Time for Vancouver to Tear Down Its Viaducts?

[Stingray2004]

Both GMT and Pattullo Bridge won't survive an ~7 seismic event - especially shallow/localized. No doubt about that. As for Van City proper, the viaducts (built 1970/1972) are much more likely to be resilient against a similar seismic event than either the Burrard St. Bridge or Granville St. Bridge - including the directional on/off ramps at either end of the GSB. My 2 cents.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Both GMT and Pattullo Bridge won't survive an ~7 seismic event - especially shallow/localized. No doubt about that. As for Van City proper, the viaducts (built 1970/1972) are much more likely to be resilient against a similar seismic event than either the Burrard St. Bridge or Granville St. Bridge - including the directional on/off ramps at either end of the GSB. My 2 cents.

This is exactly my point. If earthquake risk is really the motivating factor there are other priorities that should be addressed first. But it's not - it's just a smokescreen.

[Vin]

To leave a mark in order to boost a very self-indulgent ego, all sorts of half-baked reaso..., I mean, excuses, are thrown out in order to justify this fiasco. Like the Trump supporters, Vision will never, ever listen to logic as long as they are in power.

Originally Posted by Metro-One

200 million now? Wasn't it 100 million before?

Also no, this is not a provincial project, this is the city's pet project of removing useful existing infrastructure.

The province better not give the city a single penny for this.

You sound genuinely surprised. Wait for the final bill to tally: 300mil



The province better not chip in a single cent for the viaduct removal. Vision can come up with the millions from their own pocket. Wouldn't they be able to make it back with all the "nice condo sales" anyway?

[vanman]

I was in Hong Kong last week and noticed how that city treats many of its viaducts.







In my second pic you can see the tubing for the irrigation system that keeps the landscaping lush and green. I don't see why Vancouver can't do something similar with our viaducts for the next 40 plus years until they reach their end of life.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by vanman

I was in Hong Kong last week and noticed how that city treats many of its viaducts.

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/DSC_0165.jpg[/IMGa]

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/DSC_0163.jpg[/IMGa]

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/DSC_0164.jpg[/IMGa]

In my second pic you can see the tubing for the irrigation system that keeps the landscaping lush and green. I don't see why Vancouver can't do something similar with our viaducts for the next 40 plus years until they reach their end of life.

Vancouver can do that. They even had a comprehensive plan for park space and sports facilities under them that would have been a amazing amenity for locals. But instead they prefer to piss away tax payer dollars and hurt locals simply due to ideology of a few what I consider arrogant fools at city hall. The economic and social costs to Vancouver will go on for decades if they manage to destroy them.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by vanman

I was in Hong Kong last week and noticed how that city treats many of its viaducts.
In my second pic you can see the tubing for the irrigation system that keeps the landscaping lush and green. I don't see why Vancouver can't do something similar with our viaducts for the next 40 plus years until they reach their end of life.

Cool shots. We could have done the same. Its a shame that "Vision" has anything but, in their idealogically driven witch hunt to tear down ours.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by vanman

I was in Hong Kong last week and noticed how that city treats many of its viaducts.







In my second pic you can see the tubing for the irrigation system that keeps the landscaping lush and green. I don't see why Vancouver can't do something similar with our viaducts for the next 40 plus years until they reach their end of life.

Vancouver can do this, they choose not to...

Originally Posted by cornholio

Vancouver can do that. They even had a comprehensive plan for park space and sports facilities under them that would have been a amazing amenity for locals. But instead they prefer to piss away tax payer dollars and hurt locals simply due to ideology of a few what I consider arrogant fools at city hall. The economic and social costs to Vancouver will go on for decades if they manage to destroy them.

this

Originally Posted by whatnext

Cool shots. We could have done the same. Its a shame that "Vision" has anything but, in their idealogically driven witch hunt to tear down ours.

yup, its not logical sense, its just an ideology. and that isn't how you make a good city. it is how you create what we have. a great natural environment with a dysfunctional city.

[logan5]

Oh my god. I'll just remind everybody that the viaducts are 1 measly km long. The dysfunction and economic and social costs are happening in the DTES. The development of the viaduct lands will be a major shot in the arm for the DTES.

These dramatic posts over 1 single km of misplaced elevated freeway is hilarious.

[Pinion]

Gentrifying the dtes and pushing everyone to Whalley is not the goal.

The fact that people are so mad about having to go though even more residential streets with red lights every two blocks suggests we need a real highway from hwy 1, not a reduction.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by logan5

Oh my god. I'll just remind everybody that the viaducts are 1 measly km long. The dysfunction and economic and social costs are happening in the DTES. The development of the viaduct lands will be a major shot in the arm for the DTES.

These dramatic posts over 1 single km of misplaced elevated freeway is hilarious.

Lol yep.

And the pictures show a walkway and some plants... looks nice in central urban Japan, but we have the seawall a hundred feet away.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by logan5

Oh my god. I'll just remind everybody that the viaducts are 1 measly km long. The dysfunction and economic and social costs are happening in the DTES. The development of the viaduct lands will be a major shot in the arm for the DTES.

These dramatic posts over 1 single km of misplaced elevated freeway is hilarious.

LOL, tearing down the viaducts will do Zero Good for the misery in the DTES. It will however be great for Concord, and we all know where Vision's bread is buttered.

If you want to help people in the DTES, take the ballooning $100-200 million budget for viaduct removal and do something with it that actually helps with the issues there.

[the_prof]

Originally Posted by whatnext

LOL, tearing down the viaducts will do Zero Good for the misery in the DTES. It will however be great for Concord, and we all know where Vision's bread is buttered.

If you want to help people in the DTES, take the ballooning $100-200 million budget for viaduct removal and do something with it that actually helps with the issues there.

There was an estimate a year or so ago that $1 mln is spent per day to "help people in the DTES". Why do you assume that throwing more money into it will change anything?

[logan5]

Originally Posted by whatnext

LOL, tearing down the viaducts will do Zero Good for the misery in the DTES. It will however be great for Concord, and we all know where Vision's bread is buttered.

If you want to help people in the DTES, take the ballooning $100-200 million budget for viaduct removal and do something with it that actually helps with the issues there.

Everybody can agree that one of the major problems with the DTES is the high concentration poverty. The viaduct lands will bring in thousands of new residents a mere 400 meters away from the epicentre of the problem. Clearly a more integrated neighbourhood is needed.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

i also find it funny how people think an extra 22.5hrs a year in traffic that isn't necessary is acceptable. for a city about quality family time and healthy living, and extra 22.5hrs in a car in traffic isn't part of that plan; its the exact opposite.

(3mins each way; 6mins a day; assume 45weeks worked; 22.5hrs)

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by logan5

Everybody can agree that one of the major problems with the DTES is the high concentration poverty. The viaduct lands will bring in thousands of new residents a mere 400 meters away from the epicentre of the problem. Clearly a more integrated neighbourhood is needed.

The destruction of the infrastructure will not add a single resident to the area. The area will remain the same density.

The area is a major bottleneck, the viaducts bi pass it and handle all commuters (vehicles, transit, bikes).

Using the huge amounts of space the viaducts open up bellow them to community amenities would bring in more people and do more good for the entire area then losing that space, adding no new residents, and creating more gridlock and conflict.

The reason is ideological. It is expensive. If it manages to actually sneak by Vancouverites then the negative economic and social effects will remain for decades. The community will be worse off. Downtown East Side will be worse off. The city will be worse off. Only one entity will be better off, a foreign owned company.

[Aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

i also find it funny how people think an extra 22.5hrs a year in traffic that isn't necessary is acceptable. for a city about quality family time and healthy living, and extra 22.5hrs in a car in traffic isn't part of that plan; its the exact opposite.

(3mins each way; 6mins a day; assume 45weeks worked; 22.5hrs)

Assuming your assumptions are correct (which I'm not sold on) you are forgetting that some trips will actually be shorter with the viaducts torn down. I know for me having Georgia street connect directly with Pacific would provide a more direct route than what I have to do now.

It may not balance out the added delay you are talking about. I just want to be clear it's not a clear negative for vehicle commuters. The post viaducts road network favours connectivity and redundancy vs pure speed.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by logan5

Oh my god. I'll just remind everybody that the viaducts are 1 measly km long. The dysfunction and economic and social costs are happening in the DTES. The development of the viaduct lands will be a major shot in the arm for the DTES.

These dramatic posts over 1 single km of misplaced elevated freeway is hilarious.

Totally disagree.

You make it sound so simple: tear down the viaducts and DTES problems go away.

Have you ever thought that you can also bring in thousands more people to the neighbourhood by KEEPING the viaducts, simply by letting those towers go taller?

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Lol yep.

And the pictures show a walkway and some plants... looks nice in central urban Japan, but we have the seawall a hundred feet away.

I thought you mentioned before that Vancouver needs more green space: The more the merrier?

[Vin]

Originally Posted by mcminsen

Compare to hollywoodnorth's pic from Feb.28 '14.
[/URL]

See how the viaduct complements newer structures alongside it. Imagine the west-coast greenery underneath (instead of the sub-tropical Hong Kong foliage), with dwarf spruce, ferns, flowering plants, water features, etc, jogging/biking trail, art sculptures and the intermittent sports facilities/cafes along the 1km stretch. An all-weather public facility. Perfection!

Where else in this city that hasn't been accounted for can we build that?



Instead we will be getting a noisy super highway!! Go figure.

[CanSpice]

There isn't all that much space under the viaducts for additional public space though. They're kind of "at grade" between Gore and Main. Between Main and Quebec there's more "at grade", and then there's a VPD parking lot. Between Quebec and Expo there's already a public park. The only real stretch that's "unused" is between the SkyTrain guideway and the downtown side of Rogers Arena, a distance of about 400m, but part of that is a parking lot that's not owned by the city. There's already a nice park on the other side of Expo Boulevard in Andy Livingstone Park.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

Assuming your assumptions are correct (which I'm not sold on) you are forgetting that some trips will actually be shorter with the viaducts torn down. I know for me having Georgia street connect directly with Pacific would provide a more direct route than what I have to do now.

It may not balance out the added delay you are talking about. I just want to be clear it's not a clear negative for vehicle commuters. The post viaducts road network favours connectivity and redundancy vs pure speed.

my assumption of 3 mins 1 way comes right from the City of Vancouver itself. and knowing them, it will actually be longer then 3mins based on their previous history with traffic management.

do you really think that more direct route will take less time? I'm leery about that since there will be something like 6 new traffic lights.


then there is all the possible conflict zones. right now if you want to cross pacific, it is 4 lanes, 3 of traffic since 1 is only for parking. they want to make it 8-10 lanes. people talk about how the viaducts cut off communities. well right now the viaducts keep the majority and the heavy traffic away from people and bikes. if they come down, all those cars and trucks will be next to the bikes and pedestrians. which means more exhaust fumes for people to breath in. the majority of accidents come because of speed differentials. and they are creating many more opportunities for that.

if the city truly cared, they'd connect the viaducts to the Canada 1 through the Grandview Cut and then use traffic calming through Strathcona and funnel everyone into the cut.

then there is the terrible waste of 200 million dollars for structures they have 40 years left on their life. funny, viaducts, good for 40yrs, Massey Tunnel, past its useful life yet lets keep the tunnel and get rid of the viaducts. some weird ass priorities in this place.

the viaducts coming down, you people really think that will fix the DTES?