Metro Vancouver Road Infrastructure Discussion

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

the Upper Levels Highway should really be upgraded to have a collector system since it is used as an E/W route within the North Shore. it has taken up the lack of non-highway E/W routes and people need to acknowledge and accept this fact will not be changing ever.

ideally it should be 3 general purpose through + 2 collector in each direction.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

the Upper Levels Highway should really be upgraded to have a collector system since it is used as an E/W route within the North Shore. it has taken up the lack of non-highway E/W routes and people need to acknowledge and accept this fact will not be changing ever.

ideally it should be 3 general purpose through + 2 collector in each direction.

I agree with you that the highway is key to local travel for residents; how one addresses this issue is the problem. Expanding from two lanes each direction to five - or even just adding a third lane - will impact a lot of properties along the way.

There's also the issues with the main roads once you come off of the highway. For example, 23rd Street is an important east-west connector between Westview and Lonsdale, and even beyond through to Grand Boulevard. However, there's only about one block between 23rd Street and the highway off-ramps at Lonsdale and Westview; eastbound vehicles commonly jump across multiple lanes to make it from the off-ramps to the left turn bay for 23rd, blocking north-south traffic on a regular basis.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

I agree with you that the highway is key to local travel for residents; how one addresses this issue is the problem. Expanding from two lanes each direction to five - or even just adding a third lane - will impact a lot of properties along the way.

There's also the issues with the main roads once you come off of the highway. For example, 23rd Street is an important east-west connector between Westview and Lonsdale, and even beyond through to Grand Boulevard. However, there's only about one block between 23rd Street and the highway off-ramps at Lonsdale and Westview; eastbound vehicles commonly jump across multiple lanes to make it from the off-ramps to the left turn bay for 23rd, blocking north-south traffic on a regular basis.

there needs to be a 100yr plan done on this corridor, 100%. it needs to be looked at from squamish to the 2nd narrows realistically.

yes, it would impact properties, but long term planning/thinking needs to outweigh the short term issues. otherwise we just keep having the same issues over and over and over.

23rd Street looks interesting. it really doesn't look like it is really "needed" persay. it looks like it existing because the freeway is at capacity. lets say they do build the collector lanes through and its a 3+2 configuration. i could see 3rd Street being calmed. being so close to the freeway, if you build the free with those collector lanes, i dont see why you couldn't shift traffic over to the freeway system. right from Westview Dr - Lynn Valley Dr/Grand Blvd.

obviously this would really need to be studied in full, but i don't see why that couldn't be done from a quick study. it literally looks to parallel the freeway as more of an overflow vs anything else.

obviously there would need to be a total look at the north shore transportation network in general, and i do think there should be a 3rd crossing for both freeway + SkyTrain with the Lions Gate being closed to anything except emergency/buses/pedestrians.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

there needs to be a 100yr plan done on this corridor, 100%. it needs to be looked at from squamish to the 2nd narrows realistically.

That's a ridiculous idea. Imagine you're in Vancouver in 1912, when there were about 2,000 registered vehicles in the whole of the region. Do you think a 100 year plan produced then would have been based on the idea of 1.5 million vehicles in 2012? The private vehicle was an 'emerging technology', and the impact on movement in the region would have impossible to imagine.

Now think of all the current emerging technologies related to transportation, and their potential impact on the space needed as a result. It's possible to imagine a totally different pattern of vehicle ownership and use in only a decade or two. It's not credible to imagine what it might be in 100 years. The 30 year plans for transit for the region seems to be a reasonable way to proceed for the sort of investment we can hope to see spent in the region. For roads 20 to 30 years is all we should be trying to plan for - and in 10 years time we need to take stock of how demand has changed, (assuming it has) and revisit the plans accordingly.

'Go as far as you can see, and when you get there, you will see further' is an intelligent maxim for planning in a rapidly changing context like transportation. Given how fast some technologies are changing and developing - we probably can't see very far with any confidence - certainly not enough to invest billions buying up property and building massive stretches of asphalt that might not be needed at all.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Now think of all the current emerging technologies related to transportation, and their potential impact on the space needed as a result.

In 100 years all of the white-collar workers will be telecommuting from their chateaus in the middle of nowhere, riding a hyperloop 500 kilometres in 40 minutes to the city when they must, while all of the blue collar workers will be delivering "don't eats" for Uber or packing boxes for Amazon. Meanwhile, all of North Vancouver will have transformed into one large distribution centre for Walmart. And don't even get me started on how desolate and deserted the slopes of Whistler will be when we can all go skiing from the comfort of our living room using our VR headsets

[GeeCee]

I'm not sure how often the Highway 1 Kensington NB exit gets repaved, but it's getting really bad lately. It has seemingly been a problem since the new exit got put in, presumably due to the poor (swampy) soil conditions in the area.

[ssiguy]

The entire stretch should be 6 lanes from LB to TW and ten lanes after that with a 10 lane bridge with 2 lanes in each direction merging on/off when they hit Vancouver at McGill/Hastings. All the transit in the world isn't going to change the fact that the freeway needs to have it's capacity, at a minimum, doubled.

Even an underground SkyTrain won't make any difference. Most people using the UL are going east/west and not to downtown Vancouver. This is the only highway bridge connecting the entire mid/western portion of the Island, Sunshine Coast. Squamish, and Whistler.

BC is going to have to bite the bullet and admit that it needs a MONSTROUS upgrade and expansion of it's highway system province-wide. It will take BC probably $20 billion to bring it's highway up to it's peers but it must. It is scandalous that Vancouver has Canada's 3rd worse traffic. It has little to do with the city's geography {Montreal's is worse being an Island and Mount Royal cutting off the northern areas} but Montreal built it's highway system to handle it and Vancouver hasn't.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

The entire stretch should be 6 lanes from LB to TW and ten lanes after that with a 10 lane bridge with 2 lanes in each direction merging on/off when they hit Vancouver at McGill/Hastings...

Unless you're planning on burying the freeway, no thanks!

[Klazu]

I missed the Upper Levels upgrade plan last month but wow, what a joke! There is a 10-kilometre long traffic jam on the highway EVERY. SINGLE. DAY . and they don't think extra lanes are warranted between now and 2050??? Those proposed upgrades will do nothing to traffic flow, just like the Lynn Valley project didn't do anything of real value. It has been months since it was completed and traffic is just as bad, like predicted.

I have stopped going to North Shore and tend to drive east to the Tri-Cities for outdoorsy stuff as traffic through North Vancouver is such a joke. Most of Lower Mainland is quickly losing all its livability to congestion due to no infrastructure investment.

[idunno]

No infrastructure investment?? The Lower Lynn Improvements cost $200million!

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Klazu

There is a 10-kilometre long traffic jam on the highway EVERY. SINGLE. DAY . and they don't think extra lanes are warranted between now and 2050???

Any extra lanes will simply encourage more people to develop and live in the North Shore mountains. A massive spike in development in any community < 150km up the 99 from downtown Vancouver would follow any highway upgrades. This would clog up all of those extra lanes and we would have to consider widening the highway again in another 5 years.

BC should build the North Shore Skytrain so that commuters have a fast and reliable transportation option to downtown, Hastings, Brentwood, UBC, Metrotown, SFU, etc., and leave the people who insist on using their personal vehicles figure out the cost/benefit of sitting in traffic.

As for you not going to the North Shore for recreation, that is supply and demand at work. My wife and I still find plenty of time to go to the beach or hike in North Van, but we choose an off-peak time to cross the IWM or bite the bullet of sitting in traffic for 20 minutes. I am sure the residents of North Van are happy that you aren't taking up space on the Lynn Canyon trails.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Upgrading six lanes to ten only gets you about 37,000 more vehicles a day. Knowing the North Shore, it'll be right back to "normal" five years after that - especially if Taylor Way, Marine/Main and Hastings remain as-is.

Farmer has the right of it - build the SkyTrain for less money, get 50k+ existing vehicles off the road, and then the Sea-to-Sky is exclusively for anyone driving to Squamish/Whistler and beyond.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

Any extra lanes will simply encourage more people to develop and live in the North Shore mountains. A massive spike in development in any community < 150km up the 99 from downtown Vancouver would follow any highway upgrades. This would clog up all of those extra lanes and we would have to consider widening the highway again in another 5 years.

BC should build the North Shore Skytrain so that commuters have a fast and reliable transportation option to downtown, Hastings, Brentwood, UBC, Metrotown, SFU, etc., and leave the people who insist on using their personal vehicles figure out the cost/benefit of sitting in traffic.

As for you not going to the North Shore for recreation, that is supply and demand at work. My wife and I still find plenty of time to go to the beach or hike in North Van, but we choose an off-peak time to cross the IWM or bite the bullet of sitting in traffic for 20 minutes. I am sure the residents of North Van are happy that you aren't taking up space on the Lynn Canyon trails.

Building more lanes or Skytrain will both create more development regardless. Unless they switch to more condos/apartments on the mountain it will be peanuts in comparison to any developments like Brentwood/Lougheed/Oakridge. Some people commute from the Fraser Valley into Vancouver/Burnaby so RIP your cost/benefit of sitting in traffic theory.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Building more lanes or Skytrain will both create more development regardless. Unless they switch to more condos/apartments on the mountain it will be peanuts in comparison to any developments like Brentwood/Lougheed/Oakridge. Some people commute from the Fraser Valley into Vancouver/Burnaby so RIP your cost/benefit of sitting in traffic theory.

Transit encourages dense development and gets more bang for the buck than highway widening. Just take a look at our existing transit lines. SFH owners have been fighting it tooth and nail, but all of the corridors near fast and reliable transit are being up zoned by the cities, developers are clambering to assemble lots and build large-scale projects, and renters/owners demand units near transit more than units that lack options. It is easy for NIMBYs on the North Shore to oppose dense development, because road capacity is a very real constraint. It becomes more harder to get the city to listen to you when your SFH is one block away from a Skytrain stop.

The cost/benefit theory is totally still valid. People make all sorts of decisions based on any number of internalized factors. Yes, there are people who super commute and drive an hour or more one-way to get to work or school. But that is not the majority of people.

If the 99 is widened and new crossings are built, the promise of little to no congestion will make living in Squamish and driving to Vancouver more tantalizing for a lot of people, just like widening the 1 to three lanes all the way to Chilliwack or widening the Fraser Highway would/will. Not only will you have people that would normally live closer to their place of work making the decision to re-locate where they can afford a larger home with the tradeoff of a longer commute, but you may have residents already living in those communities making decisions like attending UBC instead of UFV or working in Vancouver instead of Langley or coming into the office versus WFH.

Yes, induced demand applies to transit as well as roadways. However, the Expo line has a capacity of 25,000 passengers per hour, while the link Migrant provided shows that four additional lanes only adds capacity for 37,000 cars per day. It's pretty clear to me which project would have the larger and longer impact.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

Transit encourages dense development and gets more bang for the buck than highway widening. Just take a look at our existing transit lines. SFH owners have been fighting it tooth and nail, but all of the corridors near fast and reliable transit are being up zoned by the cities, developers are clambering to assemble lots and build large-scale projects, and renters/owners demand units near transit more than units that lack options. It is easy for NIMBYs on the North Shore to oppose dense development, because road capacity is a very real constraint. It becomes more harder to get the city to listen to you when your SFH is one block away from a Skytrain stop.

But look at the geography/location of the line and it's going to be difficult to replicate the Expo Line/Millennium Line development brownfield potential. They only had like +9200 incremental dwellings (excluding the non-North Shore components)

https://northshoreconnects.ca/wp-con...ment_Final.pdf

(I'm not saying that they need to build more lanes/new bridges etc.)

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

But look at the geography/location of the line and it's going to be difficult to replicate the Expo Line/Millennium Line development brownfield potential. They only had like +9200 incremental dwellings (excluding the non-North Shore components)

Housing development is only one piece of the puzzle. The biggest impact will be for North Shore residents working in areas of Metro Van south of the inlet, and vice versa. Many of these trips could currently be taken by transit, but it is currently 40 minutes faster to drive from Lower Lonsdale to SFU than to take three different buses. Rapid transit would flip that calculus on its head, removing cars from congested roads.

Klazu mentioned recreational access. A great way to reduce congestion is to pull 45k people would utilize the Skytrain out of their cars so that the highway is free for the trips that must be made by car e.g., driving from Burnaby to Whistler.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

Housing development is only one piece of the puzzle. The biggest impact will be for North Shore residents working in areas of Metro Van south of the inlet, and vice versa. Many of these trips could currently be taken by transit, but it is currently 40 minutes faster to drive from Lower Lonsdale to SFU than to take three different buses. Rapid transit would flip that calculus on its head, removing cars from congested roads.

Klazu mentioned recreational access. A great way to reduce congestion is to pull 45k people would utilize the Skytrain out of their cars so that the highway is free for the trips that must be made by car e.g., driving from Burnaby to Whistler.

Also FYI 1/4 to 1/3 of all the trips on the highway are internal trips on the North Shore that don't even cross a bridge.

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/dr...edium=referral

[ssiguy]

Vancouver has this idiotic belief that great cities have great transit systems and that is categorically false. They are not defined by great transit systems but rather great TRANSPORTATION systems which includes transit, highways, bikes, and walking.

It's called a transportation SYSTEM for a reason..........they are only as strong as their weakest link. All the buses in the world won't make a hoot of difference if they are stuck in traffic. Toronto and Montreal both have substantially higher levels of per-capita transit ridership than Vancouver but still have huge freeway networks.

Vancouver has Canada's worst congestion which is absurd considering it's only about a 1/3 the size of the GTAH. Essex County in Ontario has more 6 lane highways than all of BC........lunacy.

As Einstein once said "the definition of stupidity is doing something and it's doesn't work and then doing it again and hoping for a different result". Vancouver has tried a "transit only" transportation plan and clearly both on the congestion and per-capita ridership levels, it has failed so let's not make the same mistakes twice.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Vancouver has this idiotic belief that great cities have great transit systems and that is categorically false. They are not defined by great transit systems but rather great TRANSPORTATION systems which includes transit, highways, bikes, and walking.

It's called a transportation SYSTEM for a reason..........they are only as strong as their weakest link. All the buses in the world won't make a hoot of difference if they are stuck in traffic. Toronto and Montreal both have substantially higher levels of per-capita transit ridership than Vancouver but still have huge freeway networks.

Vancouver has Canada's worst congestion which is absurd considering it's only about a 1/3 the size of the GTAH. Essex County in Ontario has more 6 lane highways than all of BC........lunacy.

As Einstein once said "the definition of stupidity is doing something and it's doesn't work and then doing it again and hoping for a different result". Vancouver has tried a "transit only" transportation plan and clearly both on the congestion and per-capita ridership levels, it has failed so let's not make the same mistakes twice.

Indeed. And the North Shore's already got 4-6 lanes' worth of continuous freeway - that's great enough for a population of 2.6 million. I can see an eventual case for increasing that to six overall, but any more starts intruding on the side streets and reducing livability in the area. Additional highways would involve tearing up entire neighbourhoods. Good thing SkyTrain doesn't need roads, so that's not a problem.
Expansion on such a scale would also cost billions... in order to add roughly 31 cars/minute per lane...and you think that should somehow be a higher priority than removing the equivalent of 500+ cars/minute for the same money? I'm afraid the idiotic belief is on your end.

Nope, Toronto's got the worst, followed by Montreal. We're #3, as expected from the third-biggest city. Looks like all those highways in Essex County have done jack squat to solve congestion.

[GenWhy?]

Are we comparing the City of Vancouver to Toronto (a collection of annexed cities) or Metro Vancouver (a collection of independent cities) with the GTA?