Dear Mr. Mayor Gregor Robertson,
Congratulations on your recent election to the Mayor’s Office! I look forward to a continued agenda of progress under your administration. As part of that agenda, I propose that you look into tearing down the Georgia St. Viaducts and utilizing the sale of these city blocks to fund the Downtown Streetcar project and more social housing.
The old Georgia St. Viaduct in 1915
The Georgia St. Viaduct was initially built over the old CPR Beatty Street railyards in 1915. The City of Vancouver, under the NPA, rebuilt the Viaduct in 1972, in the face of much opposition from the community. The Georgia St. Viaduct of the 70′s was the first phase of the massive freeway proposal that would’ve wiped Gastown, Chinatown and Strathcona right off the map and completely destroyed the livability of our Downtown. Unlike the rest of the freeway plan, the Georgia St. Viaduct was actually completed, and in doing so, demolished Hogan’s Alley, one of the few black neighbourhoods in Vancouver.
Hogan's Alley back in the day
The remnants of this form of city building are a blight to Vancouver and its achievements in terms of livability. Except for the skatepark, the entire area is nothing but an industrial wasteland.
As Northeast False Creek gets developed and the final pieces of Expo land disappear, the Viaducts will continue to act as a physical barrier to any sense of livability in the area. Furthermore, they separate the Northeast False Creek area from the historical Downtown Eastside. Vancouver cannot be a city that will aid in the further separation of the rich from the poor.
The Granville Loops plan
The City of Vancouver is currently removing the Granville St. Bridge Loops and plans to sell and develop the land, along with the creation of a fine street network. The Province of BC is currently planning to sell and develop land around BC Place Stadium, which will increase the livability of the area, while also financing upgrades to the Stadium. Both plans recognize the high value that these remaining lands can garner.
A map of the proposed routing of the Downtown Streetcar
For years, the City of Vancouver has been proposing a Downtown Streetcar that would connect Waterfront Station with Gastown, Chinatown, Main St. SkyTrain, the Olympic Village, the Canada Line, Granville Island, and Vanier Park. Trouble is, the City can’t finance the $100 million project on their own.
A mockup of the Downtown Streetcar near Science World
This proposal, if achieved, could usher in a new era of the modern streetcar, and I believe, would not only dramatically enhance the quality of life downtown, but also prove to be quite the tourist attraction. Streetcars have been proven, in Portland for example, to provide the economic stimulus for redevelopment. Seeing as the route runs right through the edge of Chinatown and Gastown, this could be exactly what the Downtown Eastside needs to continue on its path to revitalization.
The land could easily be heightened, the viaduct removed, and the road connected at-grade to Expo Boulevard
I propose that the City demolish both the Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts. In its replacement should be a complete, at-grade road network, connecting with all the major streets. This newly freed land could be sold just like the Southeast False Creek lands – requiring a large component of social housing. The land made available is in excess of five large city blocks; literally unheard of anywhere else in Downtown. If the sale of several small plots around BC Place can raise approximatively $100 million dollars, as quoted by David Podmore in The Vancouver Sun, then surely five city blocks can finance the Downtown Streetcar project in its entirety – and then some!
The proposed at-grade road network
The proposal superimposed on the current road network
The freed up city land in orange
I sincerely hope you consider this proposal. It will continue to enhance the livability of our Downtown, open up the Downtown Eastside to further revitalization and investment, and provide the City with its first Streetcar route since 1955.
Yours,
Paul Hillsdon
Here! Here!
Excellent idea and one that has immediate benefits. Great illustrations, too. Makes perfect sense to me…
There’s a bit of a leap in logic here:
>and completely destroyed the livability of our Downtown.
unless you’ve got access to a parellel dimension.
At best one could definitively state that such actions would have “resulted in a drastically different structure to our Downtown and its livability.”
Meh. It’s opinion anyway, so WTF cares?
Great plan Paul. Hopefully someone in the city takes your idea seriously.
Great proposal! I hope you at least get a response.
It was great to see you the other night. Hope you got home ok.
I applaud the effort, deeply. This is an excellent and well thought out idea, and I agree would do wonderful things for the city.
My only concern is how this idea is going to make it to the halls of power. How are you, or I going to help make this a reality?
You’ve got my attention. Now what?
You’ve obviously put a lot of work into this!
And…I have a feeling you ‘will’ get a response! My latest inquiry into the Mayor’s office was responded to the very next day.
Seems like Gregor is on point. Let’s hope it stays that way…
How to ehchance the tourist attraction? Let tourists visiting thousands of social housing in downtown is a point of interest? People come here want to see something special and shopping, not to focus on rich or poor!
Hi Paul
The SkyTrain runs right through the middle of the site that you highlighted in orange. Where will that go?
It’s still a good idea though. A lot of land is wasted in the blocks west and east of the Main St overpass.
This is a very well laid out proposal, and I really like the idea of using the land development to finance a new downtown streetcar. Its proven that streetcar attracts more ridership and more investment than buses. Bringing down the viaduct would bring down a big psychological barrier for people walking and biking between the different neighbourhoods. I would warn you that raising the grade to meet up with Expo Blvd will not be as easy as it sounds, but otherwise great idea. I’d love to see how the more technical aspects work out.
Darcy: I think the general conclusion is that Vancouver is a more livable city due to the fact it doesn’t have a highway running through it’s downtown core.
Andrew: Any suggestions? Maybe it’s time for a facebook group?
Darren: I hope so. He hasn’t responded yet…
lvlowes: Gastown and Chinatown are major points of interest, and think if they were connected via a seamless ride streetcar to Science World, the Olympic Village, Granville Island, Vanier Park, Waterfront Station, and possibly even Stanley Park – you tell me that that’s not the general tourist circuit.
Furthermore, I believe that the DTES could be a major centre for community, innovation, the arts, and tourism if it is revitalized. There’s so many fantastic historical buildings there that it’s just too hard to ignore.
Matthew: You could always design a building to incorporate the SkyTrain running through it, not too differently from the Vancity building at Main. Or, possibly, they could even just rebuild that section of the guideway to level it off, since it isn’t passing under the viaducts. That would be expensive though.
ngwright: Exactly my point! The viaduct is not just a physical, but also a psychological barrier between the communities. It’s tearing us apart!
Pingback: Thursday Morning Link Fest: Geek of the Week » Vancouver Blog Miss 604 by Rebecca Bollwitt
Paul – The Flickr images you posted to illustrate your point are no longer working. Do you mind replacing them?
Pingback: Tear down that Viaduct « Price Tags
Pingback: re:place Magazine
Great idea.. the last 3 images (the current and proposed road network, and freed-up land) aren’t displaying. I’d be really interested to see them. Thanks!
Hopefully those images work now. Been trying to host them on several different servers, but was having problems! Sorry!
What about using the viaduct as a no car bridge. Only walking, biking, skating, you get my drift
I think the connection from Dunsmuir down to Pacific Boulevard would be a lot more difficult than you have displayed there, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be done. This is a long-overdue idea and I support it wholeheartedly.
It seems to be it would be better for the city to focus on something else, away from the downtown area. Remember that most of the population in the region neither live nor work anywhere near that area.
It’s time we stopped spending money and other resources on a part of the city that has already had more than it’s fair share of the region’s wealth.
Here’s another option for Vancouver: Fast-track the proposed development around Marine Way and Boundary/Kerr, so that there’s another sustainable focal point that’s more accessible to many of the region’s inhabitants.
I’m sure there are plenty of options in the other cities too. Above all else, take the focus off the inner-city of Vancouver, and put it on other places, so the region as a whole becomes a better place to live.
Great idea Paul. A self-financing project, what an amazing thought. Had such a scheme been implemented with the entire Expo site we could have trams and LRT lines all over Metro Vancouver by now. Instead a billionaire from Hong Kong got the entire waterfront for pennies on the dollar./rant
If you want to see examples of how tearing down a freeway can enhance a city have a look at Milwaukee, Portland and San Francisco. They replaced freeways with parks, boulevards and flourishing new neighbourhoods. In none of those cities did removing a freeway cause traffic chaos.
Pingback: paulhillsdon.com » Blog Archive » Mr. Robertson, Tear Down the Viaducts! « metro babel
Paul: Don’t know how I missed this earlier.
I know you are excited about going to BCIT, but reading this still believe you have a future in Urban Planning. Very exciting. Just keep in mind though mixed use with industrial can be dynamic and provides for live / work, since Vancouver’s displaced industrial seems to be moving out to Surrey. Vancouver needs to keep some. And Bridgeview for example is getting overwhelmed with Truck parking facilities so instead of building the future today, Surrey seems doomed to repeating other cities past mistakes with over industrialization of the South Fraser waterfront. Of course the now infamous (in my mind at least) South Fraser Freeway does not make things any better and can predict that if it goes through as planned in the future some bright young mind like yourself will be calling for freeway decommissioning so that Surrey can be enhanced like Portland, San Francisco etc by replacing Freeways with parks etc. Very smart, but if we are really smart, we will skip the Freeway step all together.
Bernadette
Hi Paul,
This is a fabulous job on the idea and I think its a fabulous idea. I also think that removing the viaduct would also allow us to honour the black neighbourhood that once stood in that area. The removal would also make the view from the east of the city even better thus making another point of which we all can see and enjoy the beautiful city. I think the removal of the viaduct might also reduce the amount of traffic funneling down first Ave which is as packed full of traffic as Highway one and the portmann is now. I would like to see thought taller towers in that area though. Buildings in the neighbourhood of 30-40 and not the size of the buildings located at the olympic village site. The area could once fully developed could become a really nice area sort of like coal harbour or false creek. I also would like to see a mix of towers maybe 2 residential for every 1 office building. This development could also be part of developing the land around the VCC clark sky train station which is currently under developed and would really make the neighbourhood much more connected and a stronger sense of community could be created. I love your ideas and hope that the Mayor is listening.
I have seen this work well in places like south Korea where 12 and 24 lane highways have been removed to be replaced with restored streams and local street networks that create totally new neighbourhoods or restores them to there former glory. Looking forward to see this develope.
Jim
No way, no how. The fact that the viaducts don’t run all the way to the Trans-Canada should be reflected as one of Vancouver’s biggest failures.
Instead of vehicle traffic happily avoiding the DTES, motorists are forced onto Hastings Street to endure a cesspool of drug addicts who happily walk out into traffic whether it’s there or not.
I’d love to see a community by the viaducts. But tearing them down and forcing motorists down Pacific to mingle with pedestrians sounds awfully short sighted. These people need to get to work, not shop or play with the locals.
If anything, the viaducts should be extended down and through the Grandview cut over to the Trans-Canada. Utilizing the cut will have the least impact on neighbourhoods (as was the unfortunate case with Hogan’s alley) and with appropriate on ramps and off ramps help to develop the false creek flats area between Station and Clark.
Vancouver has too many surface streets as it is. Expressways are badly needed and tearing down the viaducts represents a terrifying step into the past.
Here’s another vote for no.
While the viaducts may represent a outmoded way of city planning I can see nothing but negatives when it comes to their removal. From a traffic, expansion and urban planning perspective.
The viaducts represent possibly the most interesting section of an otherwise single layered downtown core. When you go to the area near Stadium Station there is an actual urban fabric which is developing on several layers. If infill such as the propsed GM Place office tower go ahead you could have the viaducts expand to simply represent another level of seemingly surface street. with towers having a podium which faces both the viaduct and surface streets.
Even if the resultant buildings aren’t huge the idea of having multiple levels of accessible city could finally give vancouver a region where there actually is that level of development that simply makes it feel like you are in a much larger and denser region.
From a view point there’s a good chance and future concord developments on that parking lot will have podiums which largely obscure the structure from a distance. This is especially true if the construction attempts to integrate with the viaducts.
The engineer in me also wants to point out that if you cut and cover a tunnel up to the viaduct you could also take a lot of the unwanted traffic out of east vancouver without hurting the neighbourhoods it runs through. Ideally you could put it under the rail yards and through the grandview cut like what was mentioned earlier. Either way, it leaves a possibility of expansion which you otherwise wouldn’t have.
Pingback: paulhillsdon » Geoff Meggs, Bing Thom call for removal of viaducts!
The ideas outlined here are so poorly thought out that I knew it wouldn’t be long before I encountered misinformation and here it is-”The Georgia St. Viaduct of the 70’s was the first phase of the massive freeway proposal that would’ve wiped Gastown, Chinatown and Strathcona right off the map and completely destroyed the livability of our Downtown.” This is total hyperbole because anyone who has been to ANY major American city will attest to the fact that viaducts haven’t wiped out ANY neighbourhoods. Changed them-yes,wiped them out-not even close. No one has ever suggested freeways cover all the land in any neighbourhood which is what it would take for them to be “wiped out”. Also, how would a few viaducts have “completely destroyed the livability of downtown”? Would these viaducts have gone around killing people? Just ridiculous. All viaducts do is help people get where they are going. Are they as pretty as a park? Hardly, but they serve a much more useful and important purpose, like reducing smog, easing traffic congestion and moving people around. In short, they are extremely good for the economy and Cliff’s right-they should run right out to the Trans-Canada because trying to get there now is just a complete shitshow. Had the city been sensible in the 1960′s and built an extensive freeway system I can guarantee you the city would have less smog than it does now.
Hopefully Gregor Robertson won’t waste ANY time even considering what is written here.
I propose to run new freeways on the streets where Alex and Carewser live. Or at least through their neighbourhoods.
This is exactly what happens with the traffic accessing the viaducts — it goes through someone’s neighbourhood to merely serve the convenience of commuters from elsewhere.
Further, the critics have not adequately ddressed the uninhabitable surface land below the viaducts. If such monstrous and expensive constructs served any other purpose than as the simplistic 1950s paradigm as exclusive conduits for cars, then don’t you think the land below them would be anything but derelict after four decades?
Moreover, the original freeway concept was a double deck 8-lane job runing from a tunnel under Burrard Inlet across the Coal Harbour waterfront, through Strathcona and Chinatown to the Grandview Cut. It would’ve wiped out far more communities than the viaducts did. The viaducts remain a legacy of a failed idea, and its failure was built on the notion that neighbourhoods where people live are worth preserving.
There has now been six decades of worldwide experience with freeways and car dependency. It is no wonder there is a movement afoot in some quarters to not only dismantle them, but to replace them with a plethora of things that are far more beneficial to society.
Paul’s idea to replace the viaducts with a range of development that is more sustainable is inherently a very good one. But god exists in the details.
There is a significant grade change from the east end of downtown Georgia Street to the surface beyond. If one does not dead end Geogia Street (therein cutting off vehicular access to downtown from rthe east), then a ramp will be required to access the flats below.
It will take a 300 metre ramp at a 5% slope (i.e. less than the maximum 8% for people with disabilities) to achieve a 15 m rise. I suspect the rise is a bit more, so the ramp would be longer, and one may wish to start the down slope beyond the adjoining podiums to the stadiums and condos. This will consume more flat land below, and I suspect there will be less land available for sale than that shaded in red in the above graphics. Nonetheless, the intent is good and is worthy of further research.
Once the downtown – NEFC flats street grid access has been resolved, there is no doubt some exciting urban design and architectural elements can be explored.
The ‘traffic denied’ senario implied by the critics is not true. Just because you remove the viaducts doesn’t mean commuters can’t get through. They’ll just have to learn to experience driving though a stretch converted to a viable community from a desolate wasteland, and to do so at a slower pace with a few more lights to contend with.
I am not at all sympathetic with their inconvenience. Besides, all of us who commute will be looking for alternative transportation anyway once gas hits $2+ / litre, but some of us have already made conscious choices in such things as living closer to work and transit routes.
I would hope now that Coun. Meggs has thrown his hat into the de-viaducting ring that we could address creating a public street system that goes beyond mere engineering to build boulevards with things like very generous built-in pedestrian and bicycle features, double or triple rows of trees, very wide green medians suitable for streetcars, public art, urban plazas and pocket parks, unique street furniture and light standards, a linear park from the waterfront to Chinatown, etc etc etc.
One must maintain perspective in these measures. The boulevards of central Paris are their ‘freeways’, which also act as linear parks. They don’t need more road space despite a population 4X ours because they also have a fabulous alternative to cars called the Metro.
You've obviously put a lot of work into this!
And…I have a feeling you 'will' get a response! My latest inquiry into the Mayor's office was responded to the very next day.
Seems like Gregor is on point. Let's hope it stays that way…
love it!!
love it!!
I am very much interested in your project. It must have been interesting to you when all the bike lanes started appearing.
Is there any way you would be interested in helping me with my project that centres on the results of plans for Georgia Viaduct on Cathedral Square.
Pingback: Vancouver & the Viaducts: Local experts weigh the costs and benefits of tearing down the Georgia and Dunsmiur Viaducts « VPSN Public Space Blog
Pingback: Blogging the Viaduct « Price Tags
Pingback: Bloggers on the Viaduct Forum « SFU City
Just a comment about freeways ruining neighborhoods. I was in Atlanta where many freeways exist but one just east of downtown changed the neighbourhood of Martin Luther King Jr, which was a vibrant black community. The freeway cut the neighbourhood in two and finally now it is starting to grow with new development slowly, despite being right beside downtown.
The freeway removed from Portland and San Francisco waterfronts have been very good for the city.
It is too bad now Surrey and Delta will have a waterfront freeway with the SFPR.