Quote:
Originally Posted by Feathered Friend
|
Ah. Not sure how much it's needed, but adding to the grid is always nice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut
Dude, "regular bus line." Right now, the 23 is a community shuttle, with the 6 doing most of the work; 40-footers won't be a good fit for the route or the road grid.
|
Oh. Though, TBF, any BRT system is most likely to use artics.
Quote:
Pacific (old or new) is nowhere near maximum car or bus saturation. A two-lane Prior accelerates that saturation, yes, but current levels of traffic should still be manageable; by the time they aren't, the viaducts/Pacific combo would likely be backed up too. And the Hastings SkyTrain should be running by then - which is where much of the traffic's coming from - so commuter flow shouldn't be a massive problem.
|
From my previous post:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...postcount=5772
Quote:
...Study points out that removing the viaducts "Requires significant diversion of existing trips to transit" and that the traffic removed from the Viaducts fills up Expo/Pacific nearly entirely. Note the new road only improves capacity on Expo/Pacific by 1 lane.
I have no idea how anyone is expected to use Keefer or Alexander to get into Downtown, so that leaves Hastings, Pender, and Powell for excess capacity. A decent chunk for traffic surges, but you leave no space for potential demand growth due to planned redevelopments in East Van (where most of these people are coming from.)
|
"The Hastings Skytrain should be running by then"
You should know as much as I do that making such assumptions for something that isn't even on TransLink's official 'to-do' list is dangerous. TransLink is only building Broadway
now, once the existing network can literally no longer be upgraded to support demand. Considering the DTES problem, TransLink could very well decide to ignore Hastings until the 95B hits the same point the 99B is at now.
Also:
https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/nefc-...assessment.pdf
From the COV.
Their own study acknowledges that there will be more congestion in both scenarios, with trips taking up to a minute longer.
The lower increase in car traffic on the growth scenario with the viaducts is apparently due to the fact that Pacific/Expo is effectively a bypass to the West End and Yaletown, rather than going directly to the CBD, resulting in less overall cars being transported.
If so, then the new street should be
8-10 lanes for the most optimal solution for transportation- not
6! I would be perfectly fine (and probably most other people who are against removing the viaducts with removing the viaducts if they did that. They'd still get most of the land the viaducts waste for RE development (which is located on the Eastern Blocks).
Everyone wins.
To me, this proves, the COV
literally does not care about people and goods movement. They should
never get to decide the layout of the MRN. I doubt we'd get this situation if 99A/1A was still in provincial hands.
Quote:
They should, but why at-grade? Overpasses and underpasses allow freer flow for both vehicles and pedestrians. Part of the city planning team is obsessed with having "street interaction" like its magically going to turn the place into Amsterdam or something.
|
You just answered your question.
Even if you can't build an overpass over the viaducts (I mean, Aqualini proposed building a
tower over a
Skytrain Station, so it's not that far-fetched
)
TBF, it's not THAT bad for pedestrians compared to the rest of Downtown once you build up the area around it. Higher speeds on Expo/Pacific are a big deal, but the flip side are the narrower street crossings. I guess choose your poison?
Quote:
You missed the giant racket that the NPA made a couple of elections ago. With them holding a majority, they could make even more noise, but now, even DeGenova's come around (and/or realized her position was untenable)... and the one party that declared against the viaducts got K.O'ed back in 2018.
|
Yeah, if it was long ago, I probably missed it.
Quote:
Hmm.... Station Street's the part that's supposed to be returned to Chinatown as two blocks of mid/highrises, so I'm guessing it's an intersection.
|
Station Street is already blocked and does not pass through the viaducts. Actually, considering the new connector, (thanks Feathered Friend), it would have been ideal for the old Station Street paralleling the block with the hospital to be 'filled in' and the old apartment blocks on it being densified (either into rental or offices). Too bad it's not a part of the project.