Should the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts be demolished?
32 Comments

  • Mike A - 2 years ago

    In the fall of 2017, I, and thousands of other curious Vancouverites, attended a large information session that explained, and solicited comment about, this exciting project. This project will transform a dank corner of the city into a vibrant new urban area. Also, with the Viaducts in need of expensive repair, now is the time for this exciting, creative initiative.

  • Andy - 2 years ago

    I'm just wondering who with the right mind would do something like this ???
    Vancouver is the only city in North America there is no Highway through downtown and closing this road it will be very stupid

  • Charley Lyons - 2 years ago

    This plan is supposedly going to create "6000-8000 jobs" these are office and retail jobs, therefore minimum wage to $20 an hour. Are these workers going to come in from mission or somewhere? Because they sure as hell won't be able to afford Vancouver.

  • Charley Lyons - 2 years ago

    This plan is supposedly going to create "6000-8000 jobs" these are office and retail jobs, therefore minimum wage to $20 an hour. Are these workers going to come in from mission or somewhere? Because they sure as hell won't be able to afford Vancouver.

  • Sharon - 2 years ago

    I hope we get to vote on this removal of the viaduct..something this big should be put out for a vote..it's bad enough they want to put a temporary bike path on Cambie bridge..I've walked in the shared walk..why can't they just paint a line..one side for cyclist and one side for pedestrians..do we need to take away more roadway..there can't possibly be more cyclists then cars on the road..

  • Ben Sze - 3 years ago

    I think they should never be demolished since it's and important link to Downtown, and it carries 2 streets and 2 hwys. A 8 lane road isn't necessary and a connector a never work at all. Their west ends are also hilly so it doesn't make a difference to a connector.

  • doria Moodie - 4 years ago

    With a son in NY we visit there often, and are huge fans of the Highline in Manhattan. The old rail line was due to be demolished about 20 years ago, but a small group of people campaigned to keep it as an elevated pedestrian walkway and park. It has been far far more successful than anyone dreamed and completely transformed Chelsea. It's so great to have the elevated perspective in the city. Could we possibly do that in Vancouver .. keep the landscaped viaduct for pedestrians and cyclists, and reroute the traffic below? https://youtu.be/jnz2XJzftq8

  • Frederick - 4 years ago

    I am 77 years old. Today, Sunday, I went to Darby Dawes in Kits to share a few beers with a friend. Being 77 and going for drinks, I took the bus. From Arbutus and King Edward Boulevard to MacDonald and Fourth avenue only took me 45 minutes. Had I been in better shape ( I was a half-marathoner a few years ago) I think I could have walked to the pub faster then waiting for the bus. And this Sunday morning I went from the same location to the Granville Island market where I have met friends for the past few years for a walk/run and coffee thereafter. I also spend between $30 and $50 shopping in the market. Without speeding I can at the market in under 15 minutes. How long on the bus? And the walk from the bridge to the market? I don't know. If the mayor and all those other 20/30 something bike riders have an alternative answer to my using the car I would like to hear it.

  • Richard Echegaray - 4 years ago

    It will be the worst decision that the city take to destroy this only rapid access to the downtown area. Give solutions to the traffic problems in Downtown and don’t make worse.
    The only reason about this is the cash that developers want to make with some city councilors that well connected.
    It's time to change the administration in the City of Vancouver! It is too much already.

  • Richard Halliday - 4 years ago

    I don't like that it seems CoV has started by announcing that the viaducts will be torn down, and only after this announcement started figuring out how the existing traffic flow might be figured out. It seems to me there will be more money spent re-routing and creating new roads than using the old ones. The aesthetic of removing the 'ugly viaducts' will not remove the skytrain 'viaduct'...so this arguement has not made sense to me. It looks like another developer-initiated scam for private profit, with a few councillors making politicol hay...as usual.
    If you go to large cities around the world, good designers are not afraid of using viaduct spaces, and designing around viaduct like spaces...but apparently Vancouver can only come up with glass towers and open park spaces for 'development'...how sad and myopic.

  • Jacob Barlow - 5 years ago

    Let me start off by admitting that I do ride my bicycle regularly, to and from work from the Eastside to Downtown and fully appreciate the extensive and expensive bike lane system. Perhaps I'm a tad more openmined than other cyclists but I think that a modest and annual fee charged to each and every cyclist in the city would be tremendously effective in providing a source of income to keep these lanes open.
    That being said, a large majority of my friends, who chose to come and visit me, from outside of the City, are becoming increasingly frustrated with the gridlock caused by the apparent "faux green" "cyclist first" mentality Mayor Robertson's council is overly enamoured with. It would also seem logical, if one follows the 'money trail', that the most benefits to any group would be derived by certain, not all, developers that have provided huge support to His Worshipfulselfishone during and prior to his tenure as Mayor.
    Who benefits? Cyclists, too a small degree. The "faux green lobby", no positive benefit as the increased vehicle congestion will cause more pollution and the ever worsening gridlock constantly stalls transit buses on congested roads. The residents of Strathcona, real estate values are certain to rise accordingly, improved livability is questionable. Motorists, no benefit whatsoever, for obvious reasons. Small and medium business, Downtown business association has a very convincing argument to the negative. Westend residents, perhaps, but with the present level of one way, traffic calmed and no vehicle access streets and lanes, little benefit. Developers, absolutely benefit the most Bob "Condo King" Rennie, the Aquilini family, Concord Pacific, Great Canadian Gaming with their "destination casino" development that we need like a hole in the head. The list of beneficiaries seems rather short when looked at through the microscope of facts.
    So, do the Viaducts being demolished seem that positive or not.
    In my personal, somewhat informed view, not really. It rather seems like short term gain for a small group of enormously wealthy people and a small percentage of residents and long term pain for the vast majority of everyone else.
    Thanks for allowing me to voice my opinion.

  • John Sullivan - 5 years ago

    A well presented argument to retain the viaducts - let's hope Robertson will listen to the public's opinion this time.
    And I cannot understand John Reddy's comment ! I'm glad this popular newsletter brings the issue into the open !

  • John Sullivan - 5 years ago

    A well presented argument to retain the viaducts - let's hope Robertson will listen to the public's opinion this time.
    And I cannot understand John Reddy's comment ! I'm glad this popular newsletter brings the issue into the open !

  • Katrina Scott - 5 years ago

    When 10 ppl decide to do something that the majority of ppl don't want, to me that's a dictatorship. And of course it's about the money. To build condos that no one can afford, that are sold overseas. The viaducts are in good shape and facilitate getting in and out of van a lot easier. It is beyond belief to tear down something we, the taxpayers , paid for. Do something w/the space that is there.

  • Marcus - 5 years ago

    Look at Xiantiandi in Shanghai. You could build some amazing artisan, retail and entertainment space in the neighborhood to liven it up without knocking down the viaducts. Look at any Asian city and see how they have put amazing metro systems underground and cars have been shifted to expressways above ground so pedestrians have the ability to enjoy ground level.

    Taking out the viaducts is just another dumb poorly thought out idea. Reactionary and absence of a vision for our city.

  • Queen bee - 5 years ago

    What the city needs is more people off the road, out of their cars, using public transit, walking and biking as well as more parks and green space. The future for a greener Vancouver should be fewer cars on the road especially with our aging demographic. Why make it easier for cars to access downtown when people need to stop polluting the environment with gas guzzling cars. In many big cities such as Paris and London there are various restrictions on cars entering the city limits. This is opportunity with some careful and insightful planning to avoid this type of situation in Vancouver. The viaduct is certainly not the only nor the best solution. Why are people so attached to it? We can do better ...

  • Lester Nidoy - 5 years ago

    I would say no cuz the SkyTrain runs under the viaducts and the SkyTrain could get affected when the viaducts get demolished

  • Bob - 5 years ago

    build homeless shelters and affordable housing with the money

  • Hohum - 5 years ago

    When I go over the viaduct to get to downtown there is always congestion. Except during the early hours of the morning. While I'm in the congestion I rarely count 5 bikes going by in the bike lane that was taken away from cars. Our city is a joke. We get no say in anything. More bike lanes!!! Are you kidding me. Educate them first!!! Let the public vote! The tax payers! Not 9 people. The two who were not present could have made a difference. Joke!

  • alex - 5 years ago

    how can it be that it seems most of vancouver is against what vision does, yet they seem to do whatever the hell they want, whenever the hell they want?

    Has anyone considered the election might have been rigged?

    It doesn't seem normal that a handful of biking lunatics are deciding the fate of vancouver.

    In ten years they have snarled transportation nearly everywhere in the lower mainland, and are making it impossible for people to visit downtown anymore..

    This is what nazi fascism was all about. A handful of creepy , leachearous, self righteous maniacs who turned an entire country into a killing machine.

    Let's stand up and fight for the city that was built well in the first place adn stop replacing things that are NOT outdated and NOT obsolete and NOT needing to go by the wayside!!!!

    STOP GREGOR AND VISION before it's too late. THIS TURD knows nothing except how to make smoothies, but that shouldn't be enough to run a freaking city!

  • john - 5 years ago

    To be fair, remove the Burrard, Granville, and Cambie bridges too! Oh, wait, that's the West Side! Can't do that to ourselves can we, good gentlemen/women of Council. East Side be damned, they say. So long, easy access to downtown, with glorious view, it was good to know you.

  • John Russell - 5 years ago

    Absolutely ridiculous you do not fix what isn't broke. This socialistic city mayor and council and their law breaking bicycles are a PITA and costly. They have messed up the burrard bridge, now going to mess up another good, efficient road way. We are paying for it all. They just do not listen to the public, never, ever. Get rid of them, PLEASE. I was recently asked to sit on some advisory committee to the council, I refused as they obviously do not listen get rid of that idiot planner also.

  • John Reddy - 5 years ago

    Further proof Van City Buzz is a joke.

  • J. Pedersen - 5 years ago

    It's all about the cash. This is nothing but a land grab for developers; there will be plenty of housing built, but none of it will be affordable, who are they trying to kid? I wonder how many units Rennie will get to peddle out of this deal? Must be nice to have your best buddy mayor's help and public money to go to.
    This will destroy traffic flow into downtown -- what takes 10 minutes now will take forever with the Viaducts gone. They are the best stretches of road in the lower mainland.

  • Not Greg rob - 5 years ago

    Stupid Robertson again... not your money you spending. .. more fucken bikes dt.. stupid.. it's already a mess.. thanks for voting him in again

  • Daniel Politeski - 5 years ago

    It is hilarious. The ruling party always ignores the public, I can't believe that they were elected to do exactly what the population doesn't want to happen.

    It is like once they have an idea, no matter how many are against it they will do it.

    I pray that people remember this the next election and vote in councillors that will do what their community wants them to do.

  • Dave Osmond - 5 years ago

    Lots of info about "soft" benefits like parks, bike routes, etc but not any info about the impact on traffic volumes on existing roads such as Quebec street which is heavily congested already!

  • Joanna - 5 years ago

    Simon Chow, I think you're bang on.

  • Tanner - 5 years ago

    This is where we see the flaws of democracy, where 100 fools overpower the 10 experts. There were quite a few people advocating for the removal of the viaducts, though now that the general public knows (not that it was hidden information, but the general public is ignorant) there is heavy opposition. We see heavy opposition from people with no education on the matter because they believe it is a plan to sacrifice traffic flow for space. The people who actually study traffic and are consulting the city, on the other hand are saying the removal of the viaducts will improve traffic flow. Unless you are majoring in traffic study of some sort, perhaps you should keep your opinion to yourself, as it only clutters the issue with bullshit.

  • yvonne - 5 years ago

    Was it ever really a decision making process? Did they listen to people just to humour the and make it seem democratic? 10,000 bikes a day..they will never get that type of traffic.

    I think that it will make downtown more difficult to get to. I can see that the shops downtown will suffer and the route along whatever they decide will be really congested as well and bring the pollution levels higher with all the stopping and starting.

    Even with all the bike lanes, people who ride their bikes to work aren't using them. They are still weaving through the other streets. Some without helmuts and some not stopping at any red lights or stop signs. Follow the law much?

    I think it's great to encourage the biking, but they should also bear some of the brunt of the costs to the city.

  • Samuel Chow - 5 years ago

    What the city of Vancouver[the vision party is so misguided.Any infrastructure taken away from us on the east approaches will be total disaster.We will not have a proper grade separated entrance and exit from downtown. Translink will expect a superior connection to replace the viaducts. According to the rules the city can do nothing to remove the viaducts.The viaduct are designed to be expanded,one lane on each side . The structure has the capability for it.The only reason vision want the removal is to have developers in their pocket. The viaducts should be connected[grade separated to an expressway through the false creek flats to make traffic flow smoothly. The bike lanes on Dunsmuir should be removed as they are congesting the traffic coming into downtown.

  • Lisa Fraser - 5 years ago

    I totally agree, and have always believed they are important to traffic flow.

Leave a Comment

0/4000 chars


Submit Comment