Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts? - Page 131

WarrenC12 · #**2601** Posted: **Aug 7, 2012, 2:17 PM**

I like the soccer fields around North False Creek, I think any park space that is made up of real sports fields is well warranted. We don't have many of those in the area, and the ones there are currently well used, which means hundreds-thousands of people are getting exercise. This is a great use of greenspace IMHO.

trofirhen · #**2602** Posted: **Aug 7, 2012, 3:11 PM**

The absolute irony of all this is that even if the Viaducts are torn down, more park and residential space added, the new road plan put into place ..... in several decades, maybe less, there will be an outcry from all over the city to PLEASE do something about the terrible road access in><out of Vancouver going east ... That something to replace the "old" Viaducts will be called for, like either a tunnel into the road system, or (dare I even say it) ... New Viaducts.

jhausner · #**2603** Posted: **Aug 7, 2012, 3:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir Conga

They are talking more about the land between Quebec and Gore, which is owned by the city. The claim is that selling this land will just about pay for the project.

Yes but if they sell the land, it's not like the developer will put down grass and dog parks. They'll build more towers. I'm just still confused because you look at the proposed drawings, now granted they are concepts, but all that land is either city (to be sold which will become towers) or Concord Pacific (um more towers) so I'm not sure why they would even put all the green everywhere. Except in a bid to make it seem a lot more 'green' than it is.

The truth is they want 15+ more towers to go in there to drive up prices more and collect more tax revenue. They should just come out and say it not try to sell it as some green initiative. "Oh look more parks yay I'll vote yes!" then 15 years later "Wait why are there 15 more 30 storey towers everywhere? Where are my parsk!?!?!"

Vancouver: "Haha suckers $$$."

jhausner · #**2604** Posted: **Aug 7, 2012, 3:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

The absolute irony of all this is that even if the Viaducts are torn down, more park and residential space added, the new road plan put into place ..... in several decades, maybe less, there will be an outcry from all over the city to PLEASE do something about the terrible road access in><out of Vancouver going east ... That something to replace the "old" Viaducts will be called for, like either a tunnel into the road system, or (dare I even say it) ... New Viaducts.

I don't think it will be an issue as according to city council, there will be no cars in Vancouver in 20 years. Everyone will just be flying around in jet packs.

trofirhen · #**2605** Posted: **Aug 7, 2012, 5:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhausner

I don't think it will be an issue as according to city council, there will be no cars in Vancouver in 20 years. Everyone will just be flying around in jet packs.

Vestry · #**2606** Posted: **Aug 7, 2012, 6:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Well did anyone ask at the open houses the city had?

Purely anecdotal, but the Library open house allowed me to ask exactly this. I was told that Translink is supposedly satisfied with the new traffic routing and capacity.

Zassk · #**2607** Posted: **Aug 7, 2012, 6:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

The absolute irony of all this is that even if the Viaducts are torn down, more park and residential space added, the new road plan put into place ..... in several decades, maybe less, there will be an outcry from all over the city to PLEASE do something about the terrible road access in><out of Vancouver going east ... That something to replace the "old" Viaducts will be called for, like either a tunnel into the road system, or (dare I even say it) ... New Viaducts.

This whole exercise is an attempt by City Hall to strongarm the region/province into building a Hastings SkyTrain line.

mr.x · #**2608** Posted: **Aug 7, 2012, 6:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zassk

This whole exercise is an attempt by City Hall to strongarm the region/province into building a Hastings SkyTrain line.

What makes you think that? That's a bit of a leap.

WarrenC12 · #**2609** Posted: **Aug 7, 2012, 7:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vestry

Purely anecdotal, but the Library open house allowed me to ask exactly this. I was told that Translink is supposedly satisfied with the new traffic routing and capacity.

Hmmm, I wonder who at the city talked to who at Translink and what the answer was. It's entirely possible that the city thinks Translink is on board, when in fact they aren't.

huenthar · #**2610** Posted: **Aug 7, 2012, 10:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vestry

Purely anecdotal, but the Library open house allowed me to ask exactly this. I was told that Translink is supposedly satisfied with the new traffic routing and capacity.

I actually emailed TransLink about what their position was back in June, this is the reply they gave me:

"Thank you for your comments, which we received via our online customer feedback option. You had a question about future plans for the Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts.

TransLink knows about the City of Vancouver investigation into the removal of the viaducts from the road network. We have ongoing communication with the City and are being kept informed of plans as they develop. If the City wants to proceed with full or partial removal of the viaducts, TransLink will examine the implications and give a formal statement at that time.

Thanks for taking the time to send in your question. If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me again."

....so make of that what you will

trofirhen · #**2611** Posted: **Aug 8, 2012, 2:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zassk

This whole exercise is an attempt by City Hall to strongarm the region/province into building a Hastings SkyTrain line.

Do you really think so? If yes, would it be possible to post
some tangible reference to such? Interesting twist on the story.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr.x

What makes you think that? That's a bit of a leap.

Just what I was thinking. How are the two issues (projects) linked?
... Zaask?

jhausner · #**2612** Posted: **Aug 8, 2012, 3:25 AM**

Hastings skytrain and removal of viaducts? If you had said street cars then I might be a bit more understanding but this being for a skytrain down hastings is about as stretch as you can get.

Honestly I just think it is a make work project to keep people distracted and I still suspect nothing will ultimately come of it.

Alex Mackinnon · #**2613** Posted: **Aug 8, 2012, 7:45 AM**

I would be pretty happy if that was the case actually. It would make routing a branch to the North Shore relatively easy assuming a Second Narrows centric alignment.

Somehow I doubt the city's apparently shortsighted planning is actually setting the stage for anything other than more shortsighted planning. I'd love to be surprised, but I doubt that would be the case.

mr.x · #**2614** Posted: **Aug 8, 2012, 10:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

I would be pretty happy if that was the case actually. It would make routing a branch to the North Shore relatively easy assuming a Second Narrows centric alignment.

Somehow I doubt the city's apparently shortsighted planning is actually setting the stage for anything other than more shortsighted planning. I'd love to be surprised, but I doubt that would be the case.

That's probably the case, when was the last time the City of Vancouver did anything that made sense in the long-term?

We've never ever heard of any peep about rail rapid transit on Hastings, so I highly doubt they are setting the stage for this.

jsbertram · #**2615** Posted: **Aug 8, 2012, 10:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhausner

I don't think it will be an issue as according to city council, there will be no cars in Vancouver in 20 years. Everyone will just be flying around in jet packs.

"Jet Packs"? Hmmph. That just old-school Apollo-era thinking

In twenty years time, the Mars Colony and Moon Colony will have discovered the elusive Unobtainium we've been seeking for decades.
Once this is shipped back to Earth, the lower gravity field of refined Unobtainium will allow everyone to have anti-gravity suits instead of cars.

Jebby · #**2616** Posted: **Aug 9, 2012, 2:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhausner

I don't think it will be an issue as according to city council, there will be no cars in Vancouver in 20 years. Everyone will just be flying around in jet packs.

Jet packs aren't "green" enough.

EastVanMark · #**2617** Posted: **Aug 9, 2012, 3:55 PM**

Heck there's probably some city staff study right now that shows jet packs are being used by 1% of the population. We should hurry up and construct some grade separated jet pack lanes to encourage increases in jet pack usage rates. Just wonder if the jet packs come equipped with a pocket where you can put your backyard chicken

WarrenC12 · #**2618** Posted: **Aug 28, 2012, 2:08 PM**

This news story seems to have fallen off the cliff the last few weeks, what happened?

I expect an imminent news released from the City advising that removal will begin in Feb 2013.

IanS · #**2619** Posted: **Aug 28, 2012, 3:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

This news story seems to have fallen off the cliff the last few weeks, what happened?

I expect an imminent news released from the City advising that removal will begin in Feb 2013.

I suspect the last go around raised the political heat a bit too high, such that Vision wants to let things cool down a bit. I imagine in September or so a staff report will be issued indicating that all of the issues raised have been, or will be, addressed and recommending that they proceed immediately.

trofirhen · #**2620** Posted: **Aug 29, 2012, 12:46 AM**

Next February? So soon? OMG ..................