Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[Vin]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

You'll be disappointed to hear that the word "viaduct" doesn't appear in the presentation from staff to council outlining projects that are having funding deferred.

I'm not disappointed, because the budget has never been there in the first place. With shortfalls in other ones, how can they come up with 300-500 million to take the viaducts down?

Last time I checked, which is TODAY, the viaducts are still standing (and crumbling due to CoV neglect).

Originally Posted by logan5

Another dishonest post by Vin.

Nothing to say to your comment, except

[CivicBlues]

Any indication on how the new council will handle the viaducts?

[GenWhy?]

If ABC wants to reverse the Hogan's Alley Land Trust agreement they can have at 'er.

[WarrenC12]

Read the tea leaves, ABC probably wants to:

- lower taxes
- protect most SFH areas (ie: not Broadway Plan)
- still build a lot of housing, mostly market, but they have promised more co-op spaces, and stuff like daycares, that would come from CACs

My guess is yeah, big brownfield sites like NEFC will get built out.

Vision Vancouver 2.0

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

If ABC wants to reverse the Hogan's Alley Land Trust agreement they can have at 'er.

And why would that be something that you would want?

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by dreambrother808

And why would that be something that you would want?

In order to keep the viaducts ABC will have to reverse that agreement. Personally I would like the viaducts east of Main demolished right away while we await CAC monies from the north False Creek developments, but that's probably a logistical headache.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Personally I would like the viaducts east of Main demolished right away...

What viaducts east of Main? All I see are ramps that connect the viaducts with the street network. Are you saying that you want to disconnect the viaducts from Prior Steet and have all the traffic originate and terminate at the Main Street ramps?

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

What viaducts east of Main? All I see are ramps that connect the viaducts with the street network. Are you saying that you want to disconnect the viaducts from Prior Steet and have all the traffic originate and terminate at the Main Street ramps?

Theoretically you could demolish the viaducts east of Quebec and leave the onramps from Main Street. That would open up the plot between Gore and Main and half the plot between Main and Quebec to re-development. But that would create a lot of congestion due to the awkward right turn left turn that would become necessary to get from Prior westbound onto the viaduct, and I don't know the effect removing those segments would have on the structural integrity of the remaining viaduct and ramps.

Considering that complete removal of the viaducts could begin in 2027 and that is when the new St. Paul's is expected to be completed, I would say tearing down the viaducts and redeveloping those two plots can wait.

[Vin]

I'm a happy camper every time I see the viaducts still standing: chanelling traffic quickly into and out from downtown. Now they are even brightly lit with LED streetlights. Awesome.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Vin

I'm a happy camper every time I see the viaducts still standing: chanelling traffic quickly into and out from downtown. Now they are even brightly lit with LED streetlights. Awesome.

And a boulevard will channel the traffic just as well, provide a more comfortable experience for bikes and pedestrians, connect Chinatown to False Creek, and open up two full blocks for development, not to mention it will have none of the seismic concerns.

The viaducts are overbuilt for their current job, which is why you never have backups on the viaducts themselves despite constant congestion on Main, Prior, Dunsmuir, and Georgia.

[officedweller]

I'm not really keen on lumping all uses into the same corridor (ie creating a "stroad").
Like SkyTrain flying above instead of mixed in with traffic, I see a benefit to keeping some traffic away from areas where there are more leisurely uses.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I'm not really keen on lumping all uses into the same corridor (ie creating a "stroad").
Like SkyTrain flying above instead of mixed in with traffic, I see a benefit to keeping some traffic away from areas where there are more leisurely uses.

The problem with stroads is not the mix of a number of uses. Rather, it's the high speeds for cars in the middle of an urban environment.

The only impact removing the viaducts will have on cars is slowing them down for a few blocks. Right now, cars often travel well below the speed limit of 50 on Prior, Main, Dunsmuir, and Georgia due to congestion. Then they hop on the viaduct for one kilometre and "pin it", and then have to slow down again at the other end. Is that really helping traffic flow or making life better for the pedestrians who are segregated from the bulk of traffic, walking along Pacific Boulevard?

[officedweller]

I'm not really keen on hanging out around streets congested with lots of car traffic.

As for slowing cars down in that area, it's geographically restricted, being the isthmus to the downtown penninsula,
and no one wants to drive on Hastings in the DTES, so I'm not sure how the grid will handle the volumes.
Cordova may get busier, as it's part of the route leading to McGill, but I'm not sure if drivers have been avoiding that route now due to DTES concerns.
Cambie Bridge and West 2nd Ave. may also be an option depending on a driver's ultimate destination.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I'm not really keen on lumping all uses into the same corridor (ie creating a "stroad").
Like SkyTrain flying above instead of mixed in with traffic, I see a benefit to keeping some traffic away from areas where there are more leisurely uses.

Valid point, but we're already seeing the street network on both ends of the viaducts becoming gridlocked... and from there, it's only a matter of time before the viaducts themselves become gridlocked too and their usefulness drops into the negatives. It's not exactly a highway to begin with; you're only skipping 6-8 blocks.

[GenWhy?]

Looks to replicate Pacific Boulevard around Davie St.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Valid point, but we're already seeing the street network on both ends of the viaducts becoming gridlocked... and from there, it's only a matter of time before the viaducts themselves become gridlocked too and their usefulness drops into the negatives. It's not exactly a highway to begin with; you're only skipping 6-8 blocks.

I'm more thinking about what happens when you lump those cars onto Pacific and Expo Blvds, especially on BC Place and Rogers Arena event nights.
I expect that the new Georgia St. ramp would be closed before and after events.
It's nice to have a bit of redundancy / extra capacity.

I don't think that Pacific near Davie would have the same volumes as east of downtown, since there's more commuter traffic moving through the areas to the east.
It might end up like a Georgia - Pender merge towards Lions Gate Bridge scenario.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

shame they never built the freeway down into the Grandview Cut. wasted potental.

the viaducts could have gone down into the Grandview Cut, keeping traffic off streets so they could be calmed for people/bikes. then they could have built a deck overtop of the Cut, creating a linear park. placing cars, trains, trucks below ground with a direct freeway connection to Highway 1.

such a missed opportunity. it would have literally benefited everyone from pedestrians, to bikes, to transit, to home owners, to neighbourhoods, to commuters, to the movement of goods.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I'm more thinking about what happens when you lump those cars onto Pacific and Expo Blvds, especially on BC Place and Rogers Arena event nights.
I expect that the new Georgia St. ramp would be closed before and after events.
It's nice to have a bit of redundancy / extra capacity.

Well, on a game night or concert night, you want to avoid downtown no matter what, even if the Georgia Ramp and the viaducts were somehow open at the same time. Same thing with anything north of West 12th when the fireworks are on.

Pacific's going to be widened (not sure how many lanes), so that's a bit of "extra" room; the main problem is timing the new lights (and separating right-turns from pedestrians) so cars and buses aren't stuck at three reds in a row.

[WarrenC12]

The viaducts are old and need to go, to get on with NEFC redevelopment.

The sooner the better. If ABC wants to protect west side SFHs and be seen to make some action on housing, that should be one of the things they do during their term.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The viaducts are old and need to go, to get on with NEFC redevelopment.

The sooner the better. If ABC wants to protect west side SFHs and be seen to make some action on housing, that should be one of the things they do during their term.

they have like 1/2 their useful life left. i didn't know we replaced watermains or sewermains built in 1972; oh wait, we dont.

why cant development go around them, and incorporate them?