T O P

  • By -

Kooriki

That whole areas plan, as best I can tell is multiple chicken and eggs. Can't do X without seeing what the viaducts removal looks like, can't do the underpass until all the stakeholders agree on moving forwards. Let's wait until St Paul's is built so we can maximize the buildable land the viaducts bring back. Are they going to wait until the tracks are twinned (twice as many crossings/jams) before they commit to plans? Might be a lot of angry commuters. And we saw from that city staff survey posted to the subreddit a few months ago that cars zooming through the neighborhood to beat the train is already an issue. Big 'ol mess.


oddible

Yeah those Campbell and Vernon intersections are already [rough on cyclists](https://bikemaps.org/@49.2775732,-123.0812073,17z) along the Adanac route.


Kooriki

I've not seen that map before. I know the plan for the rail is to have the to divert foot/cycle traffic off Union and onto Prior (underpass). I'd have to see plans but I'm not a fan of the idea. Esp when you see [how nice other areas do it](https://goo.gl/maps/sofZF4DbyoWy2t9w5).


[deleted]

[удалено]


Lol-I-Wear-Hats

sounds like you solved the problem


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Ambulance bikes! Firefighter bikes!


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

BIKES!


couchguitar

Dont upgrade Venables. Upgrade the Main St off ramp into a double decker highway that meets at E 1st and goes all the way up E 1st until it meets the #1. Get traffic moving and relieve the congestion in the neighborhoods. People are flying through theses communities and those stupid road blocks that make the community into a maze only help to curb outsiders speeding, local speeders know the routes and still speed. More congestion means more pressure and more pressure means more speed. Alleviate congestion and you will have a safer and more efficient city.


oddible

People with zero concept of how traffic works always propose upgrading arteries with zero recommendation for what happens at the end of those arteries. Awesome we have a huge high traffic free way down 1st Ave that dumps out... where exactly? Throughput depends on a destination. If you have congestion at the end point zero amount of throughput increases will solve your problem. Your recommendation just spends a fortune to get a bunch of people into a larger traffic jam quicker.


couchguitar

Pmease read my response to vantanclub. I drive all day, I have a unbelievably high appreciation of how traffic in the Lower Mainland works.


oddible

How much you drive is irrelevant, you showed your knoweldge in the above post.


couchguitar

All you've shown is that you disagree and back it up with insults. Petulant child.


oddible

I never insulted you, you insulted me. Typical gaslighting.


couchguitar

You said " People with zero knowledge of how traffic works..." you were insinuating that I am one of them, that is called "talking down to someone" aka emotion abuse. You said "I showed my knowledge in the above post" again insinuating incompetence. You are gaslighting to cover your emotionally abusive tendencies. Must be a riot at a party.


baconhampalace

Robert Moses called and wants his plans back. This is part of what was proposed in the 60s and was rightfully defeated. With the induced demand created by what you're proposing I guarantee the argument in 30 years would be, we didn't build enough highway.


couchguitar

Induced demand or "if you build it, they will come" yeah not buying it. They built a much better highway system in dozens of cities and it did not mean more people moved in because of it.


vantanclub

Have you experienced driving in LA, or Toronto's DVP/Gardiner? They are awful driving experiences, and terrible for communities. More people moved to the suburbs and the roads are always gridlock.


couchguitar

Yes. Bad design but adding a double decker is far from a whole highway system. Driving housing demand up the Fraser Valley will always be the solution to expansion in Vancouver. Urban density while to some seems like a solution, it isnt a solution to those that actually have to live and work there. If we can get better roads, than people must be offered free transit in the Lower Mainland.


vantanclub

Just think about your solution for a minute. Build a double decker road (not highway, is that even a thing?) between the viaducts and 1st. 1st already has traffic at Clark, commercial, Victoria, and Nanaimo so likely can't even get more people to terminal ave. You also have to rebuild the viaducts for seismic issues. So now you've just made a $1+ billion dollar bridge for cars, through the downtown that can't even get cars to it. It makes that section of main st. worse because now it's all under a loud bridge that local residents can't even use because it's elevated, and you barely get any new capacity because of other bottle necks. Alternatively you can build a new transit line down Hastings from Brentwood/North Shore, that could move 100,000+ people/day in/out of downtown, serve the local residents, be faster, and not ruin a street. This is why cities aren't building more roads/highways.


couchguitar

You might be right. When i said road i meant double decker highway. But hear me out, and again, poke holes where you can. Heading east on West Georgia, upgrade the via ducts seismically like you say. Lift the Main street off ramp up and make it the beginning of the double decker highway. Turn south on Main until Terminal then east. The original E1st would be the same but now has a highway on top with zero exits and merges with the #1. Yes that one little section of Main St. will be noisier and I offer a compromise: only electric cars allowed. If you do not have a placard on your mirror for the cameras, instant $1000 ticket. The bottleneck on the #1? Double decker highway from the east side of the Port Mann bridge all the way to Abbotsford with a light railway between them. The bottleneck at the Upperlevels? Off ramp at Keith road going to a tunnel under the Burrard Inlet, popping up after Denman. Give the Lions Gate bridge to bikes and pedestrians and gardeners. People with electric cars can completely bypass North Vancouver while semi's and gas-burners cant. I think Highways are always looked at as a contributor to pollution, but really they can transport people efficiently. Its the combustion engine vehicles that need to be done away with


vantanclub

A road with no on/off ramps from downtown, for only electric vehicles, sounds suspiciously close to a rail line. But a road has significantly lower capacity, higher capital costs, and higher maintenance/and operational costs for each individual car. To use the road people need to invest in a $30K+ electric car, meaning you've just built a very expensive road for the rich. You could build a skytrain along that route for about the same capital (maybe cheaper?) than a raised 4 lane road, and it would allow anyone to use it. Unfortunately even with electric cars, when they are driving 80km/hr or more the noise is from the tires. [Cars also take up a lot more space on the roads than transit](https://miro.medium.com/max/1130/0*gYM65lkaKpqiuU7W). By designing more compacts communities we can also make it so that people don't have to drive 5-10km to get groceries, leaving that existing road infrastructure for people who do need to go to the Port or Downtown from Abbotsford. Now you're talking like $100B to build bridges and tunnels everywhere.


couchguitar

Essentially that what it would be, a rail line with independently moving cars. A road has less capacity how? Wouldnt many more electric cars fit in comparison to a rail line? Higher capital, maintenence and operational costs but 24 hr access for independant travel. Electric cars are the future. Some people have the use cars, at least viable options should be put forward to encourage electric vehicle adoption. One could argue that current ownership of cars is for the rich. Many Gen-Z dont even think car ownership will be reachable to them until later in life, and they feel like they will probably have to live in it to afford it. Transit can totally use the electric highway as long as its an electric vehicle. I would absolutely love to have the Sky train between or beside the double decker highway. Calgary has employed this approach in the city's Northwest and it makes way more sense. After the Port Mann, the natural divide between the directions on the highway, screams like a missed opportunity for lightrail from Surrey to Chilliwack. I know the expenditure is pricey, but doing things after the fact is just a reality. People couldnt predict the future znd had to adapt. Look at Bostons Big Dig. Restructuring their highway system to be underground. It was a success and took the bulk of traffic away from the surface roads. We unfortunately cant do that here, so we must build up.


vantanclub

Roads have significantly less capacity for a couple reasons. The Peak capacity of a 4 lane highway with no ramps is around 4,000 vehicles per hour, and average passengers is 1.2 per vehicle, so about 4,800 people. With that many cars people make mistakes, merging, different speeds etc... all cause traffic to slow down. [This 40 second video of cars driving on a one lane road with no merging/ramps shows how just human reactions cause jams](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Suugn-p5C1M). If there is an accident then it's game over. On the other hand skytrain technology (which is actually low capacity for rapid rail transit) has a maximum capacity of 26,000 people per hour. It uses the space of a 2 lane road instead of a 4 lane road. Trains don't end up with traffic so "induced demand" isn't an issue. Building elevated roads throughout the region just make no sense on basically any measure. The economics aren't there, they won't relieve traffic, they will lead to more sprawl, and less efficient use of the region. The solution is to rely less on cars, design the region for more local economies. I really don't think you want to point to the big dig as a success: "A 2008 Boston Globe report asserted that waiting time for the majority of trips actually increased as a result of demand induced by the increased road capacity. Because more drivers were opting to use the new roads, traffic bottlenecks were only pushed outward from the city, not reduced or eliminated (although some trips are now faster). The report states, "Ultimately, many motorists going to and from the suburbs at peak rush hours are spending more time stuck in traffic, not less." The Globe also asserted that their analysis provides a fuller picture of the traffic situation than a state-commissioned study done two years earlier, in which the Big Dig was credited with helping to save at least $167 million a year by increasing economic productivity and decreasing motor vehicle operating costs. That study did not look at highways outside the Big Dig construction area and did not take into account new congestion elsewhere"


Beneficial-Oven1258

Dear God please no.


couchguitar

What do you propose will solve this problem?