Metro Vancouver Road Infrastructure Discussion

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Also funny that the Vancouver of that day was not to reject the freeways and build a robust transit system in its place, but to reject it and do nothing.

Is it that surprising, though? The only choices in the Seventies were the Robert Moses school of thought or the Jane Jacobs one. Neither made much sense for an urban city.

Originally Posted by Klazu

A twin bridge would still make sense, but that ocean parkway... Yikes.

No kidding. False Creek is polluted enough as it is.

[Feathered Friend]

Flats Arterial Community Panel Recommends National-Charles for the False Creek Flats Arterial Route

The Community Panel reviewed technical information, heard from experts, stakeholders, and the public, then provided a recommendation to the City of Vancouver and Vancouver Park Board.

Vancouver, BC–The Flats Arterial Community Panel, composed of 37 people selected to represent the diversity of Flats-area residents and businesses, as well as City residents, gathered today to recommend the route for a new east-west grade-separated arterial.

After extensive deliberation, using a Ranked Choice Voting/Instant Runoff process, the Panel ranked 5 route options: Prior/Venables – Underpass; Malkin North; National-Grant; National-Charles; National-Civic Facilities.

In the instant runoff process, National-Charles was selected as the Panel’s recommended arterial route, receiving 67.6% of the vote. Prior/Venables – Underpass was runner-up, with 32.4% of the vote.

https://fcfcommunitypanel.com/2019/0...rterial-route/

[Feathered Friend]

The route chosen by #Vancouver 's False Creek Arterial Panel is shocking. It steals the #22 bus from #Strathcona , harms Trillium Park, will likely collapse in an earthquake, & harms @VanFireRescueFire 's Training & HUSAR facilities. It also costs the most

https://twitter.com/City_Duo/status/1114734163150561280

Some additional background on the route recommended by the panel.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Good to see Produce Way is good to be fine, but the soil quality (or should I say, lack of quality) is worrying.

Is there a reason the 22 can't stay on Prior? AFAIK they're only talking about diverting private vehicle traffic.

[Millennium2002]

Did they really swallow a poison pill? Because that is what it seems like... No way in hell would anyone want to pay double for that. I speculate we're going to end up with the second best option being the one moving forward.

I've always felt that, in the event of a southern route being selected, the route 22 could make a short jog to Hastings Street before dipping back down to Prior. But I get the feeling that TransLink doesn't want to budge on the matter. I'm quite frankly mystified as to why.

[trofirhen]

That sharp, right-angled zigzag is what gives me reservations about this plan. Either you have to keep the speed limit really low, or be prepared for some nasty skids and accidents.

[moosejaw]

WIth that ZIg Zag i have to ponder what is the point?
Why not a more direct connection from 1st Ave/Terminal

The plan above looks like an afterthought.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

https://fcfcommunitypanel.com/2019/0...rterial-route/

Why was National-Charles even a considerable option? Why did anyone think this was a good idea? Was there some sort of information gap because no one took the route seriously, then the panel decided on that one because it looked the best by omission?
Otherwise, this decision is literally incomprehensible.

As previous posters have pointed out, the zigzag turn is a nightmare for a major arterial, not to mention it has all the problems of Malkin while costing the most (and being the hardest to build.)

I sent them a reply, let's hope for an answer.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

this is what happens when you get people, who have no clue about what they are doing, make a recommendation where they have shouldn't. you get over-priced useless crap.

[Feathered Friend]

All of the National route options were presented / demanded by the Strathcona Residents Association. Many panel members seemed biased against any other option from Day 1, and fought to have it included as it wasn't one of the three routes originally allowed for consideration.

Costs, safety, impacts to businesses, none of it matters so long as the road was located as far from the neighbourhood as possible, and had zero impact on the community gardens. Many would have been satisfied funneling traffic down Hastings and/or Terminal instead, and removing one of the few east/west connectors into Downtown.

Honestly, I understand that the city was looking for community validation on a route option, but it feels like the process was poorly planned, dictated by those most opposed to anything, and was a self-inflicted wound.

[trofirhen]

Could the sharp"zig zag" angles themselves be put into underpasses, resulting in an "S" configuration, rather than a "Z?" It would cost more, yes, but fewer people might go to hospital.

[Millennium2002]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Could the sharp "zig zag" angles themselves be put into underpasses, resulting in an "S" configuration, rather than a "Z?" It would cost more, yes, but fewer people might go to hospital.

All of the southern routes sit on what used to be False Creek before it was reclaimed. So while a tunnel is possible, it'd be a very expensive proposition. And oh, don't count on it staying intact during an earthquake; it might sink or otherwise flood.

A project like this shouldn't be that expensive or disruptive, but yet here we are... The whole process has been such a farce.

[p78hub]

Holy crap, that is actually the worst option. What was wrong with the Malkin Ave. alignment?

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by p78hub

Holy crap, that is actually the worst option. What was wrong with the Malkin Ave. alignment?

Welcome to Vancouver............. however, with enough public protest - loud and long - they just MIGHT change to the Malkin Ave alignment. This is ludicrous and pathetic.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by p78hub

Holy crap, that is actually the worst option. What was wrong with the Malkin Ave. alignment?

(link) tl;dr, commuters would be gridlocked by grocery trucks backing out, and vice versa. Malkin's just as bad an idea.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

(link) tl;dr, commuters would be gridlocked by grocery trucks backing out, and vice versa. Malkin's just as bad an idea.

Does such a thing as a GOOD option exist at all? Or are we stuck with bad options, however you cut it?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Does such a thing as a GOOD option exist at all? Or are we stuck with bad options, however you cut it?

Personally, I'd just say screw the NIMBYs and go with Prior. All the others would just extend the chokepoint to Clark anyway.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Personally, I'd just say screw the NIMBYs and go with Prior. All the others would just extend the chokepoint to Clark anyway.

Total agreement. In this instance, yes, screw the NIMBYS. Sometimes, their complaints may have validity, but here, catering to them is going to screw everyone else taking that road ... AND ... probably cause accidents, too, given that CRAZEEE Z-turn. That turn is idiocy at its near-best, IMO.

[Bdawe]

Here me out.

What if we closed Prior at the railroad tracks...and replaced it with...nothing

[Millennium2002]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

Here me out.

What if we closed Prior at the railroad tracks...and replaced it with...nothing

As a compromise, I'd build an overpass / underpass wide enough for two lanes each direction, but Prior Street will be traffic calmed with only one lane each direction. The rest of the street width could then be used to make way for bike-friendly shoulders and wider sidewalks. Deal?