. Even with a completely new tunnel, the approaches would be taken lands.
The interchanges were also narrow ones with the bridge.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by libtard

It’s not Highway 10 until east of highway 91. You’re talking about Ladner Trunk Road

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

When I took the 404 from Ladner back to Richmond back in the days <August 2013>, the bus stop was called “Highway 17 @ Highway 10”.

It used to go further west, though, up until the early 2000s IIRC. The western terminus was at what was then Highway 17 (now 17A).

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Agreed. What may be "small" right now will only get bigger. City Square will be connected, and the underground concourse extended as this major node grows in size and necessity.

What is this obsession with having City Square connected with the station?

Do you expect a tiny little underground pathway all the way? Or are your plans more grand?

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

What is this obsession with having City Square connected with the station?

Do you expect a tiny little underground pathway all the way? Or are your plans more grand?

Excuse me. It's not meant as an obsession. City Square is right in the 'hood. Such a connection would be a beginning of "connectedness." I am following up on the idea by VotF. Broadway and Cambie will become more and more important over the years.
This is to develop what may become a smaller version of Montreal's Underground City. I'm not thinking of anything as big as that, or of the huge PATH system in Toronto.
I'm just saying that hooking things up underground is fast and convenient, especially when linked to a major subway station such as City Hall, and on a major street such as Broadway.
And, no, I don't think this will detract from, or deaden street-level life, as somebody is certain to argue. This is for commuters to get to where they want to go fast and out of the rain.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by officedweller

It was diverted around Ladner to calm traffic within Ladner. The old highway now 17A divided neighbourhoods.

As far as I'm concerned when I'm driving from the ferry into Vancouver it's just plain dumb to divert so far east in order to access the tunnel - so I always take 17A anyway. And from what I can observe of the other traffic around me, I'm not the only one.

I can understand the benefit of taking the new route for people heading to Surrey, New West, etc. - but to have the signage for Vancouver direct traffic that way is stupid IMHO.