HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1981  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2011, 4:39 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
I won't bet my paycheque on it but my understanding is it's a water treatment pumping station where the captured water heads to after passing thru the contaminated mounds of soil that make up the neighbouring parks. The NEFC parks are lined under the contaminated soils and the water needs to be sent for treatment and can't be let to enter the storm water system. So if that is the case that building isn't going anywhere, at least not without being replaced.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1982  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2011, 4:59 AM
Vonny Vonny is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stingray2004 View Post
I am not sure the numbers given in the above cited link are right...at least they don't match the CoV counting and in some case deviate from it very seriously.

here below are the number coming from CoV (click on the picture)



The link above doesn't say your conclusion is not valid, but it tempers it a bit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1983  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2011, 5:05 AM
GeeCee's Avatar
GeeCee GeeCee is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Posts: 2,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon View Post
One thing I've noticed is that in almost all proposals this little building is gone.

Anyone know what it is? It's not a hydro building or skytrain substation according to on of my friends who worked for Hydro.

Is it a natural gas pumping station?
Not sure but there's a better image of it via Google Street View: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=bc+pla...82088635303194

(with regards to the fencing, keep in mind that this area was photographed by Google in 2009 - year before the Olympics)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1984  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2011, 5:21 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
Great, now that the competition is over... The acutal report which was released to the city in Sept is liberated.

Lots of really good info in this document, it's almost 13mb. Highly recommend saving it just in case it dissappears.

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...sstudy2011.pdf

Incredible traffic numbers, where from, where to. Some even surprising such as the amount of traffic leaving and returning during rush hours on the viaducts aren't all that far apart from those in the opposite direction. The evergreen line won't make any difference as there are very few people from the tri-cities using the viaducts, and only 4% of people continue on or from the Lions Gate so it's not thru traffic either. Another chart shows where the city expects future growth pop/com to land downtown, extremely interesting. I was surprised to see the number of bodies that are expected to be living north of Waterfront road...
I'll let the document speak for itself enjoy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1985  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2011, 6:37 AM
Alex Mackinnon's Avatar
Alex Mackinnon Alex Mackinnon is offline
Can I has a tunnel?
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: East Van
Posts: 2,096
I've had that one since October 8th. I think it was posted on here a while ago.


I think the most serious jams seem to happen in the West bound counterflow. The problem is that vehicles can get on the Dunsmuir Viaduct faster than they get off, and once their up there, they're good and stuck. My bet as to why it's the worst on West counterflow is that the light timings lower the capacity of the Beatty/Dunsmuir intersection below the vehicle volumes coming onto the viaducts. In the morning, the lights are probably held a lot longer as it's the dominant direction of flow.

Take a look at my walkabout pics from when I was prepping my project. This is at about 6 PM. Total gridlock on the viaduct.





Pics are my own.
__________________
"It's ok, I'm an engineer!" -Famous last words
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1986  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2011, 7:32 AM
Alex Mackinnon's Avatar
Alex Mackinnon Alex Mackinnon is offline
Can I has a tunnel?
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: East Van
Posts: 2,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vonny View Post
I am not sure the numbers given in the above cited link are right...at least they don't match the CoV counting and in some case deviate from it very seriously.

here below are the number coming from CoV (click on the picture)



The link above doesn't say your conclusion is not valid, but it tempers it a bit.
Hey, I read your references for your traffic statements. Since your lane capacities seems really high, given the congestion we already know happens.

According to your own reference you seem to have overstated lane capacity. Vancouver has a tendency to have narrow roadways. Some lanes around here are under 3m wide.

As a base most downtown roads would fall in UAP3 or UAP4. I wouldn't say any of the main thoroughfares have lanes wider than 3.6m; so each lane would be between 750 vph to 1110 vph. Then theres a nerf factor to trucks and busses, probably about 100 vph.

If you're pessimistic, lane capacity could be as low as 650 vehicles per hour per lane in spots.
__________________
"It's ok, I'm an engineer!" -Famous last words
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1987  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2011, 4:46 PM
IanS IanS is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlousa View Post
Great, now that the competition is over... The acutal report which was released to the city in Sept is liberated.

Lots of really good info in this document, it's almost 13mb. Highly recommend saving it just in case it dissappears.
As I read the report, it seems to suggest that there is little additional transit capacity (without significant additional facilities being added), but other roads have significant additional capacity to accommodate the traffic now going over the viaducts. However, the latter conclusion is based on observations made during the 2010 Olympics. IIRC, traffic was something like 30% down during that period. Seems odd to based a capacity assessment on a once in a lifetime event.

I'm not sure how this report can be used to support the conclusion that removal of the viaducts is a good idea.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1988  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2011, 6:39 PM
s211 s211 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: The People's Glorious Republic of ... Sigh...
Posts: 8,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanS View Post
As I read the report, it seems to suggest that there is little additional transit capacity (without significant additional facilities being added), but other roads have significant additional capacity to accommodate the traffic now going over the viaducts. However, the latter conclusion is based on observations made during the 2010 Olympics. IIRC, traffic was something like 30% down during that period. Seems odd to based a capacity assessment on a once in a lifetime event.

I'm not sure how this report can be used to support the conclusion that removal of the viaducts is a good idea.
Which I've said from day one. The data's cooked to support an erroneous conclusion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1989  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2011, 7:41 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 38,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon View Post
One thing I've noticed is that in almost all proposals this little building is gone.

Anyone know what it is? It's not a hydro building or skytrain substation according to on of my friends who worked for Hydro.

Is it a natural gas pumping station?
It's a pumping station for contaminated ground water.

There's a membrane barrier somewhere under the Concord parking lots at NEFC to prevent contaminated groundwater from leaching into False Creek. This pumping station pumps the ground water that collects behind the barrier into the sewage system for treatment at the applicable sewage treatment plant.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1990  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2011, 8:15 PM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 16,828
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanS View Post
As I read the report, it seems to suggest that there is little additional transit capacity (without significant additional facilities being added), but other roads have significant additional capacity to accommodate the traffic now going over the viaducts. However, the latter conclusion is based on observations made during the 2010 Olympics. IIRC, traffic was something like 30% down during that period. Seems odd to based a capacity assessment on a once in a lifetime event.

I'm not sure how this report can be used to support the conclusion that removal of the viaducts is a good idea.
See, thats a terrible idea. So we want to further clog roads such as hastings and Water street? Especially with the heavier truck traffic? And did this report take into account the reduction in capacity along these other roads when the tram is eventually built?? (going along Pacific and hastings).
And while the Beasley and Pals proposal has some nice elements, overall it is half cooked. Especially the raising of the skytrain guideway....fantasy! And that shows how seriously these proposals should be taken in their implementation in reality.
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/306346...h/29495547810/ and Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0...lhxXFxuAey_q6Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1991  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2011, 9:14 PM
IanS IanS is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by s211 View Post
Which I've said from day one. The data's cooked to support an erroneous conclusion.
I don't think the data is cooked. I just don't think it supports the conclusion that removal of the viaducts is a good idea.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1992  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2011, 10:28 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,303
I agree with Metro-One. We should be trying to reduce the traffic on Powell and Hastings, not increase it. Put more traffic on the viaducts! Shunt it all onto a Malkin Connector! This would improve the quality of life for the whole DTES and Strathcona. Removing the viaducts would do the opposite.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1993  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2011, 2:01 AM
hollywoodnorth's Avatar
hollywoodnorth hollywoodnorth is online now
Blazed Member - Citygater
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Downtown Vancouver
Posts: 6,120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zassk View Post
I agree with Metro-One. We should be trying to reduce the traffic on Powell and Hastings, not increase it. Put more traffic on the viaducts! Shunt it all onto a Malkin Connector! This would improve the quality of life for the whole DTES and Strathcona. Removing the viaducts would do the opposite.
I fully agree. Meggs ... its time to wake up!
__________________
Quote of the Decade on SSP: "what happens would it be?" - argon007

"orange vested guy" - towerguy3
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1994  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2011, 2:30 AM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant
Posts: 6,856
How about funneling traffic onto Pacific Blvd. It's already 45 feet wide, so if you eliminate parking and widen it by 5 feet then you have 5 lanes to deal with rush hour traffic. Combine that with a Kingsway connector and a Malkin connector that tie into Pacific Blvd, and that should keep traffic flowing. It doesn't seem like it would be too difficult to reconfigure surface streets to compensate for the loss of 1 km of viaduct. Do some people actually like the viaducts?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1995  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2011, 2:37 AM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 38,292
Pacific is slated to be narrowed for the streetcar, plus its current traffic volumes do not reflect the future development of the Plaza of Nations and NEFC.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1996  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2011, 2:48 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
The Kingsway connector has been nixed for good. Not only that but where will Pacific/Expo take you? To Nelson and all the traffic it carries with the Cambie bridge? Or keep on it and end up on the South end of Downtown instead of the North end and have to double all the way back?

Anyone going to the panel judging event tonight at Woodwards for the viaduct submissions. Believe it's at 7pm unfortunately I have a meeting across town.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1997  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2011, 3:18 AM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant
Posts: 6,856
Quote:
The Kingsway connector has been nixed for good. Not only that but where will Pacific/Expo take you?
Ramps up to Dunsmuir/Georgia. And how can the Kingsway connector be nixed for good? The Mt. Pleasant Community Plan can prohibit the construction of a Kingsway connector forever? Little off topic, but how binding are these community plans?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1998  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2011, 4:16 AM
EastVanMark EastVanMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by s211 View Post
Which I've said from day one. The data's cooked to support an erroneous conclusion.
Agreed. The statements regarding the viaducts usage during the Olympics was laughable. They act as if it was business as usual downtown during the Olympics and people were "adjusting" when in fact plenty of office towers were up to 50% empty (or even more) during the Olympics.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1999  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2011, 6:16 AM
whatnext whatnext is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 22,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zassk View Post
I agree with Metro-One. We should be trying to reduce the traffic on Powell and Hastings, not increase it. Put more traffic on the viaducts! Shunt it all onto a Malkin Connector! This would improve the quality of life for the whole DTES and Strathcona. Removing the viaducts would do the opposite.
Of course that's the dirty little secret lurking behind Harcourt & Co's backslapping over stopping freeways in Vancouver: residential streets overburdened with traffic. Forcing huge numbers of vehicles onto Pacific merely continues that grand tradition.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2000  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2011, 10:33 AM
Alex Mackinnon's Avatar
Alex Mackinnon Alex Mackinnon is offline
Can I has a tunnel?
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: East Van
Posts: 2,096
Who else showed up at the Woodwards event?

I'm kind of sad I didn't get a mention anywhere; but I think I got a big lesson out of it. Practical ideas aren't sexy and definitely don't sell well. I think I hit almost all the turf that the panel was looking for as far desirable traits/goals go; but I think I was conventional in what I think could be done.

Oh well, it was a good panel discussion at the end at least. I particularly thought Gordon Price did a good job at forcing some interesting discussion out of the panels.

My ladyfriend and I just about crapped a brick when Joe Hruda commented that there were "no inate qualities" to be had walking around the area of the viaducts, so he never had. He then commented that the view of driving into the city along Cambie is history and must be protected.

Admittedly we both walk quite a bit, but come on it's still one of the best neighbourhoods to walk around in the city. A couple of empty blocks bordered by walkable destinations still sees a lot of pedestrian traffic.

Stuff like this is atleast lighting the fire under our collective butts to try to get our blog off the ground. Perfect timing now that I may be rejoining the work force and having less time on my hands...
__________________
"It's ok, I'm an engineer!" -Famous last words
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:42 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.