Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by cleowin

Speaking of a tunnel from the Grandview cut, this could be used as a Toll Expressway from Highway 1 right to the entrance of downtown vancouver, with reduced tolls or even free use for trucks & busses. Could remove some of the overly congested car/truck traffic from the surface streets. By all no means, do not build an expressway through the city, but you could make a tunnel that surfaces at the entrance of downtown, and keep the rest the same.

that was proposed many years ago, connection from HWY #1 to the viaducts going through the Grandview Cut. but it never happened, it wont happen now, and that is too much common sense for Vision. i.e. cars=bad, bikes=force-on-everyone.

you would have to redo McGill ramp to make it for trucks accessing the port only, and mike it inconvenient for people to use it to get downtown. you also need to use traffic calming through Strathcona, etc. similar to what you see in the West End. this way you would force people to use the new connection to get cars of the surface streets.


i still think that alllllll that park-space land could have easily been developed with the Viaducts in place, no reason for it not to be, especially not the Viaducts.

[Aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by cleowin

Speaking of a tunnel from the Grandview cut, this could be used as a Toll Expressway from Highway 1 right to the entrance of downtown vancouver, with reduced tolls or even free use for trucks & busses. Could remove some of the overly congested car/truck traffic from the surface streets. By all no means, do not build an expressway through the city, but you could make a tunnel that surfaces at the entrance of downtown, and keep the rest the same.

There's already a form of transportation that carries expressway-like volumes of people down that corridor. It's called the Skytrain. There's no need to spend so much money building a tunnel to accommodate a spatially inefficient mode of transportation

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

There's already a form of transportation that carries expressway-like volumes of people down that corridor. It's called the Skytrain. There's no need to spend so much money building a tunnel to accommodate a spatially inefficient mode of transportation

That's true now that industrial uses needing a truck route have largely fled the False Creek Flats.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Pinion

This is pretty funny considering your post history in this thread.

Feel free to quote me. Don't confuse discussion with opinion. I've freely admitted to thinking that removing the viaducts was a bad idea, then changed my mind. Either way I've always been close to 50/50.

Rational discussion can help you change your mind, unless of course you are set in your ways. In that case, the world is a scary and dangerous place.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

There are still empty tracks of land between Cambie Bridge and the OV. The lot to the East of the OV sat completely empty since the Olympics 6 years ago, and will be slowly built on over the next several years. Heck, the only reason the OV happened at the speed it happened at was because of a billion dollar subsidy. How long has Providence been sitting on the new St Paul's land? And even if things go ahead at full speed, it won't be done until 2022. How long have there been proposals for Plaza of Nations? Spectrum towers managed to get built with the viaducts in place, and that was a parking lot for decades before.

The idea that the viaducts are the sole obstacle standing in the way of Vancouver becoming a finally complete Utopia is completely ridiculous. It is like we are in a hurry to tear them down and replace them with a traffic clogged road that will pass through still barren land for the next 15 years.

Providence is at the complete mercy of the province for funding a new hospital.

Plaza of Nations is waiting until the casino has a new home, I expect things to move after that happens.

Concord is sitting on that land because they are awaiting a final plan from the city for the viaducts.

The land adjacent to Cambie bridge is owned by the city. They appear to be in no hurry to do anything (typical for government).

Development has been proceeding far faster in Vancouver than any of the neighbouring suburbs, despite what posters on here will say.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Feel free to quote me. Don't confuse discussion with opinion. I've freely admitted to thinking that removing the viaducts was a bad idea, then changed my mind. Either way I've always been close to 50/50.

Rational discussion can help you change your mind, unless of course you are set in your ways. In that case, the world is a scary and dangerous place.

Very well put!

[Aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Providence is at the complete mercy of the province for funding a new hospital.

Plaza of Nations is waiting until the casino has a new home, I expect things to move after that happens.

Concord is sitting on that land because they are awaiting a final plan from the city for the viaducts.

The land adjacent to Cambie bridge is owned by the city. They appear to be in no hurry to do anything (typical for government).

Development has been proceeding far faster in Vancouver than any of the neighbouring suburbs, despite what posters on here will say.

This is the only one that doesn't really make sense to me. In a city desperate to build in places that won't attract much NIMBYism, it surprises me that this has remained vacant for so long. There must be something else going on.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Feel free to quote me.

You keep repeating that you are neutral but the content of your posts say otherwise

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The viaducts are coming down, might as well get used to it.

I'm not sure I believe either side in the debate. From Yaletown I always take Pacific Blvd out of downtown and it's fine. I'm sure it will continue to be fine.

There is a real divide between the downtown peninsula and the NEFC area. Extending Georgia down the hill and into that area in a pedestrian friendly manner will surely help.

I'm looking forward to finally seeing some change and development in NEFC. If the viaducts have to come down for that, so be it. Life will go on. Just like every other change around here that people claim to be "anti car", after a few months nobody seems to care. I'm so tired of this crowd saying the sky is falling every single time.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Now you are paying them to tear down the viaducts... hope you're happy, I am.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

You have to be kidding.

The Viaducts are a pretty big wasteland right now. They carry a limited amount of traffic over a few blocks of parking lots and other roads.

I think if you take a look at them on google maps (with sat images on), you can see what a joke they are, and how much prime land they are wasting.

They also serve as an artificial separate between downtown and Chinatown. That is a gap that should have long since been filled.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Actually I noticed driving along Pacific Blvd that the viaducts block some great views of the city and the mountains...

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

We need a route down the hill, not the entire viaducts. The connection on the Prior/Main side is pretty poor as well.

But, they are coming down, people need to get used to that.

Five Stages of Grief:

1. Denial
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance

It seems like most people are still in stages 2-3... time to keep moving through.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I think what frustrates me is that every "pro car" argument, from the new bridge traffic projections, to the predictions of horribly delay and business loss from bike lanes, have turned out to be completely wrong.

The viaducts is a different beast, but I see the same people coming out of the wood work with the same tired arguments that haven't been right yet.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

We just had one. The viaduct removal plan has been on Vision's radar for years. We've had 2 elections and they got re-elected twice. Majority rules, get over it.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The whining about the viaducts knows no bounds. I'm sure we'll be in Mad Max land after they come down, just as you're predicting.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I've given it plenty of thought and looked at the area in detail many times since then (I live nearby), and I've decided the area is probably better without the viaducts.

A small slice. I gave up around the time you were considering betting $1,000 that the viaducts would be removed.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I see a completely empty Dunsmuir viaduct and a complete waste of space in the form of surface parking.

Pooh! You should've seen the amount of traffic coming into downtown this evening via the viaduct.

Only reason the spaces around are barren is because the city has been dangling the carrot to the developers into believing they can rake in more profits once the viaducts are torn down.

And no, you're not 50-50 on the viaduct issue at all. You are 100% pro tear down as far as everyone can tell.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Pinion

A small slice. I gave up around the time you were considering betting $1,000 that the viaducts would be removed.

Go back far enough and you'll see I'm on the other side of the issue.

But the point to those posts you quoted is the acceptance of reality. So many in this forum rail against Vision nonstop without remembering we are in a democracy, and they have been elected by a majority of voters 3 times in a row.

There's a huge difference between being against a proposal, and accepting the reality of it happening.

The $1000 was from stingray, and he never responded to my last offer.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Vin

Pooh! You should've seen the amount of traffic coming into downtown this evening via the viaduct.

Yep that would have changed my mind. Too bad I missed it.

Originally Posted by Vin

Only reason the spaces around are barren is because the city has been dangling the carrot to the developers into believing they can rake in more profits once the viaducts are torn down.

Why did the Aquilinis develop around Rogers Arena then? Are they dummies?

Originally Posted by Vin

And no, you're not 50-50 on the viaduct issue at all. You are 100% pro tear down as far as everyone can tell.

Considering the last post of mine quoted was as follows:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12
I've given it plenty of thought and looked at the area in detail many times since then (I live nearby), and I've decided the area is probably better without the viaducts.

If that's 100% support in your books, you need some help with comprehension.

[officedweller]

The reason that the area around the viaducts is the last to be developed is because it's the least desirable area on the Concord Lands for a number of reasons, including proximity to the DTES.

The longer they wait, the better the price they can probably get for their condos sales due to limited sites as the rest are developed.

i.e. remember in the late 1990s or early 2000s when Bosa cancelled (or put on hold) the last tower of CityGate because it wasn't selling?
That's the one farthest north / closest to the viaducts.

The same would have applied to a Concord project in the same area.

[Smooth]

City of Vancouver has posted a position for "Senior Project Manager - Northeast False Creek Viaducts Replacement Project" Link

It's a two year temporary contract from September 2016 - September 2018 so this may give us an idea of the City's timeline for the project.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by officedweller

The reason that the area around the viaducts is the last to be developed is because it's the least desirable area on the Concord Lands for a number of reasons, including proximity to the DTES.

The longer they wait, the better the price they can probably get for their condos sales due to limited sites as the rest are developed.

i.e. remember in the late 1990s or early 2000s when Bosa cancelled (or put on hold) the last tower of CityGate because it wasn't selling?
That's the one farthest north / closest to the viaducts.

The same would have applied to a Concord project in the same area.

Hmm, then why would Bosa have developed Citygate at all which is just as close to the DTES? I suspect Concord has always held out for viaduct removal, which allows more developable land. Why would they have dragged their feet for decades on the required park?

[trofirhen]

I can't help fearing that what will replace the Viaducts will turn that area into a gagging, choking, bottleneck at rush hours. I just hope that some innovative traffic engineers work on it.

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I can't help fearing that what will replace the Viaducts will turn that area into a gagging, choking, bottleneck at rush hours. I just hope that some innovative traffic engineers work on it.

The only thing that could replace the viaducts would be an expensive tunnel. Other than that....a gaggling-choking-bottleneck seems like an inevitable nightmare. Well done Vancouver, well done...

[logan5]

The Malkin Viaduct will be a good replacement for our current viaducts. While not as free flowing as the Georgia Viaduct, Malkin will be a very free flowing arterial. Malkin will certainly move traffic more effectively than Prior currently does, so there will actually be less congestion east of the viaducts. At the very least it's a saw off. Traffic loads will be metered more appropriately into/out of the DT core, which would smooth out traffic flows, as opposed to the viaducts which, if at full capacity (they never are), would funnel disproportionate loads of traffic onto city streets.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by logan5

The Malkin Viaduct will be a good replacement for our current viaducts.

but imagine though, if that Malkin Ave Connector connected to the viaducts.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

but imagine though, if that Malkin Ave Connector connected to the viaducts.

What good would the combined capacity of the Georgia Viaducts and the Malkin Connector be if the streets east of there can't handle all those cars being funneled in? You'd just be creating large traffic jams along Clark.

I suppose if you lived near the end of the Malkin Connector it would be quite convenient.

[Vin]

Are you guys prepared to foot half a billion dollars for this useless Vision pet project? We will definitely be on the hook for decades to come if this were to go ahead. A rough poll at vancitybuzz showed that 2/3 of Vancouver folks are against it, yet the City is ploughing ahead. I rather they spend the money on putting in street cars. And if you guys think that the city actually cares about future congestions and are working hard to devise a way to make the situation better, then u must be in dreamland. Look around, since when has the City cared to alleviate any traffic congestion downtown? They don't even want to spend money to pick up garbage. I see streets being cleaned by people employed by private businesses in the morning. Why would you folks think that Vison will do better when it comes to providing good transportation corridors?