Stephen Rees's blog

Thoughts about the relationships between transport and the urban area it serves

City staff recommends demolishing viaducts

with 2 comments

Georgia Viaduct from False Creek pano

This story is in the Vancouver Courier but is also in the Globe but that is behind a paywall so I am not linking to it.

The staff have done a lot of work and found that removing the viaducts actually improves the local network. I have always argued for their removal, since we know for a certainty that traffic adapts to road removal. Traffic is not like a flow of water  – as most models assume – but rather a gas that expands and contracts to fill the space available. Nearly every model that I know of assumes a fixed trip matrix. The models simply try to reassign the same number of trips – generated by land use and population – across the available routes. Real life does not work like that – as a very large number of before and after studies has shown.

However you can be sure that the dinosaurs will never believe that removing a road can make traffic flow better. Even though the traffic calming measures on Point Grey Road showed exactly that effect. None of the forecast carmageddons ever happen. But the idiots who always make these predictions have never been known to apologize after their doom laden predictions fail to materialize.

NPA Coun. George Affleck said he will wait to see the final report in September before stating whether he agrees with staff’s recommendation to demolish the viaducts. Affleck said he is concerned removing the viaducts would have a negative effect on traffic flow in the area.

And he will keep to that line no matter what the final report says and repeat it until once again he is shown to be wrong. Then he will switch his attention to some other project which he will also oppose for the same reason, but be quiet about the ones that worked. Have you ever heard any of them admit they were wrong about bike lanes downtown or the Burrard Bridge?

Written by Stephen Rees

July 22, 2015 at 9:36 am

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Since the intersection of Burrard and Pacific provides the highest number of accidents with bicycles, the designers of that bike route might well be eligible for some criticism.

    Eric

    July 28, 2015 at 11:23 am

  2. The number by itself tells us very little: it is the rate that is important. An intersection that sees much bicycle use will see more collisions (do not call them “accidents” they are anything but) than one that sees little.

    Stephen Rees

    July 28, 2015 at 11:35 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: