Summary Report: VVaannccoouuvveerr GGeeoorrggiiaa aanndd DDuunnssmmuuiirr VViiaadduuccttss SSttuuddyy
September 2011
Halcrow Consulting Inc Suite 601 – 1155 West Pender, Vancouver, British Columbia V6E 2P4 Canada Tel +1 (604) 293-2882 Fax +1 (604) 293-2892 www.halcrow.com Halcrow Consulting Inc has prepared this report in accordance with the instructions of their client, City of Vancouver, for their sole and specific use. Any other persons who use any information contained herein do so at their own risk.
© Halcrow Group Limited 2011 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...... iii SECTION ONE – INTRODUCTION ...... 12 1.1 Background...... 12 1.2 Study Area...... 18 1.2 Study Objectives...... 19 1.3 Report Outline...... 20 SECTION TWO – CURRENT TRAVEL PATTERNS & TRENDS...... 21 2.1 Auto Trips ...... 21 2.2 Transit Trips...... 31 2.3 Walk and Bike Trips...... 37 SECTION THREE – FUTURE TRAFFIC...... 44 3.1 Model Update ...... 44 3.2 Model Validation ...... 48 3.3 Future Base Case...... 55 SECTION FOUR – POTENTIAL FOR DIVERSION ...... 61 4.1 20% Removal ...... 61 4.2 50% Removal ...... 65 4.3 100% Removal ...... 74 SECTION FIVE – TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS & MEASURES ...... 80 5.1 Transportation Impacts ...... 80 5.2 Possible Mitigation Measures ...... 83 SECTION SIX – SOILS EVALUATION ...... 86 SECTION SEVEN – STRUCTURAL EVALUATION ...... 87 SECTION EIGHT – SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ...... 89
Page i City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts Study was sponsored by the City of Vancouver. This report was produced with valuable input and guidance from members of the Strategic Transportation Planning Branch and others including the following:
City of Vancouver Jerry Dobrovolny, Director of Transportation Steve Brown, Project Manager Lon Laclaire, Manager, Strategic Transportation Planning Dale Bracewell, Manager, Active Transportation Carol Yee, Transportation Planning Engineer Dane Doleman, Structures Engineer
This study was led by Halcrow Consulting with project partners including Creative Transportation Solutions, Golder Associates and Infinity Engineering. The following consultants were engaged to execute this study:
Halcrow Consulting (Transportation Planning & Modelling) Dave Turner, Director, Transportation Practice Basse Clement, Project Manager Stella Chow, Senior Transportation Engineer Nai Chiu Chan, Transportation Engineer Elham Boozarjomehri, Transportation Engineer Desmond Bliek, Transportation Planner
Creative Transportation Solutions (Traffic Data Collection) Jan Voss, President Robert Cheung, Traffic Engineer
Golder Associates (Soils Assessment) Jim Laidlaw, Senior Project Engineer/Associate Nicky Jennings, Geo-Environmental Scientist
Infinity Engineering (Structural Assessment) Dr. Matthias Schueller, Senior Structural Engineer Arndt Becker, Structural Engineer Morgan Trowland, Structural Engineer
Page i City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The following Executive Summary is an excerpt from the City of Vancouver Administrative Report: “Viaducts and False Creek Flats Planning: Eastern Core Strategy”, Standing Committee on Transportation and Traffic, July 26, 2011. The first Georgia viaduct, completed in 1915, was built to connect the eastern part of the City to the Downtown core. The railway yards and industrial area below created a barrier and the viaduct created a way to remove this barrier with a relatively flat connection to the bluff of the downtown. Due to structural problems and ongoing maintenance issues, Vancouver residents voted to replace the viaduct in the 60’s with a design that included two structures and continued to pass over the industrial lands of Northeast False Creek below. This viaduct design was based on it becoming the first phase of a larger freeway network that was planned. In the late 1960s opposition led to the rejection of the freeway plan for Vancouver and today the only remnant of the freeway proposal is the eastern portion of the viaducts. Today the area around the viaducts has a much different context than when they were built. The railway yards have been removed and the industrial areas are no longer present. They still provide a gently sloping east/west connection from Main Street to the downtown which provides a good connection for bikes and goods movement that is not present otherwise in this area, however they create a barrier for the area below and for linkages between Chinatown, Gastown and Strathcona to False Creek. Planning is currently underway for the Northeast False creek area and an update of the City’s Transportation plan is in the early stages of consultation. It is important to develop a vision for this area that fits with the new context and develops a vision for the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts so that they can be incorporated into these plans. In order to progress towards this vision, Council endorsed a two phased approach. The first phase would examine the transportation impacts of removing some or all of the viaducts and determine if there were any transportation reasons why the viaducts should not be modified in some form. If there are no transportation “show stoppers” then phase two would examine the land use and configuration scenarios. This report provides an overview of the phase one analysis. Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts Assessment Phase one of the study is intended to assess the transportation impacts on transportation capacity through removal of some or all of the viaducts structures and what conditions would need to be in place to accommodate various capacity reduction scenarios. This phase did not involve any consultation with residents or stakeholders. Staff retained Halcrow Consulting through a competitive bidding process to undertake the technical studies for this project, and Halcrow subsequently retained two sub-consultants to undertake soils and structural reviews. Preliminary reports from these consultants are now being finalized.
Page i City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Transportation Review A data collection program was undertaken as part of the transportation review to get a better understanding of the traffic characteristics of the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts. A summary is provided below. Current Traffic Characteristics The Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts are not currently heavily used by pedestrians, but with the addition of the separated bike facility there are approximately 2,000 cyclist trips using the Dunsmuir viaduct bike lane on a peak summer day. A survey of cyclists and pedestrians using the viaducts indicates that most cyclists and pedestrians are travelling between Downtown and the neighbourhoods just east of the viaducts, namely Strathcona and Grandview-Woodland. There are no transit services currently on the viaducts; however, the Expo SkyTrain Line runs adjacent to the western ends of the structures. There are approximately 160 heavy trucks (truck with three or more axels) and 800 light trucks (Cube van with two axles) that use the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts on a daily basis. The number of light trucks has remained relatively constant since 1996, but the number of heavy trucks has dropped by approximately 50%. Combined, the viaducts carry approximately 43,000 vehicles per day, with over 44% of these originating from the eastern half of Vancouver. The distribution of origins for vehicle traffic using the Dunsmuir viaduct during the AM peak period is provided in Figures E1 and E2 below.
Page i City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure E1: Origins of vehicle traffic on Dunsmuir Viaduct during AM Peak
Page i City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure E2: Origins of vehicle traffic on the Dunsmuir viaduct during AM Peak
1,200
44% 1,000
800
600 22%
400 12% 7% 200 5% 5% 3% 2% 2%
Morning Peak Trips on Dunsmuir Viaduct Dunsmuir Peakon Trips Morning 0
er st re d v e o n rrey h elta itt M ector u S D P cou S /S Others ew W y h chmo an i le R/ V le ort R p heast N ort Lang Ma rnaby/N u N B
Available Capacity Assessment In order to assess the potential for people who currently drive to divert to transit an assessment of the transit capacity was undertaken. The schedules for each bus route were used in combination with bus capacities provided by TransLink. The analysis indicates that for the transit facilities that enter the downtown from the east, Hastings Street has some residual capacity, but buses on Pender Street are operating near capacity, the West Coast Express is operating at full seated capacity and the SkyTrain is operating near capacity. This indicates that except for some routes on Hastings Street there is little capacity to attract additional transit riders under current conditions. Figure E3 below provides a summary of the available transit capacity by street.
Page i City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure E3: Transit capacity by street across the downtown neck
16,000 14,000 Total Capacity Utilization 12,000 Seated 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000
Pass/hr (Westbound) -
s* n St ai es r Skyt Expr Pender Hastings St Quebec St
Coast est W
Transit Corridor
In order to assess the potential to accommodate diversion of vehicles on adjacent streets an assessment of the available roadway capacity was undertaken. The Olympics provided an opportunity to determine the capacity of the streets entering the downtown. Due to the closure of the Georgia viaduct, Dunsmuir viaduct, Pacific Boulevard and Expo Boulevard the streets across the downtown neck were operating at capacity at some points. Permanent traffic counters were installed to monitor traffic patterns that were continuously counting the vehicle volumes. From these counts the highest observed volume was obtained for each street. The analysis indicates that there is additional vehicle capacity on the roadways entering the downtown from the east, particularly on Pacific Boulevard, Expo Boulevard. Figure E4 provides a summary of the 2010 traffic volumes and the highest observed traffic flow for each street.
Page i City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure E4: Highest observed traffic volumes crossing the downtown neck
Maximum Observed Flow 2,200 2,000 Utilization 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400
Veh/hr (Westbound) Veh/hr 200 -
d St St lv n in St n B ai a ai iaduct V t/M t/M r S S Expo er St/Main St g St/M mui n er s nd sti a Powell H Pender St/Main StKeef Dun Alexa
Roadway Name
The transportation review concludes that there is unused road capacity during peak periods on most of the parallel arterial streets, such as Expo and Pacific Blvds, Pender St, Hastings St, Cordova St and Water/Powell Sts. These parallel streets could accommodate some diverted traffic generated from partial or complete removal of the viaducts. There is also some additional transit capacity on Hastings Street. Travel Trends to Downtown Since 1996 counts have been undertaken to determine the number of people entering the downtown by travel mode. Comparing these counts between 1996 and 2011 indicates that the total number of people entering the downtown has increased but the number of vehicles has decreased. Vehicle volumes along the downtown neck have decreased in both the AM and PM peak periods. The majority of the increase in trips to the downtown has been accommodated by transit. With fewer vehicles on the road there is an ability to remove some of the vehicle carrying capacity entering the downtown. One form of vehicle capacity reduction would be to remove some or all of the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts. Capacity reduction scenarios A transportation review of the impacts of three viaduct capacity removal scenarios was undertaken for the following: • Removal of 20% • Removal of 50% • Removal of 100%
Page i City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
The transportation analysis was conducted using two methods to evaluate the various levels of capacity reduction 1) Using a transportation model that uses future land use and population forecasts 2) Using traffic count information and observed maximum volumes on adjacent streets The analysis is summarized in Table E1 below. Table E1: Summary of Capacity Reduction Scenarios Implementation Walking/ Goods Time Scenario Description Requirements Cycling Movement Horizon 20% A 20% reduction • Minimal diversion of existing • Walking cycling • Goods 5 yrs Reduction in capacity could trips connections movement can entail removing • The majority of new trips to continue along continue to use portions of the downtown continues to be Dunsmuir. the Georgia and viaducts at the accommodated by walking, • Connection to Dunsmuir east end such as cycling and transit. the Dunsmuir viaducts with bringing them Viaduct can be minimal change down to grade improved with • New connection at Main St. changes to along Malkin intersection at Ave to Clark Main St. Drive and reclassification of Prior to Collector is possible.
50% A 50% reduction • Some diversion of existing • Walking cycling • Goods 5-10 yrs Reduction in capacity could trips to adjacent routes or connections movement can entail removing transit continue along continue to use one of the • Growth in trips to the Dunsmuir. the Dunsmuir viaducts and downtown would need to be • Connection to viaduct with converting the accommodated by walk, the Dunsmuir reduced remaining cycle and transit which may Viaduct could capacity. structure to a require implementation of be improved • New connection two-way road. current planned transit with more along Malkin investments such as the changes to Ave to Clark Hastings B-Line, Evergreen intersection at Drive and Line and UBC line and Main St. reclassification improvements to walk and of Prior to cycle routes to encourage Collector is trips to happen by these possible. modes.
100% A 100% • Requires significant • Review of cycle • Review of +15yrs Reduction reduction in diversion of existing trips to connections to Goods capacity would transit which would require the downtown movement entail complete implementation of planned required due to connections to removal as a transit investments such as removal of the downtown transportation Hastings B-Line, Evergreen Dunsmuir bike required to link. Line and UBC line, capacity facility replace removal increases on the Expo line of Georgia and and improvements to walk Dunsmuir and cycle routes
Page i City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
• Requires increases in trips to the downtown to continue to be accommodated by walk, cycle and transit.
Soils Review The land beneath the viaducts bounded by Carrall, Gore, Pacific Boulevard and Expo Boulevard was reviewed to get a better understanding of the potential contamination in the area. This was conducted by Golder Associates by reviewing the historic uses in the area, reviewing previous reports and conducting 12 borehole investigations. This land area was created by significant amounts of fill and the western portion of the study area also falls within an area that is known to have contained heavy industry including a manufactured gas plant. The activities and wastes associated with this former gas plant have significantly influenced the environmental conditions in the area, and will be an important factor in future remediation planning. A high level review of the soils contamination in the area indicates that the soils remediation costs for this area are likely in the range of $4 -8 million dollars if the full area was remediated to a residential standard. Structural Review The structural review of the viaducts indicates that the majority of the structure is currently in reasonably good condition. The section that crosses Main Street requires some minor retrofits in the short term and there are some other maintenance and repairs that are required. The annualised bridge lifecycle maintenance cost (based on 1% of replacement costs) is approx $600,000/annum. Maintenance costs are generally related to replacement and patching of railings, guard rails, expansion joints and the repair/replacement of the roadway surface (asphalt, waterproofing membrane and concrete bridge deck). The structures meet the design and loading standards at the time of construction, but do not meet current seismic design standards. Having said that and due to the nature of the structural system (girders built into pier caps), the structure should perform relatively well in an earthquake. A summary of the anticipated costs to maintain the structure are provided below: • Yearly maintenance costs ~$25,000 per year • Short Term retrofits ~$200,000 • Maintenance required in next 5+ years ~$1 million (barrier rehabilitation) • Maintenance required in the next 15+ years - $3 million (deck and joint rehabilitation) • Seismic upgrades ~$5 million If the viaducts were retained it is estimated with the above maintenance they would have a remaining service life of 40+ years.
Page i City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
A review of the potential to remove sections of the viaducts was undertaken and it was determined that sections would best be removed at the expansion joint locations, generally located at every 3rd-4th column. The structures can be removed at other locations as well but will require some minor structural modifications. Therefore from a structural perspective there are a large number of removal scenarios. Next Steps In order to develop a preferred land use and transportation concept for the reconfiguration or potential removal of the viaducts, there are a number of elements that need to be examined in a larger context, particularly for any complete removal configuration. Cycling connections to the downtown will need to be examined to see how the Adanac bikeway can connect to the downtown with a relatively level grade Goods movement routes out to Clark Drive in the east and as far South as Great Northern Way would need to be examined in the context of the surrounding land use Land Use changes surrounding the viaducts and along Prior should be examined In order to assess these it is recommended that an overall strategy for the eastern core be undertaken. This would develop potential concepts and evaluate the benefits for land use and urban design.
Page i City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
SECTION ONE – INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background Over the past four decades, the approach to both land use and transportation planning within the downtown and central area of Vancouver has shifted away from the course taken by many North American cities. Plans for highway expansion within downtown and east Vancouver were abandoned in the early 1970s due to significant neighbourhood opposition, serving as a catalyst for change. The emphasis on accommodating the automobile waned, and a new approach to urban planning was developed in the 1980s that recognized the downtown area as a place for people to live, becoming known as “Living First.” The redevelopment of Downtown South and the former industrial lands at False Creek North and Coal Harbour for primarily high density residential use has reinforced this transformation, attracting families and people of all ages back into a livable urban environment where walking, cycling, transit, and taxis have made car ownership optional for many. The renovation of heritage buildings in Yaletown and Gastown and the continued popularity of the West End have further contributed to this regeneration, providing housing choice and access to employment, shopping, and recreation in the city centre. Additionally, the Province and TransLink, through development of the Expo, Millennium and Canada Line rapid transit lines, coupled with improvements to bus and commuter rail based transit services, have significantly improved access to the downtown for those living outside the city centre. Despite these significant land use and transportation changes, many areas of downtown still experience a daily influx of commuters who come by automobile, rather than use alternative travel modes. Since 2009, Vancouver City Council has embarked on a new phase of increasing mode choice to and within downtown through the implementation of trial separated bicycle facilities on the Burrard Bridge, Dunsmuir Viaduct, Dunsmuir Street and Hornby Street. These two-way separated bikeways allow a cyclist to travel from Kitsilano through downtown to Chinatown (or vice versa) entirely using physically separated facilities. Redeveloping and densifying Vancouver’s downtown area and increasing mode choice for its users has been the City’s planning strategy since the 1980s. However, the automobile continues to play a significant role in travel to, from and within the downtown. Legacies of past transportation planning decisions continue to inhibit the achievement of current goals regarding livability and sustainable transportation in cities worldwide. In Vancouver, this is exemplified by the provision of the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts. Cities in North America and worldwide are dealing with similar issues regarding downtown highways and viaducts. Seattle is examining the future of the waterfront Alaskan Way Viaduct, which is likely to be replaced by a tunnel. Seoul demolished the Cheonggyecheon elevated
Page 12 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
expressway and replaced it with a linear public recreation space incorporating a restored stream. In San Francisco, after the 1989 earthquake knocked down sections of the Embarcadero Freeway, it was fully removed in 1991, helping to revitalize the neighbourhoods along that section of the city’s waterfront. Toronto is reviewing the future of the Gardiner Expressway. The City of Vancouver is now examining the future role and configuration of the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts.
History The viaducts are remnants of the previously more auto- oriented focus of transportation planning and stand in contrast to the considerable change in urban form that has occurred in Vancouver’s city centre. The first Georgia Viaduct, completed in 1915, was built with streetcar tracks (never used) and accommodated vehicles, horse-drawn carriages and pedestrians. It provided east-west access to the downtown peninsula over the then existing railway tracks of the Canadian Pacific Railway. Poorly built, the original Georgia Viaduct was replaced in 1972 with the current Georgia and Dunsmuir viaduct structures. This required the removal of the predominantly African-Canadian community known as Hogan’s Alley. The viaducts were the only section constructed of the envisioned urban freeway system that would have ultimately connected downtown Vancouver to the Trans-Canada Highway, passing through Chinatown, Gastown and Strathcona. Well-organized opposition and protests in the late 1960s, uniting Chinatown business owners, neighbourhood residents and citywide activists, were successful in preventing this freeway expansion. Since then, the viaducts have symbolized the shift in the City’s priorities and have remained a constant backdrop within Vancouver while much around them has changed. This includes the rail yards and storage/warehouse industries that originally dominated the surrounding landscape, as well as the redevelopment of the Expo ’86 lands as the mixed-use, high density False Creek North and International Village neighbourhoods that now abut the viaducts. Today, the viaducts remain at the centre of ongoing change and debate regarding their transportation function and whether they should stay or if alternatives exist. Regardless of the direction ultimately selected by City Council, there exist a multitude of implications in terms of transportation capacity and connections with the downtown peninsula, linkages between surrounding neighbourhoods such as Yaletown, Chinatown, False Creek North, City Gate and International Village, and edge conditions for existing and future communities.
Page 13 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Vehicular Traffic The Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts are both designated as primary arterials and, combined, carry approximately 40,000- 45,000 vehicles a day. They currently provide a similar function to the False Creek Bridges (Burrard Street, Granville Street and Cambie Street) channelling traffic into and out of the downtown core from the areas to the east and to the south. Recent experience from the Olympics showed that when the viaducts were closed (along with Pacific and Expo Boulevards), vehicle trips into the downtown declined. However, vehicle trips that did not convert to other modes (walking, cycling and transit) shifted primarily to adjacent east-west streets. Pender saw the greatest increase with volumes more than doubling, followed by Hastings and then Cordova and Powell Streets. If the viaducts were altered or removed, could we expect a similar impact on adjacent streets? Would some of these trips occur at a different time? Where could there be potential impacts on adjacent neighbourhoods? Are there measures that could reduce these impacts?
Goods Movement Currently the viaducts are one of two routes into the Downtown core from the east for trucks greater than 15 meters in length during the daytime (7am-6pm), the other route being Expo and Pacific Boulevard. The viaducts carry approximately 700 trucks per day (90% of them between 7am and 6pm), mostly comprised of light trucks. During the Olympics, when both the viaducts and Expo/Pacific were shut down, temporary measures were implemented to accommodate goods movement, such as extended hours for commercial deliveries and temporary alternate truck routes. Truck volumes increased between the hours of midnight and 6am. If the viaducts were altered or removed, what will be required to ensure efficient goods movement? Will Expo and Pacific Boulevard be adequate, or will additional measures need to be taken such as establishing a new alternate truck route or relaxing existing restrictions relating to truck traffic and deliveries?
Transit There are currently no Translink bus routes that utilise the viaduct, however, as seen during the Olympics, transit would be a key to reduce the vehicles displaced to the adjacent streets. During the Olympics, transit trips in a 24-hour period increased by 35%, and transit mode share into downtown increased from 38% to 51%. If a full or partial closure of the viaducts were to occur, could a similar increase in transit usage be expected? What transit improvements would need to be in place to accommodate increases in transit and to ensure transit reliability on adjacent streets?
Page 14 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Walking and Cycling Both viaducts provide elevated walkways for pedestrians behind concrete barriers, and the Dunsmuir viaduct also provides a separated two-way facility for cyclists. There are additional bike routes on several other streets in the vicinity, such as Pender, Expo and Pacific, however none of these are currently separated from general traffic or provide a direct connection with low grades into the downtown core. The impacts on walking and cycling made by any changes to the viaducts will need to be considered in conjunction with existing facilities, as well as potential future facilities such as separated bike routes on Pacific and Expo as part of the Northeast False Creek (NEFC) planning process.
Planning Context The Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts are located between the existing neighbourhoods in Chinatown and International Village, and the newly emerging neighbourhood in NEFC. For land use and planning purposes, the viaducts are most closely related to NEFC and are discussed in the City’s NEFC High Level Review. The recent NEFC High Level Review Directions for the Future report (2009) includes an emphasis on sustainability, reinforcing the role of the area as a hub for events, achieving requirements for ‘job space’ and the provision of public open space and parks. Residential development is accommodated where appropriate, provided it satisfies the public interest and meets sustainability, livability, built form and architectural objectives. The Directions also identified the conversion of the under-utilized land under the viaducts to recreation. In endorsing the Directions report, Council asked that staff look for opportunities to provide more open space. Alterations to or removal of the viaducts could thus present an opportunity for the consideration of additional open space in the area. A key planning aspect of the viaducts is their urban design implications, especially with regard to their perceived “barrier” effect. Due to their height, bulk, on/off ramps, and support structures, the viaducts are an impediment to connectivity and pedestrian linkages at grade between the City Gate, Chinatown, Gastown, International Village and emerging NEFC neighbourhoods, as well as to views and the overall quality of the public realm in the area. The City’s Downtown Transportation Plan (2002) states: “The current challenge for downtown is to accommodate more people travelling to, from, and within the city without adding traffic lanes to existing bridges and roads, and also keeping congestion to a minimum.” This is a fine balancing act for an area such as Vancouver’s downtown, with its high density of employment and housing and mix of land uses, as well as its central role in the region’s economic, travel and recreational activity. Any change to the viaducts would have impacts to travel patterns and needs to be evaluated thoroughly.
Travel Trends and Patterns Almost every year for the last 15 years, the City of Vancouver has counted the number of vehicles entering and leaving the downtown peninsula (screenline count). While the downtown
Page 15 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
population and employment has been increasing, the number of vehicles entering downtown has dropped by 15%. One might conclude that this means fewer people are coming to Vancouver every day. But, counts indicate that the number of people (all modes) entering downtown during the three daily peak periods (morning, midday and afternoon) has actually increased. This is supported by Census data which indicate that in 2006, there were 12,000 more commute trips into downtown (from locations outside of downtown) than in 1996. While driver- trips remained stable over that period, travel by other modes increased (see charts which follow). Figure 1: Population and Job Growth vs. Vehicle & Person Trips Downtown Vancouver, 1996-2011 (Peak Periods: 7-9 am, 11am-1pm, 3-6 pm)
The results indicate that most people that live and work in the downtown peninsula walk to work (74% in 2006, up from 68% that walked to work in 1996). And that is from a population that almost doubled in size! A comparison of 1996 and 2006 Census journey-to-work data confirms that almost all new commute trips within the downtown (residents who live and work downtown) are made on foot or bike. There has also been an increase in the number of people walking to the downtown from surrounding neighbourhoods, with over 20,000 pedestrians walking into downtown on a typical 2010 day (Source: 2010 City screenline count).
Page 16 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Transit trips in the region are up 50% since 1999 (Source: TransLink) and that is not counting last year, which was the first full year of operation of the Canada Line and upgrades to the Expo Line SkyTrain. Census data show that most of the new commute trips into downtown over the past 15 years were taken up by transit and that walking and cycling are also picking up some of the new trips.
Figure 2: Journey-to-Work Trips to Downtown Vancouver (1996 vs. 2006)
Source: 1996 and 2006 Census data
Census data also show a near doubling of bicycle trips into downtown between 1996 and 2006, prior to the recent implementation of separated bike lanes on Burrard Bridge, Dunsmuir Street and Viaduct and Hornby Street. Although cycling makes up only a small percentage of total trips (about 4% City-wide and about 10% in some neighbourhoods), the number of people choosing to bike is growing fast. During the 2010 Winter Games, over 40% more trips were accommodated every day, but this was done with 30% fewer car trips (Source: City of Vancouver Olympic Monitoring Study). Trips on foot, bikes and transit doubled. The Games also demonstrated that Vancouverites are interested and willing to leave their cars at home when there are enough reasons to do so, and where convenient alternatives are in place. Follow-up surveys commissioned by the Board of Trade after the Games indicate that 42% of Vancouver residents changed their travel patterns during the Olympics, and that a quarter of those people have continued with those new patterns. And 61% of Vancouverites indicate that they are interested in shifting more travel away from the private car, particularly if transit services are significantly improved.
Page 17 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
These trends indicate that there may be the ability to permanently remove some of the roadway capacity into the downtown. This report provides a summary of the transportation analysis, a high level structural feasibility and a soils contamination review, which will be used to help determine the future of the viaducts.
1.2 Study Area The focus of this study is to assess travel to and from downtown Vancouver using the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts. As such, the study area generally encompasses the eastern neck of the downtown core and captures travel across the Main Street screenline1. This area was chosen to capture the majority of travel to and from the east, used by the viaducts, as well as the general vicinity of reasonable route alternatives if the viaducts were not available. The following map (Figure 3) illustrates the study area as well as the study screenline. Cambie and Granville bridges were included to capture any diverted trips from partial or complete removal of the viaducts, however, the focus of this study included the eastern CBD neck.
1 A screenline is an imaginary line used in transportation planning to delineate geographic areas and track traffic and transit volumes.
Page 18 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 3: Vancouver Viaducts Study Area and Screenline
Source: City of Vancouver VanMap (http://vancouver.ca/vanmap/)
The downtown area of Vancouver represents the largest concentration of population and employment in the Metro Vancouver region and contains the central business district (CBD). 1.2 Study Objectives The City of Vancouver needs to determine the future of the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts and whether they should be maintained, removed or altered in one form or another. Each of these options carries impacts to various accounts including traffic, land use, soils, structures, costs, community and others. The purpose of this study is to provide an assessment of the transportation, soils and structural impacts of various options for the two viaducts that will support the planning and decision making process.
The following key objectives were identified at the outset of this study:
(1) Collect data on traffic, transit, walking and biking and summarize current travel patterns including the current capacity of the road, transit and walking/cycling networks; (2) Update the City’s transportation model and forecast future traffic volumes including transit and walking/cycling; (3) Test various alternatives for the viaducts and assess potential for diversion to other routes and services; (4) Identify neighbourhoods that are most affected by diverted traffic and develop possible mitigation measures;
Page 19 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
(5) Conduct an evaluation of soils conditions around the existing viaducts; (6) Conduct a high level structural evaluation of removing or partially removing the viaducts and identify key issues; and (7) Summarize findings from the above.
Information from this study will likely help inform a more comprehensive assessment of possible future directions for the two viaducts. 1.3 Report Outline This report is divided into a number of sections as follows: Section two provides a summary of current travel patterns and trends based on available data as well as recent traffic counts and license plate surveys. Section three provides estimates of future traffic volumes based on the City’s transportation model for auto, transit and walking/cycling. Section four provides an assessment of the potential for traffic and travel to divert to other corridors and services if the viaducts were removed or altered. Section five identifies the neighbourhoods that would be most affected by the various viaduct options along with possible strategies to mitigate negative impacts. Section six provides a summary of the soils evaluation within the study area. Section seven provides a summary of the structural assessment for the complete and partial removal options. Section eight provides an overall summary of findings.
Page 20 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
SECTION TWO – CURRENT TRAVEL PATTERNS & TRENDS
This section provides a summary of travel volumes, patterns and trends that are observed on the viaducts and the eastern CBD neck. Previously available data as well as data collected as part of this study were utilized to determine the utilization of existing facilities and services. For each mode, an indication of total volumes, capacity as well as travel patterns was summarized using currently available information. 2.1 Auto Trips Total auto trips across the eastern CBD neck represent a significant share of total auto travel to and from downtown Vancouver. This represents the key land-based gateway to the downtown area as all other links are across water bodies including False Creek and the Burrard Inlet. The following sub-sections provide an assessment of total auto volumes, auto travel patterns as well as road network capacity and utilization.
Auto Volumes There are several sources of data that were utilized to determine total auto travel across the eastern CBD neck as follows:
• TransLink 2008 Greater Vancouver Screenline Survey – this regional traffic count program is conducted every three to five years and provides hourly traffic volumes including classification at regionally significant locations including the CBD cordon. Traffic volume data is collected automatically through loop or hose counters and manually to determine vehicle classification. The screenline survey is typically conducted during the fall period to track trends over long periods of time. • City of Vancouver CBD Cordon Counts – The City develops an annual summary of total vehicle traffic entering and leaving the downtown area similar to the CBD cordon. The City has installed automatic loop counters to track seasonal and annual trends in vehicle volumes. • City of Vancouver Intersection Turning Counts – City staff and summer students collect manual turning movement counts at key intersections throughout the City during the peak periods. These counts are conducted throughout the year and are used to determine signal timing and other operational considerations.
The following chart (Figure 4) summarizes the daily two-way volumes across the key corridors in the CBD neck. As shown, the viaducts carry a significant amount (over 30% combined of the eastern CBD neck total) of vehicle volumes across the eastern CBD neck and form major east/west linkages to and from the downtown area. All together, there are over 130,000 vehicles that crossed the eastern CBD neck on an average fall day in 2010.
Page 21 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 4: Two Way Daily Traffic Entering/Leaving Downtown across Eastern CBD Neck
24,000 22,000 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 Daily Two-Way Vehicle Daily Two-Way Volume 2,000 -
* * * * St t r St rd c ll St e va der f e we e l Ke ou Viadu Viaduct* xan Po Pender St B r a Cordova St Hastings St o Pacific Blvd* Ale p nsmui Ex Georgi Du
Note: * denotes a one way link. Source: 2010 City of Vancouver CBD Cordon Counts
The following chart (Figure 5) summarizes the hourly profile of vehicle volumes crossing the eastern CBD neck and highlights the morning peak hour which is the focus for the modelling and capacity analysis.
Page 22 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 5: Total Hourly Entering and Exiting Vehicle Traffic Across Eastern CBD Neck
6,000 AM Peak Hour Outbound Traffic Inbound Traffic 5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000 Total Traffic Volume per Hour
1,000
0 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Time of Day
Source: 2010 City of Vancouver CBD Cordon Counts
Local Auto Travel Patterns License plate surveys were conducted at both the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts in order to better understand local travel patterns. More specifically, these surveys helped determine the key corridors where people were coming from and going to when using either viaducts. The following license plate survey data was collected:
• Georgia Viaduct – License Plate Surveys were collected on Wednesday, 26 January 2011 from 07:00-09:00 and 16:00-18:00. • Dunsmuir Viaduct - License Plate Surveys were collected on Wednesday, 19 January 2011 from 07:00-09:00 and 16:00-18:00.
The following map (Figure 6) illustrates the locations where surveyors collected license plate information using Dictaphone technology.
Page 23 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 6: Local License Plate Survey Locations
Source: Creative Transportation Solutions
No less than a 92% sampling rate was achieved at all survey locations with a total of nine out of 34 locations achieving 100% sampling of vehicle license plates. Survey information was transcribed into spreadsheets and then plates were matched to determine the percentage of trips using various corridors for entering and exiting the viaducts. The following map (Figure 7) summarizes the local travel patterns of vehicles using the Georgia Viaduct during the morning and afternoon peak periods.
Page 24 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 7: Local Travel Patterns for Trips Using the Georgia Viaduct
AM Peak Percent PM Peak Percent Entering Link Exiting Link 1% 87% 2% 3% 85% 3%
12% 51% 12% 63%
4% 4%
14% 8% 28% 22%
Note: percentages represent trips using key corridors for entering and exiting the Georgia Viaduct. Percentages add up to 100% for total entering and exiting vehicles.
Key findings from the local license plate survey on the Georgia Viaduct during the morning and afternoon peak periods include the following: • Of all morning peak entering vehicles onto the Georgia Viaduct, 87% come from EB Georgia, 12% come from NB Beatty St and only 1% from SB Beatty St; • Of all afternoon peak entering vehicles onto the Georgia Viaduct, 85% come from EB Georgia, 12% come from NB Beatty St and 3% from SB Beatty St; • Of all morning peak entering vehicles onto the Georgia Viaduct, 51% exit EB on Prior St, 28% exit SB on Main St, 14% exit EB on Terminal Ave and the rest to SB on Station St and NB Main St; • Of all afternoon peak entering vehicles onto the Georgia Viaduct, 63% exit EB on Prior St, 22% exit SB on Main St, 8% exit EB on Terminal Ave, 4% exit SB on Station St and 3% on NB Main St; and • Overall, for both time periods, the majority of vehicles enter from EB Georgia and exit via EB on Prior St and SB on Main St.
The following map (Figure 8) summarizes the local travel patterns of vehicles using the Dunsmuir Viaduct for the morning and afternoon peak periods.
Page 25 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 8: Local Travel Patterns for Trips Using the Dunsmuir Viaduct
AM Peak Percent 93% PM Peak Percent 2% 93% Entering Link 1% Exiting Link
5% 1% 6% 5%
53% 37%
4% 4%
15% 25% 26% 29% Note: percentages represent trips using key corridors for entering and exiting the Dunsmuir Viaduct. Percentages add up to 100% for total entering and exiting vehicles.
Key findings from the local license plate survey on the Dunsmuir Viaduct during the morning and afternoon peak periods include the following: • Of all morning peak entering vehicles onto the Dunsmuir Viaduct, 53% come from WB Prior St, 26% come from NB Main St, 15% come from WB Terminal Ave and the rest come from SB Main St, WB Union St and NB Station St; • Of all afternoon peak entering vehicles onto the Dunsmuir Viaduct, 37% come from WB Prior St, 29% come from NB Main St, 25% come from WB Terminal Ave and the rest come from SB Main St, WB Union St and NB Station St; • Of all morning peak entering vehicles onto the Dunsmuir Viaduct, 93% exit WB on Dunsmuir St, 5% exit SB onto Beatty and 2% exit NB onto Beatty St; • Of all afternoon peak entering vehicles onto the Dunsmuir Viaduct, 93% exit WB on Dunsmuir St, 6% exit SB onto Beatty and 1% exit NB onto Beatty St; • Overall, for both time periods, the majority of vehicles continue WB on Dunsmuir St. • For the morning peak period, the majority of vehicles enter from WB Prior St and NB Main St and for the afternoon peak period, the majority of vehicles enter from WB Prior St, NB Main St and WB Terminal Ave.
CBD Cordon Travel Patterns
Page 26 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Additional license plate data was collected on Wednesday, February 9th to better understand travel patterns to and from the downtown area. More specifically, license plates were collected at each of the viaducts as well as the other downtown bridges including Lions Gate, Burrard St, Granville St and Cambie St in order to estimate the amount of through trips. Figure 9 summarizes the results of collecting and matching license plate data at the Dunsmuir and Georgia viaducts for the morning and afternoon peak hours respectively.
Figure 9: AM Peak Dunsmuir and PM Peak Georgia Viaduct Travel Patterns
4% 4%
87% to Internal AM 89% from Internal PM
4% 2% 2% 3% 3% 2%
Based on the survey results, of all trips using the Dunsmuir Viaduct during the morning peak period, 87% stay within downtown Vancouver. Of the remaining westbound through trips, 2% travel across Cambie, 3% travel across Granville, 4% travel across Burrard and 4% travel across the Lions Gate Bridge.
Of the total trips entering the downtown area via one of the bridge crossings, only 3% are continuing on to use the Georgia Viaduct. Out of all Georgia Viaduct auto users during the afternoon peak, 3% are coming from Cambie, 2% are coming from Granville, 2% are coming from Burrard, 4% are coming from the Lions Gate Bridge and the remaining 89% are coming from within the downtown area.
Full license plate data was also collected on the same date to better understand the origins of commuters using the Dunsmuir Viaduct for the morning peak period. A total of 2,910 complete six digit license plate surveys were conducted between 7:00 and 9:00 am. This data was forwarded to ICBC who then matched the license plates to the registered owner’s forward sortation area (first three digits of owner’s postal code). This aggregate information was mapped, as shown in Figure 11, to highlight trip origins of Dunsmuir Viaduct users throughout the Metro Vancouver region. The following chart (Figure 10) summarizes the Dunsmuir
Page 27 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Viaduct trip origins based on the full license plate surveys. As shown, there are a large number of short distance trips from within Vancouver. Burnaby/New Westminster and the Northeast Sector represent 34% of total trips resulting in 78% of all trips coming from the Burrard Peninsula. The remaining 22% of trips using the Dunsmuir Viaduct originate from outlying areas including Langley/Surrey, North Shore, Richmond, Delta, Maple Ridge, Pitt Meadows and others.
Figure 10: Total Trip Origins of Autos using Dunsmuir Viaduct during AM Peak
1,200
44% 1,000
800
600 22%
400 12% 7% 200 5% 5% 3% 2% 2%
Morning Peak Trips on Dunsmuir Viaduct Dunsmuir Peakon Trips Morning 0
er st re d v e o n rrey h elta itt M ector u S D P cou S /S Others ew W y h chmo an i le R/ V le ort R p heast N ort Lang Ma rnaby/N u N B
Page 28 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 11: Approximate Origins of AM Peak Dunsmuir Viaduct Users
Page 29 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Road network Capacity The capacity of the road network across the CBD neck is largely determined by the number of lanes, intersection configuration, pedestrian volumes, transit vehicles, parking as well as signal timing. Capacity along each link across the CBD neck screenline was estimated based on maximum observed flows. These capacities were confirmed through coding and application of the Synchro traffic operational software to estimate theoretical capacity. Table 1 summarizes the maximum observed traffic flows across the CBD neck in both the eastbound and westbound direction.
Table 1: Maximum Observed Traffic Flows on Corridors Eastbound Westbound # Per 85% 85% # Per 85% 85% Corridor Lanes Total Lane Total per lane Lanes Total Lane Total per lane Data Source Alexander* 1 160 160 136 136 1 298 298 253 253 Cordova/Powell** 3 1,534 511 1,304 435 3 1,541 514 1,310 437 From Olympic Hastings 2 1,544 772 1,312 656 2 1,346 673 1,144 572 screenline Keefer 2 624 312 530 265 2 445 223 378 189 Pender 1 652 652 554 554 1 706 706 600 600 Estimate only Expo/Pacific*** 3 2,118 706 1,800 600 3 2,118 706 1,800 600 (see note) 2010 Fall Dunsmuir/Georgia 3 1,912 637 1,625 542 2 1,537 769 1,306 653 screenline Notes: *Both the EB and WB peak for Alexander occurred outside of the peak (1-2pm on Sunday Feb 14th) and was much higher than typical volumes. Presumably this spike can be attributed to a temporary closure on an adjacent street, which caused vehicles to reroute to Alexander. The fact that volumes were still high in the following hour (2-3pm) and that the spikes in both directions occurred concurrently seem to corroborate this. **Powell is restricted down to 2 lanes as it approaches Gastown (past Carrall) Similarly, Cordova is restricted until it exits Gastown. *** Expo/Pacific volumes are estimates only : both corridors were underutilised during screenline counts. Estimate is based on ~700 vehicles/lane/hr in an "absolute maximum" scenario, correlating with actual volumes observed on Dunsmuir/Georgia, Hastings and Pender, resulting in 600 vehicles/hr/lane for the 85% scenario, which should be a high enough level to simulate peak usage but not so high as to cause significant congestion/declines in level of service
There appears to be significant variation in terms of the maximum observed traffic flows per lane and this would largely be reflected in the configuration of the corridor as well as the surrounding environment. The maximum observed flow along any one lane ranges from a low of 160 along Alexander St to a high of 769 along Dunsmuir St. Again, this variation in flows is largely reflected in the configuration of the roadway which includes many factors.
Road Network Utilization Based on the count data and observed maximum flow data from above, an estimate of the current rate of road network utilization was estimated and illustrated in Figure 12. Based on current volumes, there appears to be spare capacity on the parallel corridors in the study area. Expo Blvd in particular seems to be underutilized as an east/west gateway to the downtown area.
Page 30 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 12: Road Network Capacity and Utilization – Main St Westbound AM Peak
Maximum Observed Flow 2,200 2,000 Utilization 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400
Veh/hr (Westbound) Veh/hr 200 -
d St St lv n in St n B ai a ai iaduct V t/M t/M r S S Expo er St/Main St g St/M mui n er s nd sti a Powell H Pender St/Main StKeef Dun Alexa
Roadway Name
Note: Maximum observed flows recorded during the 2010 Winter Olympics and provide a gauge of the actual capacity of each roadway corridor across the Main St neck. 2.2 Transit Trips The downtown area of Vancouver has the highest levels of transit service both in terms of the types of services as well as the amount of services. Frequencies are generally configured to accommodate peak hour peak The downtown area also has the highest amount of transit ridership in the region given the levels of service and capacity, high population and employment density, high parking charges and limited roadway capacity.
Transit volumes The amount of passengers using transit services was summarized using manual point check information from the 2008 Greater Vancouver Screenline Survey. This information provided the number of passengers by route crossing the study area screenline by 15-minute intervals. The following two charts (Figure 13 and 14) illustrate the hourly passenger volumes on key routes across the study area screenline.
Page 31 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 13: Westbound Hourly Transit Passenger Volumes
10,000 4.00 WCE WB 9,000 4.40 Hastings WB 8,000 4.50 Pender WB 7,000 4.10 SkyTrain WB 6,000 4.10 SkyTrain WB 5,000
4,000
3,000 Passenger Volumes per Hour per Volumes Passenger 2,000
1,000
0 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Time of Day
Transit volumes across the Main St screenline are very peak oriented, suggesting that most trips are for commuting to work or school. During the morning and afternoon peak hours, SkyTrain carries almost 60% and 70% of the total transit volume respectively.
Page 32 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 14: Eastbound Hourly Transit Passenger Volumes
10,000 4.00 WCE EB 9,000 4.40 Hastings EB 8,000 4.50 Pender EB 7,000 4.10 SkyTrain EB 6,000 4.10 SkyTrain SB 5,000
4,000
3,000 Passenger Volumes per Hour Volumesper Passenger 2,000
1,000
0 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Time of Day
Transit Travel Patterns Transit travel patterns were summarized using information available from the 2008 Trip Diary survey. Since the survey was conducted in 2008, pre-Canada Line, any SkyTrain trips to or from downtown would have had to have used the Expo SkyTrain Line across the study area screenline. As such, applying this condition and querying the data shows the percentage of SkyTrain users’ origins and destinations as shown in Figure 15. The majority of trips (39%) are from and to the Burnaby/New Westminster sub-area on a daily basis with the next highest origin/destination being the remainder of Vancouver (30%). Surrey also is a major origin/destination for Expo line users accessing the downtown area (16%).
In terms of trip purposes, the majority of Expo SkyTrain Line users to and from the downtown area are travelling for work and post secondary purposes. The next largest trip purpose is personal business as shown in Figure 16.
Page 33 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 15: Daily Origins and Destinations of Expo SkyTrain Line Users Accessing the Downtown Area
40% Percent Originating 35% Percent Destining
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
L y er est tor eys Van CBD t Van Delta gl /Surre es orth ichmond Lan W N New W R hite Rock couver/UE east Sec South ple R/Pitt M outh Fraser S N Delta ry/W Ma n/North Fras Van io urnaby/ North B S Sur Miss Chilliwack/
Figure 16: Trip Purposes of Expo SkyTrain Line Users Accessing the Downtown Area
70% Trips Orginating 60% Trips Destined
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% To Work/PS From Work/PS During Work To School From School Personal Business
Page 34 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Service Coverage and Capacity The downtown area of Vancouver is serviced by a variety of different transit service types ranging from community shuttles to rapid transit as shown in Figure 17 below. The key services include the following: • Expo/Millenium SkyTrain – line that provides rapid transit service approximately every two minutes across the Main St screenline during the peak hours between King George and Vancouver Community College to Waterfront station. • West Coast Express – peak period/peak direction commuter rail service from Mission City to Waterfront Station approximately every 30 minutes. • Express Bus – limited stop service along Hastings St using articulated buses with higher capacity to accommodate longer distance commute trips. • Regular Bus – service along key corridors including Cordova, Hastings and Pender Streets using standard and trolley 40 ft buses. • Community Shuttle – local transit service using smaller vehicles that provide local area coverage and connections to regional services.
Figure 17: Transit Services in the Study Area
Page 35 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Source: TransLink Website (http://www.translink.ca/en/Schedules-and-Maps/Transit-Maps/System- Maps.aspx)
The capacity of transit services was estimated based on scheduled frequencies along each corridor of the CBD neck. The following table (Table 2) provides a summary of the transit routes, frequencies and approximate capacities for the morning peak period that service each of the corridors west of Main Street.
Table 2: Summary of AM Peak Transit Services, Frequencies and Capacities Corridor Cap Corridor Service Type(s) Dir Veh/hr(1) Cap/Veh(2) (pass/hr) WB 15 150 2,250 West Coast Express Commuter Rail EB - - - Alexander Street None Powell Street Regular Bus WB 16 62 990 Cordova Street Regular Bus EB 41 62-96 2,640 WB 48 62-96 5,230 Hastings Street Reg/Express Buses EB 34 62-96 3,020 Pender Street Regular Bus WB 25 62 1,530 Keefer Street None Union Street None Dunsmuir Street None Georgia Street None WB 39 85-144 16,000 Expo Line SkyTrain EB 33 85-144 14,700 Quebec Street Community Shuttle WB 6 28 168 WB 149 28-150 26,170 Main St Corridor Totals EB 108 62-96 20,360 Notes: (1)SkyTrain is shown as trains per hour with a combination of 4- and 6-car Mark I and 4-car Mark II trains. An additional six short-turn trains are run between Commercial-Broadway to Waterfront per hour. (2)Capacity for West Coast Express is seated capacity plus 10 standees per passenger car given that it is a premium, long distance commuter service. For all other services, capacity is measured as seated plus standing. For SkyTrain service, capacity is based on a combination of various train consists using Mark I and Mark II vehicles.
Transit Service Utilization This section provides an assessment of how well utilized current transit services are that cross the study area screenline. The capacity of services was based on the scheduled number of trips across the screenline for both seated and total vehicle capacities. By showing the seated and total capacity relative to usage, it is easy to see how many passengers are required to stand and how much spare capacity is available along each corridor. Figure 18 shows the morning peak hour transit service capacity, both seated and total, for each corridor along with the number of passengers per hour, or utilization.
Page 36 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 18: Transit Service Capacity and Utilization – Main St Westbound
16,000 14,000 Total Capacity Utilization 12,000 Seated 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000
Pass/hr (Westbound) -
s* n St ai es r Skyt Expr Pender Hastings St Quebec St
Coast est W
Transit Corridor
As shown in the above chart, transit services going across the Main St screenline are generally well utilized with standing room only. The SkyTrain line carries the majority of passengers across this screenline with almost 60% of total inbound passenger trips. 2.3 Walk and Bike Trips Walking and cycling trips in downtown Vancouver are both on the rise given changes in land use and the supply of better quality and safer cycling facilities. The following chart (Figure 19) summarizes the morning peak hour inbound walking and cycling trips along key corridors in the study area. As shown in Figure 19, the Dunsmuir viaduct is a popular non-motorized facility for travel to the downtown area.
Page 37 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 19: Morning Peak Hour Inbound Walking and Cycling Flows
200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
t ll St S a r ll vard Pedestrians and Cyclists per (Inbound)Hour and Cyclists Pedestrians eaw nde owe Viaduct S a Keefer St r P astings St Pender St Boule H Alex xpo E Dunsmui
Source: 2010 City of Vancouver CBD Cordon Counts
Walk and Bike Travel Patterns A roadside survey of cyclists and pedestrians was conducted on the Dunsmuir Viaduct from 06:00 to 10:00 on February 8th, 2011 in order to better understand the travel patterns of viaduct users and their demographic profile. A total of 109 surveys were completed out of a total of 411 viaduct users representing a 27% sampling rate. For each person surveyed, the following information was collected: (1) Mode of travel (walk or bike) (2) Direction of travel (inbound or outbound) (3) Gender (male or female) (4) Age group (0-12, 13-17, 18-24, 25-44, 45-64 or 65+) (5) Time of survey (to nearest 15-minute increment) (6) Trip purpose (Commute to work, Commute to home, Business trip, Commute to school, Shopping/leisure/social or other) (7) Origin and destination (address, nearest cross street or monument) (8) Was the viaduct used for the return trip later in the day (yes or no) (9) If yes to (8), what time is the return trip made (to nearest 15-minute increment) (10) Which approximate (bike) route was used to access the viaduct
Page 38 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
The following results were summarized from the two-way bike and walk road side survey on the Dunsmuir Viaduct: • 94% were bike trips, 6% were walk; • 93% of trips were inbound, 7% were outbound; • 61% were males, 39% were females; • 27% were between 18-24, 62% were between 25-44 and 11% were between 45-64 years of age; • 98% were for commuting to work, 1% were business trips and 1% were for commuting to school; and • 89% used the Dunsmuir Viaduct for their return trip later in the day, mostly between 5:00 and 6:00 pm. Because of the time of year and cold and grey weather patterns, the survey results are likely skewed to capture more utilitarian travel reflected in the high proportion of work trips. If the survey were to be conducted during the summer peak cycling months, then perhaps the proportion of recreational and leisure trips could be higher as well as overall volumes. The hourly profile of bike and walk users of the viaduct showed that the actual peak hour fell between 7:45 and 8:45 am. The following chart (Figure 20) illustrates the volume (15-minute increments) of bike and walk users of the Dunsmuir Viaduct with the majority of trips being inbound cyclists. Figure 20: 15-Minute Flows of Cyclists and Pedestrians using the Dunsmuir Viaduct
180 Pedestrian Inbound
160 Pedestrian Outbound Bicycle Inbound 140 Bicycle Outbound 120
100
80
60
40
Control Totals(Hourly Running Total) 20
0 6:00 6:15 6:30 6:45 7:00 7:15 7:30 7:45 8:00 8:15 8:30 8:45 9:00 9:15 9:30 9:45 10:00 Time of Day (AM)
In terms of overall travel patterns, the majority of trips originated in northeastern Vancouver, generally west of Victoria Dr, north of 16th Ave and east of Main St. Not surprisingly, the majority of destinations were within the CBD area especially considering that almost all trips surveyed were for work purposes. Figure 21 on the following page provides a map showing the origin and destination locations of survey respondents. Most trip origins and destinations fell
Page 39 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
within a 2.5 km radius of the Dunsmuir Viaduct with some notable exceptions included bike trips that originated in North Vancouver, Burnaby Mountain and New Westminster.
Page 40 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 21: Origins and Destinations of Bike and Walk Trips Using Dunsmuir Viaduct During AM Peak Period
Note: circle shows 2.5 km radius from Dunsmuir Viaduct.
Page 41 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Cycling and Walking Facilities There are several options for cyclists and pedestrians to access the downtown area across the eastern CBD neck. The key cycling routes into and out of the downtown area consists of the Dunsmuir Viaduct and the Seaside routes, which are the only separated bike routes across this screenline. The secondary routes consist of the Pacific Blvd, Expo Blvd and Pender St bike lanes which are marked wide curb lanes that, in some cases, share road space with parking lanes. Cyclists are permitted to use any of the other public roadways, however because of high vehicle volumes and lack of safe and convenient facilities, these are not highly utilized. Figure 22 provides a map showing the City of Vancouver bike routes within the study area. As for pedestrian facilities, all roadways generally contain sidewalks on both sides at a width of 1.5 metres or more. This is the standard throughout the City of Vancouver that provides for adequate walking facilities along key routes in the study area. All signalized intersections also contain pedestrian crossings, most of which also contain pedestrian activated signals to provide walk/don’t walk signals for safe roadway crossing. Both viaducts contain a sidewalk that is separated from other traffic with concrete dividers. This provides the only separated and exclusive walking facility across the study screenline that is elevated.
Page 42 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 22: Bike Routes and Facilities within the Study Area
Source: City of Vancouver Website (http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/transport/cycling/bikeways/documents/2011BikeMap.pdf)
Page 43 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
SECTION THREE – FUTURE TRAFFIC
In terms of future traffic and travel volumes, the City of Vancouver Sub-Area model was updated to produce forecasts of travel activity. A thorough description of the development and calibration of the most recently available City of Vancouver sub-area model is available in “City of Vancouver, Consulting Services for Future Travel Demand Modelling and Analysis”, Ward Consulting Group, November 2007. This section provides a discussion regarding the further update of the City’s sub-area model and subsequent analysis of future options for the viaducts.
3.1 Model Update The City of Vancouver sub-area model was updated and validated to reflect most recently observed travel and traffic conditions. The following sub sections describe the assumptions, as well as the key updates, in the transportation model used in this study.
Land Use Assumptions Changes to land use provide the key drivers of growth and change in travel activity. The downtown area has capacity to grow significantly which is reflected in the following table that summarizes current and future population and employment for downtown Vancouver and the rest of the region from both the model and updated City of Vancouver/Metro Vancouver numbers. As shown in Table 3, population and employment in the downtown area is expected to grow by 7% and 8% respectively over the next ten year period as reflected in the model. This growth in people and jobs will result in more travel to and from the downtown area as predicted by the transportation model. Given that the more revised land use numbers show even higher anticipated growth in people and jobs, the total number of trips to and from downtown Vancouver may very well be higher than what is predicted by the model.
Table 3: Population and Employment Assumptions for Downtown Vancouver and the Metro Vancouver Region (Thousands) Model Numbers CoV Revised Population 2011 2021 Change 2010 2021 Change Downtown 113 121 8 (+7%) 108 125 17 (+16%) Region 2,410 2,780 373 (+15%) 2,370 2,780 410 (+17%) Employment 2011 2021 Change 2010 2021 Change Downtown 154 166 12 (+8%) 172 188 16 (+9%) Region 1,222 1,411 189 (+15%) 1,249 1,448 199 (+16%)
The following map (Figure 23) illustrates the distribution of population and employment growth for each of the traffic zones within the Vancouver sub area model. The locations of
Page 44 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
people and jobs also provides context around key areas where growth in trip productions and attractions will occur in the future.
Page 45 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 23: Allocation of Population and Employment Growth by Traffic Zone
Page 46 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Road Network Assumptions The model was updated with revised volume-delay functions (vdfs) and turn penalty functions in order to provide a good fit with observed turn volumes in the study area. This is a similar approach used in the Coquitlam sub-area model to achieve a close fit with observed through and turn volumes along key corridors. The overall approach is to revert all intersection-based vdfs to free flow capacity and then update turn penalty functions to reflect turn delays including through movements. The following provides the overall formulation for the turn penalty functions used in the updated mode:
TPn = (0.1 + (turn volume)/(n*100))^4 where: TP = turn penalty delay in minutes n = number of 100 turning vehicles
As the turn volume approaches capacity, the turn delay begins to rise exponentially reflecting actual turn delay. This general formulation was used along with the Sunchro operational model to update and validate the sub area model and ultimately provide a better fit to observed turn volumes.
Transit Network Assumptions The transit network is assumed to expand significantly over the next ten year period considering current plans and commitments. This expansion of transit capacity will allow more people to travel to and from downtown Vancouver using transit as opposed to driving. The following map (Figure 24) highlights the key transit network assumptions in the model between the 2011 base year to 2021. These rapid transit and rapid bus lines were coded into the 2021 base case scenario and were included in all of the test scenarios as well.
Page 47 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 24: Map of Future Transit Assumptions
Hastings St Rapid Bus
Rail Rapid Transit Rapid Bus
Evergreen Line
Broadway/ UBC Line 41st Ave Rapid Bus
3.2 Model Validation A number of sources of data were used to validate the updated City of Vancouver sub area model. The following sub sections provide a summary of each indicator used to validation the transportation model. Auto Volumes Auto volume data from the most recent downtown cordon counts was used to validate the sub- area model. Table 4 below summarizes the observed and modelled vehicle volumes at key locations within the study area. Generally the modelled volumes reflect the observed values with a few exceptions. The False Creek bridges in particular are over predicting volumes by 18% and 28% in the inbound and outbound directions respectively. This is likely due to the sub-area model being validated previously to higher automobile volumes available in 2004. Since then, auto volumes have reduced significantly and the updates to turn penalty functions were focused more around the Main St corridor where the impacts of any changes to the viaducts are more pronounced.
Page 48 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Table 4: Auto Volume Validation
Total Vehicles Cap Obs Mod Diff % Diff Abs Alexander St 300 40 120 200% 80 Powell St 1,540 1,250 1,230 -2% -30 Hastings St 1,350 720 620 -14% -110 Pender St 710 320 230 -28% -90 Keefer St 450 100 10 -90% -90
Inbound Expo Blvd 2,120 750 950 27% 210 Dunsmuir Viaduct 1,700 1,510 1,630 8% 120 False Creek Bridges 7,690 6,230 7,340 18% 1,100 Total 15,840 10,920 12,120 11% 1,200 Cordova St 1,530 460 460 0% -10 Hastings St 1,540 280 430 54% 160 Pender St 650 170 240 41% 70 Keefer St 620 120 270 125% 150 Georgia Viaduct 1,910 1,190 1,190 0% 0
Outbound Pacific Blvd 2,120 860 410 -52% -460 False Creek Bridges 7,690 4,580 5,840 28% 1,260 Total 16,070 7,660 8,830 15% 1,180 Note: All east/west flows are measured east of Carrall St. Source for Observed Flows: 2010 City of Vancouver CBD Cordon Counts
Transit Volumes Transit passenger volume data from the most recent downtown cordon counts were used to validate the sub-area model. The following table (Table 5) summarizes the observed and modelled transit passenger volumes in the study area. Generally the model fits well with observed conditions with modelled bus volumes on the high side. This, however, would not pose any significant issues on the modelling results as capacity in the transit assignment stage is not constrained.
Page 49 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Table 5: Transit Passenger Volume Validation
Transit Passengers Obs Mod Diff % Diff Abs WCE 2,730 2,390 -12% -340 Expo Line 10,000 10,660 7% 660 Canada Line 4,220 n/a 4,220 Total Bus 5,950 7,900 33% 1,950
Inbound Total Transit 18,680 25,170 35% 6,490 WCE ExpoLine 1,720 610 -65% -1,110 Canada Line 1,100 n/a 1,100 Total Bus 2,320 3,630 56% 1,310
Outbound Total Transit 4,040 5,340 32% 1,300 Source for Observed Flows: 2010 City of Vancouver CBD Cordon Counts
Local Travel Patterns As described in detail in Section 2.1, a local license plate survey was conducted to better understand which corridors were being utilized for trips using the viaducts. The following two sets of network plots, Figures 25 and 26, provide a summary of the corridors that are utilized to access the Dunsmuir and Georgia Viaducts respectively.
Page 50 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 25: Dunsmuir Viaduct Modelled Origins and Destinations
DUNSMUIR VIADUCT - ORIGINS
5% 100% 45% 35%
45% 15% 5% 10% 15% 30% 10% 25%
10% 10% 20%
DUNSMUIR VIADUCT - DESTINATIONS 10% 15% 30% 5%
20% 10% 40% 100%
10%
5%
Page 51 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 26: Dunsmuir Viaduct Modelled Origins and Destinations
20% GEORGIA VIADUCT - ORIGINS 5% 5% 35%
25% 5% 15% 100%
15% 10% 5%
GEORGIA VIADUCT - DESTINATIONS
10%
10% 100% 35% 5%
15%
25% 20% 5% 15%
5% 15%
Page 52 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
The following two tables, Table 6 and 7, provide a comparison of the observed and modelled local trip distribution patterns on the Dunsmuir and Georgia Viaducts respectively. These two tables demonstrate that the model is accurately replicating observed travel patterns for roads leading to and from each of the viaducts especially considering that only one day of survey data was collected and there is typically at least +/-10% variation in volumes day to day.
Table 6: Validation of Local Travel Patterns on Dunsmuir Viaduct Link Observed* Modelled Difference NB Main St 304 504 200 SB Main St 21 9 -12 WB Union St 6 31 25 WB Prior St 999 777 -222
Entering Entering NB Station St 52 83 31 WB Terminal Ave 172 209 37 Total 1,554 1,613 59 NB Beatty St 24 208 184 WB Dunsmuir St 1,453 1081 -372 SB Beatty St 89 347 258 Exiting Total 1,566 1,636 70 *Note: Observed values are the two hour license plate survey (7:00-9:00 am) divided by the peak hour factor of 1.9.
Table 7: Validation of Local Travel Patterns on Georgia Viaduct Link Observed* Modelled Difference NB Beatty 187 269 82 EB Georgia 1,357 891 -466 SB Beatty 17 31 14 Entering Entering Total 1,561 1,191 -370 NB Main 21 50 29 SB Main 326 297 -29 EB Prior 588 495 -93 SB Station 47 135 88 Exiting EB Terminal 162 160 -2 Total 1,144 1,137 -7 *Note: Observed values are the two hour license plate survey (7:00-9:00 am) divided by the peak hour factor of 1.9.
Page 53 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Downtown Travel Patterns By conducting a select-link assignment for both viaducts, a comparison between the modelled and observed downtown travel patterns is possible. Table 8 summarizes the comparison between modelled and observed trips to the downtown area for the Dunsmuir viaduct. The model provides a very close fit in terms of the total trips that travel across the Dunsmuir viaduct and stay downtown (87% observed versus 84% modelled); referred to as internal trips.
Table 8: Comparison between Modelled and Observed Downtown Travel Patterns on the Dunsmuir Viaduct Trip Destination Cambie Granville Burrard Lions Viaduct Trip Origin Internal SB SB SB Gate NB Total Dunsmuir WB 29 52 56 61 1,560 1,362 (87%) Observed (2%) (3%) (4%) (4%) (100%) Dunsmuir WB 1,635 1,367 (84%) 83 (5%) 4 (0.2%) 1 (0%) 180 (11%) Modelled (100%) Difference 4 54 -48 -55 119 75
Regional Travel Patterns The final model validation check was to assess regional travel patterns by comparing the full license plate survey results conducted only on the Dunsmuir Viaduct against the model. Figure 27 shows the full license plate survey results which provided the vehicle registration home forward sortation area (first three digits of the postal code) versus the model. Some caution should be noted as the full license plate survey only provided the vehicle registered owner’s home address which only provided a proxy for trip origin. As shown in the chart, the model generally fits very closely to the full license plate survey results and accurately replicates observed regional travel patterns.
Page 54 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 27: Comparison of Regional Observed vs Modelled Travel Patterns on Dunsmuir Viaduct
900 52%
800 44% 700 Adjusted Survey
600 2011Base
500 23% 400 22% 300 12% 200 10% 7% 5% 5% 5% 100 3% 2% 3% 3% 2% 2%2% 0% 0 Morning Peak Trips on Dunsmuir Viaduct Dunsmuir on Trips Peak Morning r ey rs re ve r e itt M ur Delta cou S n Oth hmond rth Sho c Va gley/ o Ri n N La Maple R/P Northeast Sector Burnaby/New West Note: Percentage indicates proportion form home or origin sub area. 3.3 Future Base Case The Business as Usual, or Future Base Case, option assumes that the viaducts are maintained and no further changes are made to the road network. The following concept map (Figure 28) illustrates the current configuration of the two viaducts and how they connect to Prior St, Main St, Georgia St and Dunsmuir St.
Page 55 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 28: Concept Map Showing Current Configuration of Viaducts
This base case scenario was run for both the 2011 and 2021 morning peak hours using the updated Vancouver sub area model to gauge the change in vehicle volumes and travel patterns. The following plots (Figures 29 and 30) show the changes to link auto and transit volumes respectively between 2011 and 2021 during the morning peak hour (7:30-8:30 am). Growth in vehicle volumes around the study area seems to be relatively stable with minor increases concentrated on a few key corridors. The Cambie St, Prior St including the viaducts, Great Northern Way, Hastings St and Pender St corridors all show growth in vehicle volumes to varying degrees. Growth in transit trips is largely focused on the Expo/Millennium line with improved frequency and capacity. The following charts (Figures 31 and 32) show the relative change in vehicle volumes between 2011 and 2021. Generally, vehicle volumes are well below maximum observed volumes for the inbound and outbound directions across the CBD neck. Inbound volumes along Powell St and Dunsmuir St exhibit conditions that are close to capacity with other corridors showing spare capacity to absorb further growth and potentially diverted trips.
Page 56 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 29: Change in Base Case AM Peak Vehicle Volumes (2011-2021)
Page 57 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 30: Change in Base Case AM Peak Transit Volumes (2011-2021)
Page 58 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 31: Inbound Vehicle Volumes and Capacities for Base 2011 and 2021
2,200 2,000 Capacity* Base 2011 1,800 Base 2021 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 Veh/hr (Inbound) 600 400 200 0
t t . St l S S ia er der St r V ings n and po Blvd x Powel ast Pe Keefer St Ex e H Al unsmui D
Figure 32: Outbound Vehicle Volumes and Capacities for Base 2011 and 2021
2,200 Capacity* 2,000 Base 2011 1,800 Base 2021 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 Veh/hr (Outbound) 600 400 200 0
t t . S ia vd V ings ia c Bl rdova S g fi ast Pender St Keefer St Co eor H G Paci
*Note: Capacity is the maximum observed volumes
Page 59 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
As shown in the network plot, there is substantial growth in transit volumes for trips to and from downtown Vancouver with only a marginal increase in auto volumes. Table 9 summarizes the trips by mode for trips to and from downtown for the 2011 and 2021 base case. As shown, the majority of new trips are by transit, with 76% of new trips being made on transit. There is also a substantial growth in walk/bike trips with more population and employment growth in the downtown area. Although past trends from actual counts show a decrease in automobile volumes, the model does predict an increase of just over 4% in vehicle-based travel as a result of land use growth. Even though past trends have shown a decrease in auto travel to and from downtown, the model predicts a slight increase. This is likely a reflection of the model not accounting for vehicle ownership which is low in the downtown area compared to other parts of the region. Overall, the total number of trips to and from downtown increases by almost 5,400 trips; an almost 10% increase.
Table 9: Changes to Mode Shares of Trips to and from Downtown Vancouver for 2011 and 2021 Base Case Trips To and From Downtown Vancouver by Mode Travel Mode 2011 Base 2021 Base Change Percent Auto Driver 18,980 19,760 780 4.1% Auto Passenger 6,010 6,230 220 3.7% Transit 27,260 31,340 4,080 15.0% Walk/Bike 2,350 2,640 290 12.3% Total 54,600 59,970 5,370 9.8%
Page 60 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
SECTION FOUR – POTENTIAL FOR DIVERSION
A number of options have been developed as part of future alternatives for the Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts. These have been developed for the purposes of evaluation and do not represent definitive or preferred alternatives at this point.
The primary goal of this analysis is to assess the potential transportation impacts of various future alternatives for the viaducts. Three concepts were developed to help assess the capacity reduction scenarios defined briefly as follows:
• 20% Removal – Bring viaducts down to connect with Main St. • 50% Removal (1) – Complete removal of both viaducts and bring down to connect with Expo and Pacific Blvds. • 50% Removal (2) – Complete removal of only the Georgia Viaduct. • 100% Removal – Complete removal of both viaducts.
The following sections describe each option in more detail and present the results from the transportation modelling and overall traffic impact assessment.
4.1 20% Removal The 20% Removal option explores the possibility of bringing the viaduct ramps down to connect with Main St. This scenario would involve the following change to the current configuration of the viaducts: • Remove the current raised connections to Prior St and Gore Ave; • Construct a new inbound ramp from the Main St/Prior St intersection to the Dunsmuir Viaduct; • Construct new two-way, four-lane link along Prior St from Gore Ave to Main St; and • Reconfigure and optimize signal timing at Prior St/Main St and Union St/Main St intersections. The following concept map (Figure 33) illustrates the 20% Removal option.
Page 61 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 33: Concept Map Illustrating 20% Removal Option
In terms of overall capacity, this option does not remove a significant amount of roadway capacity across the CBD neck screenline. West of Main St, as the viaducts maintain the current number of lanes to and from downtown Vancouver. The following network plot (Figure 34) shows the change in vehicle volumes for the 20% Removal option. As shown, the changes to vehicle volumes are localized with only a small reduction in longer distance auto trips along the Dunsmuir St/Prior St corridor. The results from the model show that only marginal vehicle trips divert to Terminal Ave and Main St as well as the Hastings St and Cordova St corridors because of increases to travel times along the Prior St/Dunsmuir St corridor. The following charts, Figures 34 and 35, show that corridor volumes do not change substantially with the 20% Removal scenario. Not enough vehicles divert to other corridors that would results in a noticeable change to levels of service on the auto network.
Page 62 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 34: Morning Peak Hour Vehicle Volume Differences with 20% Removal
Page 63 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 35: 2021 Inbound AM Peak Vehicle Volumes for 20% Removal
2,200 2,000 Capacity* 1,800 Base 2021 1,600 20% 2021 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 Veh/hr (Inbound) 600 400 200 0
t t d St l S r St ia. er e V Blv r o and eef ui p x Powel Pender S K Ex e Hastings St Al Dunsm
Figure 36: 2021 Outbound AM Peak Vehicle Volumes for 20% Removal
2,200 Capacity* 2,000 Base 2021 1,800 20% 2021 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 Veh/hr (Outbound) 600 400 200 0
t t . S ia vd V ings ia c Bl rdova S g fi ast Pender St Keefer St Co eor H G Paci
*Note: Capacity is the maximum observed volumes
Page 64 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Table 10 below shows the changes to mode of travel to and from downtown Vancouver for the 20% Removal option. As shown in the table and further confirmed with the network plots above, there is only a marginal change in the mode of travel for trips to and from downtown Vancouver. As expected, the total number of trips to and from downtown remains unchanged as no changes to land use was assumed for this and all other scenarios.
Table 10: Changes to 2021 AM Peak Mode Shares for Trips to and from Downtown Vancouver for 20% Removal Scenario Trips To and From Downtown Vancouver by Mode Travel Mode Base Case 20% Removal Change Percent Auto Driver 19,760 19,730 -30 -0.2% Auto Passenger 6,230 6,220 -10 -0.2% Transit 31,340 31,350 10 0.0% Walk/Bike 2,640 2,640 0 0.0% Total 59,970 59,940 -30 -0.1%
Summary of 20% Removal Traffic Impacts Based on the modelling analysis, there appears to be an almost negligible impact to traffic volumes with diversion limited to localized effects. There would be a minor travel time impact as vehicles would have to travel through an additional signalized intersection. There is an even less noticeable impact to transit as no buses currently use the viaducts and there is almost not diversion of auto trips to transit. Also for walking and cycling, there is no change to the current separated facilities on the viaducts.
4.2 50% Removal The next stage of viaduct removal looks at two possible options for the 50% Removal scenario. The first of these two options noted as 50% Removal (1) explores the possibility of removing both viaducts and bringing Georgia St and Dunsmuir St down to connect with Pacific Blvd and Expo Blvd respectively with new ramps. This scenario would involve the following changes to the current configuration of the road network: • Complete removal of both the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts; • Construct new ramp to connect Georgia St to Pacific Blvd with a new intersection; • Construct new ramp and flyover to connect Dunsmuir St over the SkyTrain track and connect down to Expo Blvd with a new intersection; and • Reconfigure Pacific Blvd and Expo Blvd intersections with optimized signal timings to accommodate new connections. The following concept map (Figure 37) illustrates the first 50% Removal (1) option. The new Georgia ramp will connect to Pacific Blvd at Abbott St. Depending on grades and other design features; this will likely be a complex, five-legged intersection configuration. Given the level of complexity of vehicle movements, this intersection would be a challenging and intimidating intersection for pedestrians and cyclists to cross.
Page 65 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 37: Concept Map Showing 50% Removal (1) Option
This option removes a significant amount of east/west vehicle capacity with the removal of both viaducts. The largest impact will be in terms of travel time as vehicles that previously had an approximately 1 km non-stop link between the signalized intersections at Gore Ave and Citadel Parade will now have only an approximately 400 m ramp. Furthermore, vehicles will then have to navigate through the downtown grid network with additional stop delay at five or more intersections depending on route choice. This additional delay will likely encourage some auto users to switch to transit or walking/cycling. The following network plot (Figure 38) illustrates the changes to auto volumes for this 50% Removal option during the morning peak hour in 2021. As shown there is a significant diversion of auto trips to parallel corridors to the north in Chinatown and surrounding neighbourhoods including Keefer St, Pender St and Hastings St as well as Cordova St and Powell St to a lesser degree. There is also a noticeable diversion of automobile trips to the Terminal St corridor as well as the Great Northern Way/2nd Ave corridor that utilize the Cambie St Bridge to get to and from the downtown area. Following the network plot are Figures 39 and 40 which show that there is a clear increase in corridor volumes 50% Removal (1) scenario. However, these trips that have been diverted from the Georgia St and Dunsmuir St corridors are not enough to result in serious capacity issues as all corridor volumes are still below capacity. Powell Street would perhaps be the most congested corridor with vehicle volumes approaching maximum observed volumes.
Page 66 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 38: 2021 Morning Peak Hour Vehicle Volume Differences with 50% Removal (1) Option
Page 67 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 39: 2021 Inbound AM Peak Vehicle Volumes for 50% Removal (1)
2,200 2,000 Capacity* 1,800 Base 2021 1,600 50% (1) 2021 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 Veh/hr(Inbound) 600 400 200 0
t . d St r St ia er e V Blv ir o and eef u p x Powell S Pender St K Ex e Hastings St Al Dunsm
Figure 40: 2021 Outbound AM Peak Vehicle Volumes for 50% Removal (1)
2,200
2,000 Capacity* 1,800 Base 2021 1,600 50% (1) 2021 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 Veh/hr (Outbound) 600 400 200 0
t . r St ia vd e V ef a c Bl fi Pender St Ke ci Cordova S Hastings St Georgi Pa
*Note: Capacity is the maximum observed volumes
Page 68 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Table 11 below shows the changes to mode of travel to and from downtown Vancouver for the 50% Removal (1) option. As shown there is a minor change to mode shares, albeit more significant than the 20% Removal option. The majority of diverted trips from auto users are taken up on transit. The decrease of approximately 200 total trips to and from downtown is a reflection of changing trip distribution patterns with this network change. With increased congestion, some trips to and from downtown would be made in other parts of the region; most likely shopping and recreational trips whose elasticity to travel time would likely be higher than for work and school trips. Although the model indicates that trips would be reduced, past trends have shown that with improved transportation options people will make a mode shift and continue travelling to and from downtown Vancouver. It is important that if vehicle capacity is reduced that there are other good walking, cycling and transit options that are convenient and reliable.
Table 11: Changes to 2021 AM Peak Mode Shares for Trips to and from Downtown Vancouver for 50% Removal (1) Scenario Trips To and From Downtown Vancouver by Mode Travel Mode Base Case 50% Reduction (1) Change Percent Auto Driver 19,760 19,560 -200 -1.0% Auto Passenger 6,230 6,130 -100 -1.6% Transit 31,340 31,430 90 0.3% Walk/Bike 2,640 2,650 10 0.4% Total 59,970 59,770 -200 -0.3%
Summary of 50% Removal (1) Traffic Impacts There would be moderate impacts to automobile travel with the removal of both viaducts but still providing a connection between Georgia St and Dunsmuir St to Pacific Blvd and Expo Blvd respectively according to the transportation model. The increased travel time of using these corridors diverts a portion of auto trips to alternate corridors including Keefer St, Pender St and Hastings St to varying degrees. There is only a minor change in mode shares, more importantly, however, is the additional vehicle volumes along transit corridors that causes buses to slow down. This additional congestion along alternate corridors is likely discouraging a higher diversion of auto users to transit. Both walking and cycling trips are significantly impacted due to the loss of segregated facilities. Furthermore, the new connection between Dunsmuir St and Expo Blvd over the SkyTrain tracks would be at a very significant gradient (~12-15%) that would be very challenging not only for cyclists and pedestrians, but for wheelchair users and trucks as well.
The second 50% Removal (2) option explores the possibility of completely removing the Georgia St viaduct. This scenario would involve the following changes to the current configuration of the road network: • Complete removal of the Georgia viaduct; • Convert Dunsmuir viaduct to two-way operation with one lane in each direction; and
Page 69 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
• Reconfigure intersections at both ends of the Dunsmuir viaduct to accommodate two- way operation. The following concept map (Figure 41) illustrates the first 50% Removal (2) option.
Figure 41: Concept Map Showing 50% Removal (2) Option
This option reduces roadway network capacity significantly with the removal of two lanes of road capacity with the complete removal of the Georgia viaduct. The biggest impact to auto users will be the increased travel time on the Dunsmuir viaduct with only one lane in each direction. The following network plot (Figure 42) illustrates the changes to auto volumes for this 50% Removal (2) option during the morning peak hour in 2021. As expected, there is a significant diversion of automobile trips away from not only from the Georgia St/Prior St corridor, but from the Dunsmuir St/Prior St corridor as well given the decrease in capacity. Similar to the previous scenario, there is a significant diversion of auto trips to parallel corridors to the north in Chinatown and surrounding neighbourhoods including Keefer St, Pender St and Hastings St as well as Cordova St and Powell St to a lesser degree. There is also a noticeable diversion of automobile trips away from the Terminal St corridor and an increase on the Great Northern Way/2nd Ave corridor that utilize the Cambie St Bridge as an alternate route to and from the downtown area. Following the network plot are Figures 43 and 44 that show the diversion of trips onto parallel corridors relative to the do nothing base scenario. What is clear on this diagram is that vehicle volumes inbound on the Dunsmuir St corridor are at capacity resulting in congested
Page 70 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
conditions. The parallel corridors, however, appear to have spare capacity to absorb the remaining diverted trips.
Page 71 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 42: 2021 Morning Peak Hour Vehicle Volume Differences with 50% Removal (2)
Page 72 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 43: 2021 Inbound AM Peak Vehicle Volumes for 50% Removal (2)
2,200 2,000 Capacity* 1,800 1,600 Base 2021 1,400 50% (2) 2021 1,200 1,000 800 Veh/hr (Inbound) 600 400 200 0 t t St S S d St r r v ell s e ing de ef en Pow st P Ke Expo Bl Ha Alexander St Dunsmuir Via.
Figure 44: 2021 Outbound AM Peak Vehicle Volumes for 50% Removal (2)
2,200 2,000 Capacity* 1,800 1,600 Base 2021 1,400 50% (2) 2021 1,200 1,000 800 Veh/hr (Outbound) 600 400 200 0 t t St S S a St s r r vd v e Bl ing de ef c en fi st P Ke ci Cordo Ha Alexander St Pa Dunsmuir Via.
*Note: Capacity is the maximum observed volumes
Page 73 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Table 12 below shows the changes to mode of travel to and from downtown Vancouver for the 50% Removal (2) option. There is an almost negligible impact to mode of travel with a reduction in auto trips made up by an increase in transit trips. The decrease of approximately 100 total trips, similar to the previous scenario, shows that some trips opt to divert to other parts of the region with the increase in travel times and congestion delay. As already noted in the previous scenario, improved transportation options will see people continuing to travel to the downtown area even if increased congestion might discourage auto travel. As such, it is important that if vehicle capacity is reduced that there are other good walking, cycling and transit options that are convenient and reliable.
Table 12: Changes to 2021 AM Peak Mode Shares for Trips to and from Downtown Vancouver for 50% Removal (2) Scenario Trips To and From Downtown Vancouver by Mode Travel Mode Base Case 50% Reduction (2) Change Percent Auto Driver 19,760 19,650 -110 -0.6% Auto Passenger 6,230 6,180 -50 -0.8% Transit 31,340 31,400 60 0.2% Walk/Bike 2,640 2,640 0 0.0% Total 59,970 59,870 -100 -0.2%
Summary of 50% Removal (2) Traffic Impacts There is a fairly significant decrease in vehicle capacity with the complete removal of the Georgia viaduct and conversion of Dunsmuir St to two-way operation. Essentially two lanes of east/west general purpose lanes are removed which results in fewer auto trips especially on the Prior St, Terminal Ave and Main St corridors. These trips divert to Pender St, Hastings St and Cambie St corridors to avoid the increased congestion along the Dunsmuir St corridor. Overall, however, the diversion to transit is fairly minor considering that the diverted auto trips slow buses down on transit corridors including Pender St and Hastings St. Bike trips are essentially unaffected as the two-way segregated facility on Dunsmuir St could be maintained. Walk trips lose the separated facility that is on the Georgia St viaduct, however, usage is low and they still have access to the Dunsmuir viaduct sidewalk so impacts to pedestrians are likely minimal.
4.3 100% Removal The final scenario that was tested was the 100% Removal option that considers the complete removal of both the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts. This scenario would involve the following changes to the current configuration of the road network: • Complete removal of both the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts; • Convert Georgia and Dunsmuir St to cul-de-sacs at their eastern ends; and • Reconfigure laning and signal timings at Main St/Union St and Main St/Prior St intersections. The following concept map (Figure 45) illustrates the first 100% Removal (2) option.
Page 74 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 45: Concept Map Showing 100% Removal Option
This option represents the most extreme scenario in terms of reduction to road network capacity. As such, vehicles would be forced to reroute to other corridors in order to access the downtown area. The following network plot (Figure 46) illustrates the changes to auto volumes for this 100% Removal option during the morning peak hour in 2021.
As expected, this scenario results in the most significant diversion of automobile trips to parallel corridors with the removal of both viaducts. There are significant diversions of automobile trips to Keefer St, Pender St, Hastings St, Cordova St and Powell St. There are also noticeable increase in trips to Terminal Ave as well as trips that use 2nd Ave and the Cambie St bridge to access the downtown area. Following the network plot are Figures 47 and 48 that show the diversion of trips onto parallel corridors relative to the do nothing base scenario. What is clear on this diagram is that vehicle volumes inbound on the Dunsmuir St corridor are at capacity resulting in congested conditions. The parallel corridors, however, appear to have spare capacity to absorb the remaining diverted trips. Figure 49 illustrates the changes to auto volumes for this 100% Removal option during the morning peak hour in 2031. By this horizon, the impact of removing both viaducts is further pronounced with increase auto volumes based on growth. Similar diversion patterns are observed yet the impact is amplified given the longer time horizon.
Page 75 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 46: 2021 Morning Peak Hour Vehicle Volume Differences with 100% Removal
Page 76 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 47: 2021 Inbound AM Peak Vehicle Volumes for 100% Removal
2,200 2,000 1,800 Capacity* 1,600 Base 2021 1,400 100% 2021 1,200 1,000 800 Veh/hr (Inbound) 600 400 200 0 t St t S d St l r v er el nde and e x Pow P Keefer St Expo Bl e Hastings S Al Dunsmuir Via.
Figure 48: 2021 Outbound AM Peak Vehicle Volumes for 100% Removal
2,200 2,000 1,800 Capacity* 1,600 Base 2021 1,400 100% 2021 1,200 1,000 800 Veh/hr (Outbound) 600 400 200 0
t . St r St ia vd er e V ef a c Bl and fi x Pender St Ke ci e Cordova S Hastings St Al Georgi Pa
*Note: Capacity is the maximum observed volumes
Page 77 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Figure 49: 2031 Morning Peak Hour Vehicle Volume Differences with 100% Removal
Page 78 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
One of the many consequences of these diverted auto trips to parallel corridors is that they tend to slow down buses that are using the Hastings St and Pender St corridors. The future network assumptions included a Hastings St rapid bus that would be largely immune to increased vehicle delay.
Table 13 below shows the changes to mode of travel to and from downtown Vancouver for the 100% Removal (2) option in 2021. There is a more noticeable mode shift in this scenario from auto to transit, however, there appears to be enough roadway capacity on parallel facilities to accommodate diverted trips. As such, even complete removal of the viaducts does not appear to invoke a serious shift in mode shares given the spare capacity on the remaining road network. Similar to the previous scenario, there is a drop in total trips to and from downtown as some trips are made in other parts of the region. As with the previous scenarios, providing more transportation choice would result in people continuing to travel to the downtown area highlighting the importance of providing convenient walking, cycling and transit facilities.
Table 13: Changes to 2021 AM Peak Mode Shares for Trips to and from Downtown Vancouver for 100% Removal Scenario Trips To and From Downtown Vancouver by Mode Travel Mode Base Case 100% Reduction Change Percent Auto Driver 19,760 19,540 -220 -1.1% Auto Passenger 6,230 6,130 -100 -1.6% Transit 31,340 31,470 130 0.4% Walk/Bike 2,640 2,610 -30 -1.1% Total 59,970 59,750 -220 -0.4%
Summary of 100% Removal Traffic Impacts This option presents the most significant reduction in east/west road network capacity as well as loss of segregated walking and cycling facilities with the complete removal of both the Georgia and Dunsmuir St viaducts. This scenario results in significant diversion of trips to other east/west corridors including minor roads such as Keefer St. The model results show the level of traffic dispersion that occurs as vehicle-based trips seek alternatives to access the downtown area. This scenario also results in more significant increases to auto travel times generally on the road network which results in a moderate diversion of trips to transit. Furthermore, the increased vehicle congestion on transit corridors has a noticeable impact on bus travel times which discourages further diversion of trips to transit. As a result, some transit users that were on buses on east/west corridors divert to the Expo Line where travel times are faster and more predictable. Pedestrians and cyclists are significantly impacted with the loss of separated facilities on both viaducts. Cyclists currently have no comparable separated east/west route that provides safe and convenient access to and from the downtown area across the eastern CBD neck.
Page 79 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
SECTION FIVE – TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS & MEASURES
This section provides a summary of the potential transportation impacts as a result of each of the viaduct options. A summary of possible mitigation measures is also presented as potential ways to manage some of the consequences of removing or altering the viaducts. 5.1 Transportation Impacts Removing or partially removing the viaducts will no doubt result in impacts to traffic and the surrounding neighbourhoods. People will still need access to and from the downtown area across the eastern CBD neck and most people, according to the model, will continue to use their private automobile. The previous section provided a comprehensive review of the traffic impacts of partially or completely removing the viaducts. The following sub sections provide a summary of the possible non-automobile transportation impacts for these scenarios based on modelling results and analysis.
Overall Transit Impacts The transportation modelling analysis shows that a small proportion of total trips would divert to transit because of the increased levels of automobile congestion. One of the more interesting findings through the modelling work shows that buses along key corridors such as Hastings St are slowed down by diverted automobiles. This speaks to the importance of providing enhanced transit services so that transit service levels are not compromised with the complete or partial removal of the viaducts. Recent experience through the addition of the Canada Line shows that travel patterns have changed and people would be more willing to use transit if reasonable alternatives to driving are provided. Although the overall number of trips entering and leaving the downtown has increased over the past several decades, trips across the downtown neck have decreased. Transit trips have increased across the neck but vehicle volumes have dropped further than the overall increase. Many of these trips now occur on transit trips across the False Creek screenline. The addition of the Evergreen Line connecting to the UBC Line (which connects to the Canada Line and would provide one transfer service along the Millennium line corridor out to Coquitlam), and the Hastings B-Line would likely have even greater diversion to transit than the model indicates, which is the best way to protect the neighbourhoods from possible through traffic.
Overall Walking and Cycling Network Impacts A high level assessment of alternative routes from the intersection of Main and Union Streets to the intersection of Dunsmuir and Granville Streets reveals that removal of the Dunsmuir Viaduct facility would increase travel times for both pedestrians and cyclists and require both of these groups to cross a greater number of signalized intersections and execute a higher number of turning movements. The following table (Table 14) highlights route alternatives and their estimated travel times and route features.
Page 80 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Table 14: Alternative Routes for Pedestrians and Cyclists (min) (min) Turns Cycling Facilities Direction Curb Cuts Curb Cuts Ride Time Walk Time Walk Time Alternatives Alternatives Distance (m) Distance Intersections Intersections
Main>Pender>Granville 1,770 21 9 14 3 7 1, 3 Both Union>Expo>Abbott> 1,720 20 9 12 3 10 2, 3, 0, 3 WB Pender>Granville Union>Columbia> 1,740 20 9 13 3 10 2, 0, 3 Both Pender>Granville Union>Expo>Carrall> 1,870 23 10 13 3 9 2, 3, 4, 3 WB Pender>Granville Union>Columbia> Seawall>Carrall> 2,268 28 12 14 5 10 2, 0, 4, 4, 3 Both Pender>Granville Dunsmuir Viaduct 1,515 16 7 7 0 7 4 Both (status quo)
Cycling Facility Codes: 0 None 1 Sharrows 2 Bikeway Designation 3 Painted Lane 4 Fully Separated
Travel time for pedestrians and cyclists will increase from between 25 and 44%, while the number of intersections to cross will increase by 70 to 100%, depending upon the alternative. The street segments that are included in the alternative routes, ranging from 20 to 30 metres in total width (from property line to property line) all have adequate facilities for pedestrians, including sidewalks ranging from the 1.5 metre minimum to as wide as 5 metres. Except for Columbia Street, these street segments also include variable accommodation for cyclists, including sharrows (Main Street), bikeway designations (Union Street), painted lanes (Pender Street and Expo Boulevard), and fully separated lanes (Carrall Street). The amount of vehicle travel and number of parking lanes varies between the segments, but typically includes on-street parking on both sides, and between one and three travel lanes typically 3 metres or more in width. In terms of traffic direction, pedestrian travel works well in both directions (westbound and eastbound) on all alternatives, while the alternatives involving Expo Boulevard are problematic for eastbound cycling movements, without the provision of additional infrastructure. Table 15 summarizes sidewalks, cycling facilities, parking, transit and geometric attributes of several route alternatives.
Page 81 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Table 15: Alignment Analysis for Pedestrian and Cyclist Alternatives
To From Lanes Lanes Travel Transit Facility Facility Cycling Parking Segment Sidewalks Sidewalks Total width Union Main Columbia 2x1.5 m* 2 2x3.75 m 1x3.5 0 20 Expo Columbia Abbott 2x3 m 3 1x2.5 m 3x3.3** 0 20 Pender Main Granville 2x5 m 3 2x2.5 m*** 4x3 1 20 to 25 Main Union Pender 2x4.25 m 1 2x3.75 m 4x3 1 30 Columbia Seawall Pender 2x4 m* 0 2x3.25 m 2x3 1, 2 20 Carrall Seawall Pender 2x3 m 4 2x2.25 m 2x3 0 20 Abbott Expo Pender 2x4.5 m 0 2x3.25 m 2x3.25 1 20 * Variable/changing ** Wider curb lane *** East of Abbott Street Transit Facility Codes: 0 None 1 Bus (including conventional bus and community shuttle services) 2 Downtown Streetcar (proposed alignment)
The above discussion highlights the need to provide a fully separated cycling facility if the Dunsmuir separated bike line is removed. No other east/west route provides the same level of separation from automobiles and trucks that cyclists currently enjoy on the Dunsmuir facility.
Potential Timing As we look to the future, the transportation modelling shows that a large portion of the trip growth will occur on transit. This means that the road network is able to handle capacity reductions of varying degrees by some diversion to transit, but also redirection to other streets. A reduction of 20% would have little to no impact on adjacent streets, 50% would divert a moderate number of vehicles to the adjacent streets and would likely cause some increased travel times but is within the roadway capacity. A 100% reduction would divert more vehicles but is still within the capacity of the adjacent streets and does not appear to divert enough vehicles that the current road network cannot adequately handle. The 20% scenario could be undertaken tomorrow given the level of impact, the 50% scenario due to complexity and the need to determine what the configuration would look like would take about 5-10 years before being reasonably implemented. The UBC Line, Evergreen Line and Hastings B-Line should all be in place to ensure that there are travel options available for people for the 100% Removal scenario. As such, the timing for the 100% Removal scenario is likely in the +15 yrs range.
Page 82 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Summary of Impacts In terms of overall traffic and transportation impacts, each scenario affects different users to varying degrees. To date, this evaluation has focused solely on the transportation account and there are many other aspects to evaluating these options yet to be determined. The current evaluation, does however, show the magnitude of transportation impacts for the various viaduct scenarios. Not surprisingly, the 100% Removal option has the highest level of impact to each of the user classes given that it removes the most infrastructure. The next most significant scenario in terms of impacts is the 50% Removal (1) option where the viaducts are removed and new ramps connect Georgia St and Dunsmuir St to Pacific Blvd and Expo Blvd respectively. The 50% Removal (2) option retains the separated bicycle facility on the Dunsmuir viaduct and still maintains some level of east/west capacity for auto users. The 20% Removal option has very little impact overall on the transportation network given that it only adds one additional traffic signal for automobiles and trucks and still maintains the separated bike and walk facilities.
5.2 Possible Mitigation Measures There are a host of possible mitigation measures that were explored in terms of their potential to alleviate some of the negative consequences of each option. A brief description and assessment of each measure is provided in the following sub sections.
Road Network Given the loss of roadway capacity for each option, there are several options to be explored further that help in terms of traffic flow and circulation. The following provides a description of these various options: • Turn Lane Capacity along Main St – as many vehicles would need to travel further north along Main St to parallel east/west corridors such as Keefer St, Pender St and Hastings St, additional left and right turn capacity could be beneficial. With the expected increase in volumes along the Main St corridor, additional left and right turn capacity would improve traffic flow and circulation and replace some of the capacity that might be lost from complete or partial removal of the viaducts. • Traffic Signal Optimization – with the expected changes in traffic patterns, optimization of signal timing at key intersections along Main St would also help in terms of traffic operations and minimize impacts to overall travel times between trip origins and destinations. Furthermore, optimization of signals at new intersections such as the scenario that would connect a Georgia St ramp at Pacific Blvd would be necessary to maintain adequate levels of service in these areas. • Traffic Calming – certain neighbourhoods would likely see an increase in vehicle volumes as congestion levels increase and vehicles seek to avoid congestion along main arterials. “Rat running” is common in Vancouver with its dense grid network and ability for vehicles to shortcut through neighbourhood streets. Traffic calming measures such as traffic circles, speed humps, corner bulges, partial diverters, diagonal diverters, right- in/right-out diverters, signage, complete street closures or street narrowing would help minimize vehicle volumes through vulnerable neighbourhoods such as Chinatown,
Page 83 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Gastown, Downtown Eastside, Strathcona and International Village. Rather than assume that vehicles will shortcut through these neighbourhoods, an ongoing traffic data collection program would be beneficial to monitor the level of shortcutting activity before and after the viaducts are removed or altered. If traffic on local streets increase far beyond pre-implementation levels, then appropriate calming measures can be determined at that time. The preferred alternative, however, is to reduced vehicle volumes on arterials and local roads with improved transit services. • Corridor Alternatives – there are a portion of vehicles that would likely divert to the Great Northern Way/Cambie St corridor as far upstream as Clark Dr to get to the downtown area. This seems a viable alternative as the Cambie St Bridge appears to be somewhat underutilized during peak periods. Given that the City of Vancouver’s road network is dense and provides sufficient route alternatives, one strategy would be to allow traffic to disperse onto the roadway network. Users will seek to minimize their travel time and choose alternate routes that work for them and allow the network to absorb diverted trips and still maintain reasonable travel times and congestion levels.
Goods Movement Network The Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts are one of several truck routes across the eastern CBD neck. Without the viaducts, alternate truck routes would provide connections for goods vehicles to access the downtown area from the east. 82% of truck trips to and from downtown, according to the most recent cordon counts, are light trucks which can maneuver and utilize the alternate corridors including Hastings, Pender, Cordova and Powell. The truck network will need to be examined in the context of the vision for the surrounding area as well as the broader goods movement sector. Alternate truck routes will depend on adjacent land use as well as network changes. Since the Port Metro Vancouver’s key inter modal hub is located east of the viaducts, the impact to heavy trucks and container trucks would likely be minimal. Trucks accessing these port facilities use either the Knight St corridor or the McGill/Commissioner corridor for trips further east.
Transit Network Enhanced transit services appear to provide the most competitive alternative to driving downtown and represent a viable alternative for many of the people currently driving on the viaducts. As evidence from the Canada Line and the Olympic experience has shown is that transit, when the proper services and strategies are in place, can provide a reasonable and competitive alternative to automobile usage. Removal of the viaducts leads to automobiles being diverted to alternate corridors which slows buses down on those routes. In order to maintain travel time competitiveness and schedule reliability, the following transit improvements would help to minimize impacts from complete or partial removal of the viaducts: • Hastings St Rapid Bus – transit priority measures along Hastings St would be required in order for buses to provide competitive travel times. In particular, a dedicated bus lane or queue jumpers would allow buses to maintain competitive travel times as well as schedule reliability which is an important factor in mode choice.
Page 84 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
• Pender St Transit Priority Measures – secondly, buses operating on Pender St would also likely require treatment in order for buses to maintain competitive travel times. Queue jumpers as well as curb bulges and others transit supportive features would be required for buses to maintain schedule reliability and travel time competitiveness. • Increased Expo Line Capacity – as an alternative to driving on the viaducts, the Expo and Millennium Lines would serve as a competitive mode of travel especially considering that many of the current viaduct users as indicated from the license plate surveys are within a reasonable walking distance or bus transfer from SkyTrain stations. Capacity issues, today and more so in the future, could prevent this line from providing a viable alternative to driving. As such, capacity upgrades such as higher frequencies, longer trains and stations upgrades along this line would help divert further trips onto transit and requiring less mitigation measures on the road side. • Evergreen Line – the license plate surveys showed that many current viaduct users are coming from the Northeast Sector. The planned configuration of the Evergreen Line would allow users to travel from Coquitlam and other parts of the Northeast Sector to downtown on transit. As such, the Evergreen Line would provide a competitive alternative for existing automobile users in the study area. • UBC Line – the UBC Line would likely provide a competitive alternative for transit users today who travel downtown and then transfer to a bus to get to UBC or other destinations along 4th Ave, Broadway and 10th Ave. As such, the UBC Line could provide a more reliable transit route for people to use and avoid congestion along the Hastings St and Pender St corridors.
Walking and Cycling Network As described in the previous section, the only two scenarios that show a significant impact to the walking and cycling network are the 50% Removal (1) and 100% Removal scenarios with the loss of the Dunsmuir St viaduct. Pedestrian usage on both viaducts is relatively low and would not likely result in a significant reduction in the overall pedestrian network. For cyclists, however, the loss of the separated two-way facility along Dunsmuir would be very significant. This newly implemented route provides a safe, convenient and scenic route to access the downtown area that connects well to the Adanac bike route. The viaduct also provides a comfortable grade for cyclists to climb up to the downtown plateau.
An alternate east/west corridor that is separated from traffic would be required to replace the loss of the Dunsmuir facility. Also, creating better cycling routes that appeal to a wider range of users and abilities will help to attract more cyclists in the study area and the downtown as a whole. However in the 50% Removal (1) and 100% Removal scenarios the loss of the separated facility would need to be explored further to see how cyclists may be accommodated.
Page 85 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
SECTION SIX – SOILS EVALUATION
As part of conducting a thorough assessment of options for the viaducts, an evaluation of the soil conditions within the study area was conducted by Golder Associates. Given the history of industrial land uses surrounding the viaducts, there was concern regarding the amount of contaminated soil and the potential cost of remediation.
The objective of the soils assessment was to evaluate soil conditions at the project site using available historical data as well as collecting new data by drilling boreholes and analyzing soil samples. The scope of work to conduct the soils evaluation included the following:
• Assessment and review of existing soil quality data available in existing, publicly available reports; • Conduct a soil investigation including drilling boreholes, collecting soil samples and laboratory analysis for potential contamination; and • Data assessment and reporting including documentation of historical data, subsurface investigation as well as conclusions and recommendations with respect to soil quality, estimates of contaminated soil volumes and possible remediation costs.
The overall findings from the soils evaluation include the following:
• Contaminated fill material is present between Carrall Street and Gore Avenue, within the Project Site and along the alignments of both the Georgia Street and Dunsmuir Street Viaducts. The contaminants of concern along the alignments include metals, petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. • The lateral and vertical extent of the contaminated fill material was not determined, but an estimate of the potential remediation costs associated with fill removal to facilitate redevelopment was prepared based on the information available and assumptions with respect to redevelopment. • When plans for the redevelopment of the area are refined, the data and assumptions used in the high-level remedial cost estimate should be reviewed, in detail, to evaluate what further work may be required to address the contamination and/or refine the estimates.
High level soil remediation costs were calculated and estimated for the Western Project Site Area (Pacific Place Site) as follows: • Beneath the Dunsmuir Viaduct: Approximately $550,000 to address contaminated soil issues; and • Beneath the Georgia Viaduct: Approximately $1,100,000 to address contaminated soil issues.
High level soil remediation costs were calculated and estimated for the Eastern Project Site Area as follows: • Beneath the Dunsmuir Viaduct: Approximately $2,100,000 to address contaminated soil issues; and
Page 86 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
• Beneath the Georgia Viaduct: Approximately $160,000 to address contaminated soil issues.
A comprehensive soils evaluation report prepared by Golder Associates is titled “Vancouver Viaduct Study Soil Quality Assessment, Golder Associates, March 2011” and available from the City of Vancouver Strategic Transportation Department.
SECTION SEVEN – STRUCTURAL EVALUATION
As part of evaluating the various viaduct options, a thorough structural evaluation was conducted to determine feasibility, cost and schedule implications. In this context, three options to be evaluated were as follows: Option 1 - 100% Removal of viaducts; Option 2 - 50% Removal – Connect viaducts to Expo and Pacific Boulevard; and Option 3 - 20% Removal – Bring Viaducts down to Main Street.
Infinity Engineering Group Ltd. was retained to provide structural expertise in regard to the three different future scenarios (Options 1 to 3) for the Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts. Infinity evaluated each option for feasibility, cost and schedule implications and in regard to public interference. The following summarizes the overall results of this evaluation:
Option 1 (100% Removal of viaducts) • Feasibility: Yes • Construction Cost: Considerable (Georgia: $6 M / Dunsmuir: $6 M) • Construction Schedule: Moderate (Georgia: 9 months / Dunsmuir Viaduct: 9 months) • Public Interference: Considerable
Option 2 (50% Removal - Connect viaducts to Expo and Pacific Boulevard) • Feasibility: Questionable • Cost: Significant (over $20 M) • Schedule: Considerable (over 24 month) • Public Interference: Significant
Option 3 (20% Removal - Bring Viaducts down to Main Street) • Feasibility: Yes • Cost: Moderate (less than $10 M) • Schedule: Moderate (less than 18 month) • Public Interference: Low
Option 1 provides the best opportunities for redevelopment and promises the highest return on investment. However, cost, public interference and the reduction in traffic lanes are considerable. Removal of West abutments would require new retaining walls to satisfy structural and aesthetic requirements.
Option 2 is a compromise that attempts to keep the existing traffic pattern alive and at the same time providing valuable space for future development. The question remains whether the
Page 87 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
significant investment is justified and compatible with long-term development strategies for the area. The SkyTrain overpass with significant slope on the East ramp (beyond 6%) is questionable from a user’s perspective.
Option 3 is a relative low risk and an inexpensive alternative but redevelopment opportunities are strictly limited to the area East of Main Street. However, this option would maintain bike lanes and direct pedestrian access from Main Street to Beatty Street. The live load capacity of the remaining viaduct portions and the condition of the expansion joint piers should be evaluated before an additional investment for retaining the old viaducts is considered.
A comprehensive structural evaluation report prepared by Infinity Engineering is titled “Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaduct Study Structural Evaluation, Final Report, Infinity Engineering Group, April 2011” and available from the City of Vancouver Strategic Transportation Department.
Page 88 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
SECTION EIGHT – SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts Study has provided an assessment of the transportation, soils and structural impacts of completely or partially removing the viaducts. One of the main purposes of this study is to simply present the information and let the reader draw their own conclusions and join the discussion. This information will also serve as a foundation piece for further review and consideration of future alternative for the viaducts as well as a more thorough assessment of impacts to land use, structures and other social, economic and environmental accounts. The following provides the salient findings from this first phase of the Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts Study: Transportation Complete or partial removal of the Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts is plausible from a transportation view point. The transportation analysis has shown that there is spare capacity within the existing roadway network for vehicles to disperse and choose alternate routes. Enhanced transit services will play a key role in supporting future travel to and from the downtown area with or without the viaducts in place. Complete removal of both viaducts would not impact pedestrians given the low volume of current users. Removal of the Dunsmuir Viaduct would have a significant impact on cyclists and a alternate separated facility will be critical in maintaining safe and convenient access for cyclists. The following table summarizes the overall transportation impacts for the three main scenarios that were investigated.
Page 89 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Table 16: Summary of Capacity Reduction Scenarios Implementation Walking/ Goods Time Scenario Description Requirements Cycling Movement Horizon 20% A 20% reduction • Minimal diversion of existing • Walking cycling • Goods 5 yrs Reduction in capacity could trips connections movement can entail removing • The majority of new trips to continue along continue to use portions of the downtown continues to be Dunsmuir. the Georgia and viaducts at the accommodated by walking, • Connection to Dunsmuir east end such as cycling and transit. the Dunsmuir viaducts with bringing them Viaduct can be minimal change down to grade improved with • New connection at Main St. changes to along Malkin intersection at Ave to Clark Main St. Drive and reclassification of Prior to Collector is possible.
50% A 50% reduction • Some diversion of existing • Walking cycling • Goods 5-10 yrs Reduction in capacity could trips to adjacent routes or connections movement can entail removing transit continue along continue to use one of the • Growth in trips to the Dunsmuir. the Dunsmuir viaducts and downtown would need to be • Connection to viaduct with converting the accommodated by walk, the Dunsmuir reduced remaining cycle and transit which may Viaduct could capacity. structure to a require implementation of be improved • New connection two-way road. current planned transit with more along Malkin investments such as the changes to Ave to Clark Hastings B-Line, Evergreen intersection at Drive and Line and UBC line and Main St. reclassification improvements to walk and of Prior to cycle routes to encourage Collector is trips to happen by these possible. modes.
100% A 100% • Requires significant • Review of cycle • Review of +15yrs Reduction reduction in diversion of existing trips to connections to Goods capacity would transit which would require the downtown movement entail complete implementation of planned required due to connections to removal as a transit investments such as removal of the downtown transportation Hastings B-Line, Evergreen Dunsmuir bike required to link. Line and UBC line, capacity facility replace removal increases on the Expo line of Georgia and and improvements to walk Dunsmuir and cycle routes • Requires increases in trips to the downtown to continue to be accommodated by walk, cycle and transit.
Page 90 City of Vancouver Viaducts Study September 2011
Soils Assessment The land area underneath the viaducts was created by significant amounts of fill and the western portion of the study area also falls within an area that is known to have contained heavy industry including a manufactured gas plant. The activities and wastes associated with this former gas plant have significantly influenced the environmental conditions in the area. The following points summarize the key findings from the soils review: • Contaminated fill material is present between Carrall Street and Gore Avenue, within the Project Site and along the alignments of both the Georgia Street and Dunsmuir Street Viaducts. The contaminants of concern along the alignments include metals, petroleum hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. • The lateral and vertical extent of the contaminated fill material was not determined, but an estimate of the potential remediation costs associated with fill removal to facilitate redevelopment was prepared based on the information available and assumptions with respect to redevelopment. • When plans for the redevelopment of the area are refined, the data and assumptions used in the high-level remedial cost estimate should be reviewed, in detail, to evaluate what further work may be required to address the contamination and/or refine the estimates.
A high level review of the soils contamination in the area indicates that the soils remediation costs for this area are likely in the range of $4 -8 million dollars if the full area was remediated to a residential standard. Structural Review The structural review of the viaducts indicates that the majority of the structure is currently in reasonably good condition. The section that crosses Main Street requires some minor retrofits in the short term and there are some other maintenance and repairs that are required. The annualised bridge lifecycle maintenance cost (based on 1% of replacement costs) is approx $600,000/annum. Maintenance costs are generally related to replacement and patching of railings, guard rails, expansion joints and the repair/replacement of the roadway surface (asphalt, waterproofing membrane and concrete bridge deck). The structures meet the design and loading standards at the time of construction, but do not meet current seismic design standards. Having said that, and due to the nature of the structural system (girders built into pier caps), the structure should perform relatively well in an earthquake. If the viaducts were retained, it is estimated with the recommended maintenance program that they would have a remaining service life of 40+ years.
Page 91