Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Game night (sometimes just rush hour) pushes traffic up to 100% saturation with the viaducts. The rebuild is a 1 to 1 replacement; traffic will not somehow jump to 150% saturation without the viaducts, which would violate the laws of physics.

They can be built. And to walk between them and BC Place will take upwards of twenty minutes - or ten minutes on a narrow overpass definitely not meant to be a main entryway - when it could be ten minutes right to the front gate. It's just as much easier to carpool, taxi or bus with a Georgia Ramp than with the viaducts.




Hah, literally that demographic, and I don't like it that much either. But there should be a kind of designated "drunk tank" zone in the area, even if it's just one or two blocks. Maybe add a cinema and library to balance it out.

It damn will. Imagine all the viaduct traffic funneling down to Pacific Boulevard on that new narrow ramp, on top of the traffic created by the new residents as well as the new entertainment district of the entire area. Now imagine all these happen on a game night. What kind of nightmarish scenario would that be? Now think further about having all this traffic squeezed onto the new 2-lane Prior street. It's not like we are adding an additional Skytrain line through that area to alleviate all the traffic of the future, and I don't think planners think about all these. We are a City that do not plan ahead: we just collect our pay-cheque to get through each day here.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Vin

It damn will. Imagine all the viaduct traffic funeling down to Pacific Boulevard on that narrow ramp, on top of the traffic created by the new residents as well as the new entertainment district of the entire area. What kind of scenario would that be? Now think about all this traffic being squeezed onto the new 2-lane Prior street.

Again, it's a 1 to 1 lane replacement; the most that happens is an extra red light or two. Most of the visitors will come via foot, taxi/rideshare or rapid transit. The Burrard rebuild wasn't the end of the world, this won't be either.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Vin

It damn will. Imagine all the viaduct traffic funeling down to Pacific Boulevard on that narrow ramp, on top of the traffic created by the new residents as well as the new entertainment district of the entire area. Now imagine all these happen on a game night. What kind of scenario would that be? Now think further about having all this traffic squeezed onto the new 2-lane Prior street.

At any given moment there are around 25 cars on the Georgia Viaduct. Not that many because the viaduct is only 900 metres long. There is spare capacity right now on Pacific, plus they are adding a lane, so absorbing the few cars that are on the viaducts will be easy.

Vancouver doesn't need to build an entertainment district. There are already bars and restaurants steps away from the stadiums. The Ice District in Edmonton is not very large. There are still lots of parking lots surrounding Rogers Place.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Heh, literally that demographic, and I don't like it much either. But there should be a kind of designated "drunk tank roundup" zone in the area, even if it's just one or two blocks. Maybe add a cinema and library to balance it out.

Isn't that what Granville is on Friday/Saturday nights? Closed to cars and puke everywhere?

They could do a little more to block it off. I admit I haven't been there at that time for at least a few years.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Speaking of the community centre, let's hope there's other recreational stuff besides the rink - there's a shortage of bowling and rock-climbing spaces downtown. Wouldn't mind one or two of those fancy VR sports booths either.

I vote for a swimming pool. Hillcrest is jammed, all the time. I'm guessing the one downtown is too.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by logan5

At any given moment there are around 25 cars on the Georgia Viaduct. Not that many because the viaduct is only 900 metres long. There is spare capacity right now on Pacific, plus they are adding a lane, so absorbing the few cars that are on the viaducts will be easy.

Vancouver doesn't need to build an entertainment district. There are already bars and restaurants steps away from the stadiums. The Ice District in Edmonton is not very large. There are still lots of parking lots surrounding Rogers Place.

A good city does not function on "any given moment". We plan for the worst case scenarios. Have you seen the viaduct traffic coming in during a game night? It's like an elevated parking lot!

We are building a new entertainment district near the waterfront at the Expo lands whether you like it or not. it is already in the works. The project is necessary to provide an added synergy to the new Parq Casino as well as the businesses around there. Without this project, the Parq would be a wasted effort.

FYI, the ICE District in Edmonton is only the first phase of the district as a huge anchor is needed to attract more going into the downtown core. It current consists of office towers, a really tall Marriott hotel, hockey stadium, retail space as well as a casino. Be prepared to see more buildings taking over those parking lots soon. They recently opened the new Royal Alerta Museum couple of blocks away, as well as constructing a new LRT Valley Line going through the ICE district. Downtown Edmonton has a vision, we have lost ours long ago, and fallen to complacency.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_District

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Again, it's a 1 to 1 lane replacement; the most that happens is an extra red light or two. Most of the visitors will come via foot, taxi/rideshare or rapid transit. The Burrard rebuild wasn't the end of the world, this won't be either.

Your blind trust of the system and status quo is truly amazing.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Vin

A good city does not function on "any given moment". We plan for the worst case scenarios. Have you seen the viaduct traffic coming in during a game night? It's like an elevated parking lot!

Spending tax dollars to build enough infrastructure to handle the highest volumes (ie: rush hour) at the fastest speeds, is a gross misuse of pooled resources.

[GenWhy?]

The viaducts being an elevated parking lot during games I think says more about the intersections at either end and the fact you're stuck on them says more about their design pitfalls rather than necessity to retain.

Which still begs the questions. Objectively is there a reason to keep them post 2025-2030?

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

So I guess the downward spiral really began when the PCHA folded? /s

sorry you didn't like those 2 facts that Vancouver once achieved and accomplished things.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

sorry you didn't like those 2 facts that Vancouver once achieved and accomplished things.

We now have the world's longest uninterrupted waterfront path. It could benefit from more interventions to stop and get food and/or a drink. The shopping node at the end of Davie Street works well, with the choice of a supermarket, a couple of coffee shops and several restaurants. The Olympic Village node has a similar mix, and also works well. There will be a similar City-planned node under Granville Bridge. The redevelopment of NEFC (including losing the viaducts) is the chance to add another node, although it's planned to be on a larger scale and with more commercial space and with other facilities.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Vin

A good city does not function on "any given moment". We plan for the worst case scenarios. Have you seen the viaduct traffic coming in during a game night? It's like an elevated parking lot!

Welcome to living in a city; every single part of the globe has traffic/transit overload when there's a game or a concert on. Bigger metros than us have learned that building your way out of gridlock is about as effective as gambling your way out of debt.

Originally Posted by Vin

Your blind trust of the system and status quo is truly amazing.

The "status quo" would be to keep the viaducts until they're "parking lots" even at five in the morning, a course of action you seem to approve of. Such a fear of change would be much welcomed in Point Grey.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Spending tax dollars to build enough infrastructure to handle the highest volumes (ie: rush hour) at the fastest speeds, is a gross misuse of pooled resources.

Small correction: spending tax dollars to build enough infrastructure to handle the highest volumes (ie: rush hour) with the least efficient systems, is a gross misuse of pooled resources. Nobody would be complaining about an NEFC SkyTrain.

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

sorry you didn't like those 2 facts that Vancouver once achieved and accomplished things.

Pfft, lower the bar enough and even Yellowknife's achieved and accomplished things.

Despite our... triumphs, we never did manage to boast about being the Second City of the British Empire - and there aren't any op-eds in the archives where Glaswegians and Liverpudlians (who did boast such things) bemoan their lack of 15+ storey towers or indoor skating rinks as compared to Vancouver's, or say they're falling behind compared to the colonies. It's as if being a world-class metropolis has little to do with how many Tallest and Biggest records one has.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Changing City

We now have the world's longest uninterrupted waterfront path.

...which, in my opinion, is as much of a crown jewel as Stanley Park is.

[SFUVancouver]

I think it's more so. We inherited Stanley Park but created the Seawall.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

I think it's more so. We inherited Stanley Park but created the Seawall.

I would agree in that it's accessible to a ton more people. Those that live nearby, and can transit to pieces of it much easier.

I love Stanley Park, but can't get out there as much as I'd like.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Spending tax dollars to build enough infrastructure to handle the highest volumes (ie: rush hour) at the fastest speeds, is a gross misuse of pooled resources.

The money had already been spent. We are not spending more.

Are you meaning to say that Granville Bridge, Burrard bridge, Cambie bridge and the wide roads built in the old days were a "gross misuse" of tax dollars because they were planned for bigger capacities?

And of course, when we don't build enough for future capacities, such as the congested and tiny Canada Line trains with tiny platforms, people start complaining.

I suppose St Paul's hospital should only be planned for today, and forget about the growth of the city's population because it would be a "gross misuse of pooled resources".

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.


No wonder this city is getting sub-par.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Welcome to living in a city; every single part of the globe has traffic/transit overload when there's a game or a concert on. Bigger metros than us have learned that building your way out of gridlock is about as effective as gambling your way out of debt.

The "status quo" would be to keep the viaducts until they're "parking lots" even at five in the morning, a course of action you seem to approve of. Such a fear of change would be much welcomed in Point Grey.

I guess spending at least $500 mil to get rid of perfectly functioning viaducts, without any guarantee in funding, helps in "gambling your way out of debt"?

I love your logic!

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Changing City

We now have the world's longest uninterrupted waterfront path. It could benefit from more interventions to stop and get food and/or a drink. The shopping node at the end of Davie Street works well, with the choice of a supermarket, a couple of coffee shops and several restaurants. The Olympic Village node has a similar mix, and also works well. There will be a similar City-planned node under Granville Bridge. The redevelopment of NEFC (including losing the viaducts) is the chance to add another node, although it's planned to be on a larger scale and with more commercial space and with other facilities.

Few and far between. That's all I can say for recent accomplishments.

And if not for the foresight of Lord Frederick Stanley, a British citizen from the 19th century, by giving Stanley park to the citizens of this land, we won't have the title of having the world's longest uninterrupted waterfront path today.

This is what Lord Stanley said:
"To the use and enjoyment of people of all colours, creeds, and customs for all time.
I name thee Stanley Park"

Lord Stanley
Governor-General
October 1889

This means that he City will never be able to expand into the park, which benefits us tremendously.

The retail/restaurant nodes are a huge welcome, but I still think the moves to implement them are not bold enough. Everything is of a minuscule scale, and won't make a huge impact to help make downtown become a shopping destination like it used to. Back in the days people from all over would come over to view the displays at the Woodwards store, especially during Christmas time. Mind you that the Woodwards department store was one of the biggest in the world at its time. We have simply lost that ability to attract by only thinking small.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Vin

I guess spending at least $500 mil to get rid of perfectly functioning viaducts, without any guarantee in funding, helps in "gambling your way out of debt"?

I love your logic!

Stop with your false budget numbers. $500M if the City leaves the land empty, which is one of your bigger fallacies.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Vin

The money had already been spent. We are not spending more.

Are you meaning to say that Granville Bridge, Burrard bridge, Cambie bridge and the wide roads built in the old days were a "gross misuse" of tax dollars because they were planned for bigger capacities?

Granville was, depending on what the additional cost was at the time, and what else could have been done with that money.

Originally Posted by Vin

I suppose St Paul's hospital should only be planned for today, and forget about the growth of the city's population because it would be a "gross misuse of pooled resources".

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.


No wonder this city is getting sub-par.

Healthcare is a different beast. St. Paul's isn't getting additional beds on opening day, as I'm sure you're aware.