HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #161  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2009, 7:52 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 25,027
Here's what Wikipedia says.

The 401 expressway and Highway 1 were originally separate highways.

Quote:
Like its Island section, the Highway on the Lower Mainland was first given the "1" designation in 1941. Highway 1's original alignment started out within the city limits of Vancouver, and followed Kingsway from Vancouver to Surrey, and then went along the Fraser Highway to Clearbrook. From Chilliwack, the highway originally went to Rosedale, which is a community just east of Chilliwack, along Yale Road, then along Flood-Hope Road to where it picks up its current alignment just across the Fraser River from Hope.

In 1959, Highway 1 was given an extension from within Vancouver to Horseshoe Bay by way of the Lions' Gate Bridge and Taylor Way in West Vancouver. In 1962, the section between Clearbrook and Chilliwack was re-routed to a new expressway.

In 1964, the Clearbrook-Rosedale section of Highway 1 was restored to its original alignment. Also in that year, a new expressway (or "freeway"), originally designated as Highway 401, opened up on Highway 1's current alignment between West Vancouver and Rosedale. The expressway became part of Highway 1 in 1973.

In 1986, Highway 1 between Chilliwack and Hope was improved to a freeway. Through the 1990s, all signals and intersections on Highway 1 through Greater Vancouver were removed, making the entire section of Highway 1 between Horseshoe Bay and Hope a freeway.
BTW - Highway 99 is a holdback from the old US highway naming system - Route 99 was the predecessor to I-5 and still exists in sections, the same way Route 66 still exists.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #162  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2009, 7:55 PM
sacrifice333 sacrifice333 is online now
Vancouver User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,458
Tearing down the Dunsmuir and Georgia viaducts may make sense... but with the Spectrum development complete and heavily influenced by the existing viaducts... removal of those viaducts would significantly change that development and it's interaction with "street level".

hmm....
__________________
Check out TripStyler.com {locally focused travel blog} | My instagram {Travel Photos}
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #163  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2009, 8:49 PM
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,372
Arrow an example of this ......

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zassk View Post
It was only ever named 401 in the first place to copy Ontario, who is the only jurisdiction in the world that names their freeways in that way. Nowhere else but in southern Ontario do freeway numbers start in the 400's. Turning it back to Highway 1 was correcting a previous mistake.

Personally, I would like to have an explicit freeway system with its own numbers, just like Quebec's Autoroute system.
In France, freeways are called "Autoroutes" and are numbere: "A6,A12" etc
In the UK ,freeways are called "Motorways, and are also numbered: "M1, M5"

How would we label the freeways in B.C.? (there aren't very many, yet) ??
"F" for Freeway or something else? I like your idea, though, but some of our freeways do need an upgrade in capacity and in the quality of the interchanges, and maybe the lighting.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #164  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2009, 8:59 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 29,880
south africa uses the M system too

what about the 101 - it continues along the sunshine coast... its a continuation o fthe 101 in the states isn't it?
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #165  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2009, 9:30 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,291
93, 95, 97, 99, 101 are all (or were originally) continuations of the equivalent north-south U.S. highways. 91 was built much later and is out of place compared to the U.S. highway system.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #166  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 12:39 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 29,880
cool

I only found this out a while ago that in the states odd numbered ones are for north south highways - like the I5 or I95 and even numbers are for east west like the I90 or I80
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #167  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 12:49 AM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 25,027
And Interstates with the same last digit are generally bypasses.
I-5, I-405, I-205, I-605
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #168  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 12:59 AM
Architype's Avatar
Architype Architype is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pacific Canada
Posts: 6,600
I've driven across those viaducts many times. I think they (or some similar alternative) should stay. The geography of Vancouver's downtown peninsula makes them a neccessary evil. Without them, more local streets would have to be added and re-configured, and there would have to be more lanes to carry more traffic.

Another alternative would be a fourth bridge I suppose.

Last edited by Architype; Oct 24, 2009 at 9:09 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #169  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 1:12 AM
whatnext whatnext is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,241
Isn't it ironic that one of the arguments against Tom Terrific's freeways was that they would destroy Chinatown. And now Chinatown is dying a slow death in the face of free market forces, compounded by Vancouver's other hippie holdover, the permissive attitude toward drug users.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #170  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 2:01 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,944
A few developers have worked on what the land lift would be w/o the viaducts in place, I'm sure the city has as well. The additional density that could be gained would be worth between $40-$50Million at the peak. That is not including the price to demolish it and somehow connect Georgia and Dunsmir to the lower level. That's why there has not been a proposal to tear them down.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #171  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 2:17 AM
Phil McAvity's Avatar
Phil McAvity Phil McAvity is offline
I put the F-U in FUN
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by kylemacmac View Post
In Monteal there's also a lady running for mayor who plans to make downtown more livable by building more parking garages and expanding the freeways leading into the city. Make no mistake, this lady is BAT SH!T crazy and has no chance at all of being elected.
Parking garages and freeways are fantastic plans.....if you care about the economy. Parking garages can replace surface parking lots (the ultimate waste of urban space) thereby allowing a lot more commuters to park and shop downtown and freeways allow people to get places faster which brings myriad economic benefits as well as reducing air pollution (less idlng, more moving and faster moving).

Quote:
Originally Posted by kylemacmac View Post
Montreal has absolutely no lack of freeways going downtown and within the city.....
That's bullshit. I've seen countless aerial shots of Montreal and never seen one viaduct or freeway downtown. A bridge is not the same thing as a freeway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kylemacmac View Post
So being crazy might get you heard, but doesn't make you anywhere near having good ideas.
While the woman may be crazy, those two ideas are anything but crazy

Quote:
Originally Posted by kylemacmac View Post
I suspect most who support keeping the viaducts do so because: a) They give Vancouver a 'big city urban feel'
You're right about that and it seems thoroughly hypocritical to me that someone can love skyscrapers while opposing viaducts on the basis of some fuzzy-thinking notion like "livability". To me livability is skyscrapers and freeways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post
Yes, but as threads often due it had moved into a much more constructive direction and then Phil had to come and say something about adding more viaducts downtown (off topic) and then this become a freeway debate.
Oh i'm sorry, I figured that the viaducts are freeways. I didn't know that they are in fact, residential streets.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DKaz View Post
It boggles me how suburbanites working in Downtown Vancouver would rather drive than choose one of the excellent transit options.
People drive because they have the freedom to choose exactly when and where they want to go. Transit only goes specific places at specific times and people are wiling to pay handsomely for that freedom.
__________________
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"-Winston Churchill

Last edited by Phil McAvity; Oct 25, 2009 at 9:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #172  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 2:41 AM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 11,561
Freeways are generally considered to be much longer then 1km hahahahaha. Viaducts are simply bridges over land, the same way you would not call Burrard Bridge a freeway. The ducts have no interchanges, just one ramp each, that is not a freeway. There are many short (1 to 2km) viaducts in many European and Asian cities that are not considered freeways or even highways.

With your logic, I guess the viaduct in Langley City is also a freeway...

The viaducts along the Golden Ears Bridge are starting to enter freeway territory, because there is free flow for about 4 to 5km of the GEW utilizing 3 full interchanges. But even this would not be considered a freeway to most because of its short free flow distance. It is more of a connector.
__________________
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
     
     
  #173  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 3:05 AM
geoff's two cents geoff's two cents is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil McAvity View Post
Parking garages and freeways are fantastic plans.....if you care about the economy. Parking garages can replace surface parking lots (the ultimate waste of urban space) thereby allowing a lot more commuters to park and shop downtown and freeways allow people to get places faster which brings myriad economic benefits as well as reducing air pollution (less idlng, more moving and faster moving).
Indeed, nothing makes for an attractive street quite like a large parking garage, and Los Angeles, the freeway capital of North America, is renowned for its pristine air quality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil McAvity View Post
That's bullshit. I've seen countless aerial shots of Montreal and never seen one viaduct or freeway downtown. A bridge is not the same thing as a freeway.
Another solid point. The lack of freeways in Montreal must be why it is such an un-liveable city with no cultural significance whatsoever. I don't know why anyone would ever want to go there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil McAvity View Post
You're right about that and it seems thoroughly hypocritical to me that someone can love skyscrapers while opposing viaducts on the basis of some fuzzy-thinking notion like "livability". To me livability is skyscrapers and freeways.
You're right! Life without freeways just wouldn't be liveable, and it's impossible to have skyscrapers without them. Vancouverites live in a dream world if they think they can have the lowest office space vacancy rate in North America without a comprehensive freeway network.

Vancouver's economy has absolutely nothing to do with tourism, and everything to do with getting metro-Vancouverites into and out of downtown as quickly as possible in their own automobiles. That's why, for instance, the two tallest buildings in our city are not hotels.

Furthermore, those "fuzzy-thinking" liveability people are a bunch of hippies who don't know anything about the world, and who don't care about the economy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #174  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 3:28 AM
Millennium2002 Millennium2002 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,693
Exclamation Contradictions...

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff's two cents View Post
Indeed, nothing makes for an attractive street quite like a large parking garage, and Los Angeles, the freeway capital of North America, is renowned for its pristine air quality.
The air quality of Los Angeles isn't "pristine". Far from that in fact. Very few, if any, urban areas will have pristine air quality. I don't know how parking garages make for attractive streets either... streets that people will like because they are not crowded and because people won't get hit by careless and aggressive drivers. =S

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff's two cents View Post
Another solid point. The lack of freeways in Montreal must be why it is such an un-livable city with no cultural significance whatsoever. I don't know why anyone would ever want to go there.
Prove this with evidence please. There are probably other reasons for its "un-livability".

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff's two cents View Post
You're right! Life without freeways just wouldn't be liveable, and it's impossible to have skyscrapers without them. Vancouverites live in a dream world if they think they can have the lowest office space vacancy rate in North America without a comprehensive freeway network.

Vancouver's economy has absolutely nothing to do with tourism, and everything to do with getting metro-Vancouverites into and out of downtown as quickly as possible in their own automobiles. That's why, for instance, the two tallest buildings in our city are not hotels.

Furthermore, those "fuzzy-thinking" liveability people are a bunch of hippies who don't know anything about the world, and who don't care about the economy.
Your post is quite contradictory... I don't see how people can live with crowded 10-lane freeways either... and if you think it's impossible to have skyscrapers without them then I guess you haven't looked at places like Japan.

Vancouver's economy is geared more towards tourism than you would expect. If not then I don't know why Fairmont has 4 hotels here, the tallest building in Vancouver has a hotel, why there's a cruise ship terminal, why we save Gastown and Chinatown, why Stanley Park remains a park, etc.

BTW... it's very unreasonable to condemn people that care about the long-term growth of this city as unfriendly "hippies".
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #175  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 3:30 AM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 11,561
Quote:
Another solid point. The lack of freeways in Montreal must be why it is such an un-liveable city with no cultural significance whatsoever. I don't know why anyone would ever want to go there.
I dont know where you guys get these facts, anyone who has ever been to or who has ever looked at Montreal knows that Montreal has a massive freeway network that does reach downtown. One freeway arm downtown is underground I believe and another is on the surface. Also they are currently building a new freeway and river crossing in the area. And one of the freeways does ride along a several KM viaduct in the greater Montreal area.



All of the darker yellow lines are freeways akin to and larger than our #1 and the light yellow lines are major highways akin to or larger than our Lougheed highway. As on can see, two dark yellow line penetrate the downtown core.

And yet Montreal has retained and flourished its famed downtown life. Even Quebec City and Halifax have larger freeway networks than Vancouver (Metro Halifax is around 350 000 by the way) and somehow these cities still have large dense urban cores relative to their sizes ans Quebec City is often reffered to as one of the best cities in NA.
__________________
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
     
     
  #176  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 3:31 AM
eternallyme eternallyme is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by Architype View Post
I've driven across those viaducts many times. I think they (or some similar alternative) should stay. The geography of Vasncouver's downtown peninsula makes them a neccessary evil. Without them, more local streets would have to be added, and would have to have more lanes and carry more traffic. Another alternative would be a fourth bridge I suppose.
Would it makes sense to extend a freeway to link up with Highway 1? There is only one possible route though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #177  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 3:57 AM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,689
I think this debate is starting to get off track here: the question is whether we should keep the viaducts or to remove them, despite the fact that the latter will not happen. Not about extending it to Highway 1, to recreate the original highway plan.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #178  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 4:01 AM
Phil McAvity's Avatar
Phil McAvity Phil McAvity is offline
I put the F-U in FUN
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff's two cents View Post
Indeed, nothing makes for an attractive street quite like a large parking garage
I believe the economy should be the first priority and how "pretty" something is is of little importance to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff's two cents View Post
Los Angeles, the freeway capital of North America, is renowned for its pristine air quality.
Comparing Vancouver to Los Angeles is like comparing Victoria to Vancouver-there is no comparison. Los Angeles is six times the population of Vancouver and as it is, Vancouver has smog. Had Los Angeles not built all those freeways the smog would be even worse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff's two cents View Post
The lack of freeways in Montreal must be why it is such an un-liveable city with no cultural significance whatsoever. I don't know why anyone would ever want to go there.
Montreal's "liveability" or "cultural significance" has nothing to do with what I was talking about-I was simply calling bullshit on another poster's comments about Montreal's (supposed) freeway system. Paying attention helps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff's two cents View Post
Vancouverites live in a dream world if they think they can have the lowest office space vacancy rate in North America.....
Got proof? I doubt it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff's two cents View Post
Vancouver's economy has absolutely nothing to do with tourism, and everything to do with getting metro-Vancouverites into and out of downtown as quickly as possible in their own automobiles. That's why, for instance, the two tallest buildings in our city are not hotels.
You actually type really well for someone so high. Shangri-La isn't a hotel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff's two cents View Post
Furthermore, those "fuzzy-thinking" liveability people are a bunch of hippies who don't know anything about the world, and who don't care about the economy.
Finally you said something I agree with!
__________________
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"-Winston Churchill
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #179  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 4:02 AM
geoff's two cents geoff's two cents is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post
I dont know where you guys get these facts, anyone who has ever been to or who has ever looked at Montreal knows that Montreal has a massive freeway network that does reach downtown. One freeway arm downtown is underground I believe and another is on the surface. Also they are currently building a new freeway and river crossing in the area. And one of the freeways does ride along a several KM viaduct in the greater Montreal area. . . .

. . . .And yet Montreal has retained and flourished its famed downtown life. Even Quebec City and Halifax have larger freeway networks than Vancouver (Metro Halifax is around 350 000 by the way) and somehow these cities still have large dense urban cores relative to their sizes ans Quebec City is often reffered to as one of the best cities in NA.
Thank-you, Metro-One, for at least understanding my sarcasm and, yes, I am aware that Montreal has a more extensive freeway network than our own. Allan_kuan, please do not take anything I said in that last post seriously. I was merely having a little fun with Phil's comments. They were just begging for some kind of satire. In the end, I couldn't help myself. . .
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #180  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2009, 4:05 AM
Millennium2002 Millennium2002 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,693
You may want to state that clearly at the very bottom of the post in some hidden or italicized font. Few people would have been able to catch that sarcasm. = \
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 8:37 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.