HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2821  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2016, 8:56 PM
Trainguy Trainguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 689
One huge reason why major bottlenecks don't get fixed or resolved soon in Metro Van is the pro-transit voices that want to get everyone out of their cars. Who are these voices? Politicians who have a narrow agenda about what a healthy transportation network should look like. Despite all of GC faults, his legacy is the new PM bridge. Traffic flows much smoother and quicker because of it.

176th and Fraser Hwy should have been an overpass/underpass so people are not stuck waiting in yet another line up. That intersection is always backed up. Traffic lights on major roads is just plain bad engineering!! Actually, don't blame the engineers... blame the narrowed minded pro-transit politicians at any level.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2822  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2016, 9:07 PM
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainguy View Post
One huge reason why major bottlenecks don't get fixed or resolved soon in Metro Van is the pro-transit voices that want to get everyone out of their cars. Who are these voices? Politicians who have a narrow agenda about what a healthy transportation network should look like. Despite all of GC faults, his legacy is the new PM bridge. Traffic flows much smoother and quicker because of it.

176th and Fraser Hwy should have been an overpass/underpass so people are not stuck waiting in yet another line up. That intersection is always backed up. Traffic lights on major roads is just plain bad engineering!! Actually, don't blame the engineers... blame the narrowed minded pro-transit politicians at any level.
Bang on! You got it! Unfortunately (and this will sound snobby, for which I am reputed) .. this small town "everyone: out of your cars!!" mentality is caused
by politicians, many of whom have not travelled extensively and thus have no concept that metro Vancouver needs roads - and efficiently designed ones - like any big city.
They seem to live in a dreamy OZ, backs turned to the mountains, with a fantasy image of a town where nearly everyone takes transit, bicycle, or uses rinky-dink roads.
It's pathetic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2823  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2016, 9:38 PM
logicbomb logicbomb is offline
Joshua B.
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainguy View Post
One huge reason why major bottlenecks don't get fixed or resolved soon in Metro Van is the pro-transit voices that want to get everyone out of their cars. Who are these voices? Politicians who have a narrow agenda about what a healthy transportation network should look like. Despite all of GC faults, his legacy is the new PM bridge. Traffic flows much smoother and quicker because of it.

176th and Fraser Hwy should have been an overpass/underpass so people are not stuck waiting in yet another line up. That intersection is always backed up. Traffic lights on major roads is just plain bad engineering!! Actually, don't blame the engineers... blame the narrowed minded pro-transit politicians at any level.
So pro-transit voices are why we have that awful intersection on Hwy 91, the SFPR with low speed limits and many intersections?

I am a "pro-transit voice" in the community, but I do think:
-The SFPR should have been built with free-flowing interchanges from point A to point B
-176 Ave should have been a full freeway from Hwy #1 down to 32nd Ave
-Ditto 56 Ave from Scott Rd to 192nd

Maybe it's because the provincial governments in charge are so hell bent on completing projects that are on-time and on budget that they omit essential infrastructure and opt for quick fixes.

I know for a fact that the City of Surrey is pushing this whole LRT agenda to appease developers and encourage inner-city development. If the politicians were truly pro-transit, we'd be seeing a push for grade separated rapid transit in every municipality, including Surrey. Instead, they want the quickest and cheapest project to spur on development and garner votes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2824  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2016, 10:07 PM
Trainguy Trainguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 689
I am not anti-transit at all. I just don't think that roads should suffer because they want to get people out of their cars. By car I get to work in 10 mins. By transit, at least an hour+. No brainer there. In contrast, I think every major bridge should be tolled fairly so those who choose private transportation, have the option to use it at a cost.

Transit has a lot of catching up to do before a lot more people switch from private to public transit. The skytrain network is efficient and pretty quick.. It just needs to go more places where people are going.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2825  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2016, 3:32 AM
Klazu's Avatar
Klazu Klazu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Above Metro Vancouver clouds
Posts: 10,187
Quote:
Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture View Post
i always thought a N/S underpass of Oak street going below 70th Ave would be an awesome idea as well.
Yeah, this is what I have mentioned few times here being a priority intersection. Seeing how the Oak Street Bridge won't be upgraded in a long time, building that underpass would push the need for a new bridge much further in the future.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BCPhil View Post
But really, 6 through lanes on Lougheed from Beta to Boundary would solve a lot of the problems. Honestly, Lougheed should be 6 lanes from Boundary to Cape Horn.
I am always amazed how it's only 4 lanes through most of Burnaby as it should really have 6 lanes being a major arterial road.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BCPhil View Post
The problem with a tunnel there is I would be worried about the impacts construction would have on the stability of the pillars for the Skytrain Guideway.
I doubt this would be any problem. Look at how they managed to dig so deep right under Granville Bridge ramp with the BIG tower without any problems.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2826  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2016, 10:51 AM
xd_1771's Avatar
xd_1771 xd_1771 is offline
(daka_x)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdawe View Post
If people really want to make a case for these tunnels then they should try to show how they are more beneficial than they are harmful, rather than simply asserting that they exist elsewhere, bearing in mind that most countries being discussed have various greater mechanisms to limit the inducement of demand that Vancouver lacks.
Are the benefits not clear already from the very limited examples we've presented? It's not like any of us are trying to push this overpass/underpass thing as a paradigm, in that they should be built essentially everywhere and are solely for the purpose of keeping vehicle traffic moving without going through lights. There are very practical benefits, for pedestrians and transit users alike, that can result from the direct outcomes such as reducing crossing distances, stop-and-go movements for heavy vehicles such as trucks, and reducing the presence of roadway-length traffic jams. We also seem to justify it all the time over railways, so I'm not so sure why it needs to be such a problem when it happens to be over other roadways.

The initial example (Lougheed Highway through Brentwood) could significantly improve the pedestrian friendliness of an area whose growth has been oriented around a major rapid transit station. Apart from the reduced crossing distances, some of the land taken up by the roadway could be converted into park or plaza or repurposed for additional private use.

These investments don't have to induce demand because there are ways to offset it right from the get go. As a trade-off for introducing free-flow, you could reduce movement to a single lane (this would be particularly effective for converting dual left-turn lanes into overpasses/underpassed). If the surrounding road network can accommodate the movements without a negative impact on the community, you could even entirely remove portions of the road at-grade (this could be done for Lougheed from Gilmore-Willingdon).

I can think of quite a few places in this region where it would be feasible to introduce these, many of which would be assisted by convenient approach/exit grades. Some examples could include...

Marine Drive EB to Cambie Street NB
(a single lane flyover to replace the dual left turn lane, simplify the operation of the traffic signal below and significantly cut down on transit delays for buses exiting Marine Drive Station)

King George Blvd SB to Fraser Highway EB
(Same rationale as the last example, plus could help reduce crossing distances if introduced as a right-hand exit ramp)

Grandview Highway @ Boundary Rd
(Reduce congestion, transit delays and crossing distances on Boundary)

Barnet Highway through Coquitlam Centre
(Pretty much all of it from west of Mariner to west of Westwood and for obvious reasons)

Queensborough Bridge NB to 20th St
(This could be a single lane flyover, exiting towards the right and proceeding over the WB Stewardson on-ramp before turning onto 20th. This would simplify signal operations at 6th/20th and speed up exiting transit buses)

WB Marine Dr at Taylor Way (N Van)
(Doing SB Taylor Way to EB Marine would be pointless as long as the Lions Gate remains a bottleneck, but separating the WB movement could bring transit improvements both WB and EB, particularly if one lane of this underpass is dedicated to EB transit movement).

Boundary Rd @ Kingsway
(With the big developments in the area, an underpass could smoothen grades and reduce truck stop-and-go movements through this area, enable safer crossings at Kingsway & Boundary, and set up the area for further TOD)

***

It doesn't even have to be focused on cars. You could build this type of separation for busways too.

If Bus Rapid Transit goes through on Surrey's L-Line corridor, one of the things I envision is an elevated BRT station at King George & 88th. This could be combined with a new raised entryway towards the Surrey Arts Centre and Bear Creek Park, allowing those arriving by transit to access these city amenities without ever having to cross a major roadway or climb a grade.

Another potential example could be a series of transit-only overpasses on Willingdon over the Highway 1 ramps and Canada Way could help legitimize future BRT along Willingdon, integrating with existing transit lanes to the south and providing top-notch access between Brentwood and BCIT.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2827  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2016, 1:48 PM
Kisai Kisai is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by trofirhen View Post
Bang on! You got it! Unfortunately (and this will sound snobby, for which I am reputed) .. this small town "everyone: out of your cars!!" mentality is caused
by politicians, many of whom have not travelled extensively and thus have no concept that metro Vancouver needs roads - and efficiently designed ones - like any big city.
They seem to live in a dreamy OZ, backs turned to the mountains, with a fantasy image of a town where nearly everyone takes transit, bicycle, or uses rinky-dink roads.
It's pathetic.
That's what they apparently teach at UBC under Patrick Condon, the guy that the Media turns to pooh-pooh the Skytrain and flog replacing all buses with streetcars.

Politicians tend not to step out of their comfort zone (always taking Private Airplanes and Limo services instead of using public transit) so they see something that looks cool and wants that for their city instead of actually making decisions with consequences past their current mandate.

It would be nice if everyone biked, like in Europe and Asia with their people-scale roads, but that is just not viable in North America unless you want to raze a smaller city and build it new from scratch, or expand an existing one (see the western communities on Vancouver Island) thus increasing urban sprawl, and people still won't bike because the grocery store is a good 10 minute drive, and the bus only comes once an hour.

Pro-transit arguments (and also real estate people) often ignore the fact that you can't do deliveries on transit (eg Fedex) and without a mix of low-income and luxury housing in the same area, there will be no people to operate the restaurants and coffee shops. If a store wanted to operate 24 hours, they are hobbled by the fact that transit doesn't operate 24 hours.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2828  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2016, 5:20 PM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 6,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisai View Post

It would be nice if everyone biked, like in Europe and Asia with their people-scale roads, but that is just not viable in North America unless you want to raze a smaller city and build it new from scratch, or expand an existing one (see the western communities on Vancouver Island)
Just to play devil's advocate here... taking lanes away from roads or narrowing roads to add in wider sidewalks, bike lanes, transit-only lanes, or LRT tracks... seems to be a very people scale thing to do to roads.
Quote:
thus increasing urban sprawl, and people still won't bike because the grocery store is a good 10 minute drive, and the bus only comes once an hour.
You have to start somewhere, don't you? More frequent transit won't come if people don't use it... and as our population ages, more people will rely on public transit. Grocery stores ( and business in general ) tends to locate where there is a market to do so. You can't win customers with cost, but you can woo them on convenience and customer service. If it's MORE convenient to walk to the store because average road speed makes driving less comfortable, enterprising businesses WILL step in and provide services to these people. Yes, there usually is a cost to this, but time and time again, it's been proven that people are willing to pay for convenience.

A business has to have 2 of 3 of the 'C's. Cost, Convenience, Customer-centric.

Quote:
Pro-transit arguments (and also real estate people) often ignore the fact that you can't do deliveries on transit (eg Fedex)
I don't think anyone forgets that. However, if the goal is to make cities about people, it's true that certain things must be sacrificed. Mind you, if Jess Bezos has his way, deliveries won't use the roads anyway.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm all for roads and I think that lots of people live in a dreamland when it comes to thinking Vancouverites will take to their bikes in the winter rain... but I've seen the positive effects of narrowing roads can have on a community and a city... despite the 'short-term' cons.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2829  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2016, 8:54 PM
Caliplanner1 Caliplanner1 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 692
Quote:
Originally Posted by twoNeurons View Post
Now, don't get me wrong. I'm all for roads and I think that lots of people live in a dreamland when it comes to thinking Vancouverites will take to their bikes in the winter rain... but I've seen the positive effects of narrowing roads can have on a community and a city... despite the 'short-term' cons.
As a visitor/part-time resident from California I'm amazed that such huge industrial haulage trucks and public buses are able to navigate metro Vancouver's often narrow/traffic clogged streets. This reality of narrow roadways could come back to haunt the city's economic growth in the near future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2830  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2016, 12:18 AM
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caliplanner1 View Post
As a visitor/part-time resident from California I'm amazed that such huge industrial haulage trucks and public buses are able to navigate metro Vancouver's often narrow/traffic clogged streets. This reality of narrow roadways could come back to haunt the city's economic growth in the near future.
Vancouver started as a small town not so many years ago, by historical standards. The road system is very underbuilt for a North American city of its size. Vancouver remains at heart a rather Presbyterian town, founded on Scottish utilitarianism.

Unfortunately, while there was for many years an outcry against freeways, it was not until fairly recently in the city's history that rail transit was built, and that has been very much a success. If anything, that has, and will be, a cornerstone in the high quality of life.

Nevertheless, there's a mentality here that roads, freeways, (and that includes tunnels and underpasses) somehow spell doom for the city, and relatively little has been done
to keep up with the exponential growth the city has been, and is, experiencing. The planners will have to bite the bullet at some point, and build.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2831  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2016, 6:46 AM
Marshal Marshal is offline
perhaps . . .
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,485
A big difference is the current 'public process' in which a segment of the population, which shares an outlook and desire to participate in the process, becomes the voice of all. It then handcuffs the planners and politicians and becomes a powerful force which often overrides reasoned plans. Again, representative democracy is screwed up by taking decisions to the uneducated electorate and then listening to a small portion as if it was the whole.

Good luck ever getting a complete and proper transportation system with this screwing us all up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2832  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2016, 6:20 PM
Klazu's Avatar
Klazu Klazu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Above Metro Vancouver clouds
Posts: 10,187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal View Post
...or make the Mary Hill/Laugheed Hwy free flowing to Maple Ridge, as examples, etc
This. I was yesterday evening driving around Port Coquitlam and drove over the Coast Meridian Overpass connecting to Mary Hill. Now that's a long bridge that gets never mentioned in here, but makes so much logistical sense! I was just surprised how there is absolutely no merge lane to Mary Hill Bypass. It's just a regular intersection.

Talking about Mary Hill Bypass, I agree with you that it should be freeway standard all the way from Pitt River Bridge. It is just so crucial connector to 100 000+ people in that corner and it is strange they didn't build it as one, as it runs through area that has been easy to build in. It should also be 3+3 lanes, just because the number of cars it will see on weekdays (I presume it is fairly congested).

Actually on that note, I have always been thinking that also the "Coquitlam Connector" part of Lougheed Highway should be of freeway standards. It is another very busy connector road that currently has stupid traffic lights at few places. Definitely something that should be upgraded.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2833  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2016, 6:26 PM
Klazu's Avatar
Klazu Klazu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Above Metro Vancouver clouds
Posts: 10,187
Talking about roads, I was yesterday driving around Port Moody and drove to Belcarra. From Sasamat Lake I opted to take the Tum Tumay Whueton Drive that I have never drive before and now I am really confused why this road even exists?

It basically just takes you to Belcarra Picnic Area parking lot which is separated from Belcarra itself with a gate. Why does this road exist and why is there a gate? It all seems so redundant considering that it mirrors the Bedwell Bay Road that connects Belcarra with Port Moody.

Is there some history with having two parallel roads and the gate that prevents entering the parking lot from Bedwell Bay Road? It seems like a big waste of money having to had build two roads and log lots of forest.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2834  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2016, 6:36 PM
connect2source's Avatar
connect2source connect2source is offline
life in the present
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,702
Always wondered about that road too! I take it when I rent kayaks from Takaya Tours but it seems so strange that the roads never connect. Nice drive though!
__________________
source | energy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2835  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2016, 6:43 PM
BobLoblawsLawBlog's Avatar
BobLoblawsLawBlog BobLoblawsLawBlog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 449
wrong place
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2836  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2016, 8:15 PM
David's Avatar
David David is offline
David
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Vancouver Island, British Columbia
Posts: 1,453
I used to be very curious about that road too growing up in the Tri-Cities. I think I remember taking the Bedwell Bay route to Belcarra as a child, and then coming back as a teenager and being confused why I couldn't access the parking lot from Belcarra. My theory has always been residents of Belcarra complaining about traffic to the Regional Park loud enough to result in the GVRD (at the time) constructing that road as an alternate access to the regional park
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2837  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2016, 1:43 AM
Klazu's Avatar
Klazu Klazu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Above Metro Vancouver clouds
Posts: 10,187
Funny to hear that also others have wondered about it. I am surprised to find out that the road and the gate have been there for so long (at least you guys make it sounds like we are talking about at least a decade).

I am sure the reason was complains of traffic/noise/blaa blaa, but I do wonder how the Belcarra residents have managed to be so vocal about it? It's a very small community of under 50 houses and it doesn't even appear very upscale (there are only few big houses). How on Earth have they been able to convince the authorities to build a secondary road for such a miniscule park? We all know how difficult it is to find any money for roads in here, so it really makes me wonder. Is Belcarra an independent municipality or part of Port Moody?

If that is indeed the reason, it makes me wonder even more how come there is no bridge over the water to connect with Deep Cove? I know I asked about it some time ago, but if they already invested so much for a nice secondary road, why not make it a full loop? Yes, people would complain, but I am sure the gate would be gone the moment the bridge would open, considering how it would cut the commute time to Downtown in half. Currently the drive is almost an hour even on a weekend, so the area is very isolated.

Also, I still hold my position how a bridge there would make for a fantastic scenic drive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2838  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2016, 6:10 PM
SOSS SOSS is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 661
Belcarra, like Anmore, are separate from Port Moody. Although they fit under the "tri-cities" label they are independent villages. Back in the day David Ave was envisioned as a connector to be extended all the way to Deep Cove. Living in PoMo and working in North Van, this route would make my commute considerably shorter but I am very happy this bridge idea has been scrapped for decades. It would just be another congested roadway making PoMo even more of a drive-thru city. Now, I'd like to see a water-taxi idea connecting Rocky Point Park to Lonsdale Quay via a stop in Belcarra and Deep Cove. Doubt its economically feasible but would be cool IMHO.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2839  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2016, 6:30 PM
VancouverOfTheFuture's Avatar
VancouverOfTheFuture VancouverOfTheFuture is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 3,279
does anyone have a drawing or anything of how this connector would meet up? there must be a plan somewhere that i cant find. i would be curious to see how it would work. it seems quite far from Coquitlam to Deep Cove.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2840  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2016, 8:12 PM
Pinion Pinion is offline
See ya down under, mates
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,167
People keep repeating that David Ave plan here and I've never seen anyone back it up with any evidence. It makes zero sense for the north shore.
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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:21 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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