MLA says Olympic gridlock possible

Broadcast News

Tuesday, September 20, 2005

ADVERTISEMENT

VICTORIA -- A veteran B.C. Liberal MLA is warning his own government to fix congestion problems on the bridges to Vancouver's North Shore before the 2010 Olympics.

The prediction came in North Vancouver-Seymour MLA Dan Jarvis' budget response.

He points to heavy traffic on the Second Narrows Bridge sparking accidents resulting in delays that last hours, not minutes.

Jarvis says 400 buses a day may cross the bridge during the 2010 winter games and has a warning.

He says congestion or a deliberate act could leave the whole world watching as B.C. fails to get people to the Olympics.

Jarvis then remarked that all it would take is -- in his words -- "one jumper and there would be deadlock.''

Nudged by another MLA, Jarvis amended that to "gridlock.''
© Broadcast News

Getting to the North Shore and back is a pain, thank God I don't have to do it very often. Traffic will be a real consern on both bridges. I think a perminent solution is to have one way traffic on the Lions Gate Bridge and then build a tunnel under the inlet for traffic going the other direction, but it won't happen any time soon. As for jumpers they will have cops on the briges wont they?

Well thats why there's public transit and Vancouver's better than most cities at providing that. Any dumb ass that wants to drive deserves grid lock. Mind you if I lived in the area I'd either deal with it as its only during the Games (and the Sea to Sky is busy at the best of times anyway) or take a vacation like half of Sydney did during the Summer Olympics in 2000. I think Vancouver will cope quiet well. One of the things I love about it is - you don't need a car to get around in the first place, unless your really going 'bush' that is.

Oh there will be gridlock. The last time I was on the Lions Gate was last April when I was going back to Vancouver from Whistler. Gridlock, 20 blocks and 2 hours long! this was just 4 pm too.

I just wish the streetcar system was more extensive into other areas of downtown that are busy, that would help tremendously, but living in a city, the gridlock will never go away.

Move over Moses; there's a new prophet in town. I wish I could get a spot in the newspaper for predicting something that already exists or has already happened. I should get a newspaper column for my ability to predict who won various sporting events in past years.

That said, I understand this is the only way the issue will get any press. But what does he expect to happen? The govt. just announced a handful of new roads and bridges; where's the money (and time) to add more lanes to the north shore?

This is crazy.
Here we have a government planning our entire transit/transportation system based on a 10 day event. BAD URBAN PLANNING!
If things need to be built or upgraded then fine, do it. But don't do it because of a 10 day circus. That just invites political interference, waisted tax dollars, and projects going way over buget because this idea everything has to be built by 2010, with money no object.
Remember the Coqihala Highway? Bennett was damned and determined it get built by the start of Expo86 and because of all the rushing and political influence it came in triple its budget.
Look at RAV, they changed the entire "liveable region" plan to get the RAV for the Olympics instead of down Broadway { a far busier transit route} and then Coquitlam.
Not one shovel is in the ground and it has already gone from 1.5 to 1.7 to1.9 billion$.
There is no way it will come in now under $2bil.
But what $500,000,000 between friends?

^ RAV IS part of the GVRD Liveable Region plan, and right now we've got the cash to fund it unless you want to wait a few more years and then leave the whole bill to British Columbians.

And is it not fact that there is heavy congestion on the first and second narrows? In fact, 2010 is acting as a catalyst for transportation improvement in this region. We build for tomorrow, not today.

I wonder how feasible a commuter rail between Downtown/West Van - Squamish - Whistler would be. Right now, the only rail alternative available is the Rocky Mountaineer, and a round-trip costs $200-300.

There will be much more traffic during the Olympics, but it's nothing to get worried about. The games only run for 14 days. As ssiguy2 pointed out, there really is no reason to upgrade/expand our highways/roads just for 14 days of increased use. Futhermore, gridlock could be reduced in a few ways. Here are some suggestions:

-Get Translink and VANOC together and plan events that start either before peak times or after. I go across the Lions Gate Bridge every monday morning at 7:00/7:10 and there is no traffic at all. Planning some events to start at 7:00am or 7:30am would greatly reduce Olympic traffic at peak hours. Same with the reverse rush. Have events start at 2:00pm and/or 7:00pm.

-Sea bus. There has already been talk of adding another Seabus by, 2009 I think? and expanding routes. Advertising the Sea Bus as a means to the North Shore with waiting buses to take visitors to events would reduce traffic at choke points; Lions Gate and Ironworkers Memorial.

-Boat/Charters. I'm sure many companies such as HarbourLinx and other privitatly owned corporations would offer daily service between either Vancouver/North Shore or Vancouver/Squamish that would again greatly reduce car traffic. Again, buses would be waiting at Squmish and the North Shore.

-Train. Unlikely that Translink would put together commuterrail service to Whistler, but it would be nice. Otherwise there is the Rocky Mountaineer which is starting Vancouver to Whistler service next year. They are overly expensive though. They sell a journey, Translink sells a destination.

-I seem to remember reading about the Sea to Sky highway being shut down to non-corridor residents and just using buses to ferry people up the road. Finding a parking spot for all the 'park-and-ride' participants would be challenging. Perhaps relate this to public transit options.

-Air. Well, for the rich and/or those seeking an extra special Olympic experiance there is always Heli-jet and Harbour Air. But there has been some talk of building an airport in Whistler capable of landing 737's. This would be a very efficient way of transporting spectators to their destination. If this is to happen though, they better start construction soon.

Essentially, if Translink and VANOC push public transit as a means for not only tourists but residents I don't think we'll have a major issue. A big advertising campaign that draws attention to possible gridlock will definetly put some people who are worried about time saving and gas saving into trains, boats and buses.

Mr.X
As you will note I said at the beginning if a project is needed than build it but don't change plans for a 10day circus.
By pushing everything thru for these false deadlines that results in soaring prices.
RAV was part of LiveableRegions but was to take place AFTER the Broadway ext {which is a far busier route than to Richmond and Coquitlam was to be built before hand as well.
Look at how the the price of RAV has already skyrocketed and there isn't even a shovel in the ground. Even Translink has now admitted that it will only result in 30,000 new passengers a day, not the 70,000 they said when they were pitching it.
My whole point is that you build and plan for the longterm not basing everything on a 10 days. That is fool hearty and expensive.
If we need a new bridge then fine but don't make this magical date for the construction of everything. This is why there is a real shortage of construction labour right now which is sending prices on evrything going on thru the roof.
This is how we got the Coquihala over runs and SkyTrain which the city didn't want and took a route they didn't want because it was all politically based.
RAV also lied to the public by saying there would be no cut and cover on RAV to persuade the dubious to agree to it but had no intention of following thru.

You know what I'm gonna say, i've said it again and again over the past year.


And RAV is gonna happen, so suck it up.

I know its going to happen but its an example of the rushing everything for an artificial date of 10days.
You don't build infastructure for a 10day event. That is not how a city should be planned.

RAV is not being built to serve a 10 day event. Come to Vancouver, travel on Main, Cambie, or Granville during the day on transit, and see how congested it is. Most of the time you can't even get on the B-Line because it is too full. If you do manage to get on a bus, it is stop and go traffic from about 3pm to 7.

Anyone who doesn't think RAV is needed now is very unaware of the situation on these roads heading south to Richmond.

I wonder how feasible a commuter rail between Downtown/West Van - Squamish - Whistler would be. Right now, the only rail alternative available is the Rocky Mountaineer, and a round-trip costs $200-300.
I think that was something they looked into; modifying the tracks would have costed a billionish dollars, though. Instead, they are taking the natural North American route –– paving it for cars.
There will be a passenger ferry from Vancouver to Squamish, and buses from there to Whistler. There were ramblings of a ferry from the airport to somewhere, but that may have been a fever dream.

@ ssiguy OMG shut up! Your an idiot. Nobody cares what you think about RAV (except Wally, who lives in anouther country), thats all you ever talk about and its getting ridiculous. The fact is most people in Greater Vancouver support the project, and at some point a Skytrain line will have to be built from Richmond to downtown and its not going to be cheaper in 15 years.

its not going to be cheaper in 15 years.
Exactly.

If it takes the Olympics to kickstart some infrastructure projects, then you might as well take full advantage of it. Personally, I think they should be building even more while the chance is there.

…Your an idiot…[sic]…Who even knows…

Building all these projects at once does make it more expensive. The shortage of labour we've been hearing about has made construction costlier, as has increased demand on materials. So, not only do all these projects come in over budget – as we knew they would – non olympic construction also costs more, ie: houses; condos are more expensive.

And as for new transit lines being costlier and more useless than initially reported; that's a given isn't it? It's these international media circuses that keep dropping white elephants in our midsts anyway.

EXACTLY.
Like I said by doing things all at once it sends the price of everything artificially thru the roof.
Look at the ConventionCentre. Is it needed? Absolutly, but it is also already $60mil over budget.
Labour costs rise due to all the construction at once and projects are deliberatly low-balled in the cost estimates to make them more attractive to the general public. Its called politics and it comes out in full force when there is ribbon cutting to be made at an event like the Olympics.
have you noticed that the Richmond OvalRink has not even been given a pricetag!! They have said they will know when things get going......outrageous. The Sea to Sky is already $40mil over budget.
It will have to be paid sometime. All that extra money that theyn said they didn't know about would buy a lot of buses and SkyTrain cars.

^^ However, a large part of Vancouver's labour shortage is due to tight competition with Alberta. Unless Alberta's economy tanks (seeing gas prices shooting past the roof, I wonder when), I wouldn't expect labour costs to go down anytime soon.

And after the Olympics, the feds are going to ignore Vancouver anyways (just look how desparate Toronto is right now for funding)... by then, the province would be crying murder for picking up the tab of any new project, and the projects would most likely end up in limbo.

Yes, when you have the Olympics, you get much more fed funding, which more than offsets any extra construction costs.

The Olympics is the stimulus that gets these things off the ground. Sure you could try to build them in 15 years instead, but it becomes that much more difficult.

MLA says Olympic gridlock possible

He points to heavy traffic on the Second Narrows Bridge sparking accidents resulting in delays that last hours, not minutes.

Jarvis says 400 buses a day may cross the bridge during the 2010 winter games and has a warning.


Well, Buckland & Taylor Engineering has already completed a study to complete the widening of the 2nd Narrows Bridge to accomodate "8 lanes to full modern standards, which almost doubles the width, as the current lanes are substandard, and for adding transit". However, it ain't gonna happen before 2010, maybe by 2020.

http://www.b-t.com/projects/snb.htm

How much of an increase could there be? Aren't some areas already relatively gridlocked during rush hour and beyond?

If they eventually have to widen the Ironworkers, then screw it and make a third crossing at the end of main. They could put a SkyTrain or LRT line right down the middle of the lanes.
Exactly where do they propose all this new traffic goes when it gets to the Vancouver side? It will just clog the Hastings corridor.
Absurd.

If they eventually have to widen the Ironworkers, then screw it and make a third crossing at the end of main. They could put a SkyTrain or LRT line right down the middle of the lanes.
Exactly where do they propose all this new traffic goes when it gets to the Vancouver side? It will just clog the Hastings corridor.
Absurd.


well good luck to that, the city would never let that happen....and besides, twinning second narrows or expanding the platform would probably be cheaper than a new bridge that would have to go quite some distance across the strait.

^ It's an inlet. Aren't there port cranes at the foot of Main? I doubt a bridge would connect there. A more likely option is Clarke as it turns into Knight and goes on to connect to HWY 91. Main makes no sense.

When the thrid crossing was bandied about a few years ago, one of the designs had the south portal south of downtown - so that the traffic did not add to the congestion in the downtown core.

I wouldn't want to see a 3rd bridge crossing Burrard Inlet it would look ugly. They should go for a tunnel.

Well, Buckland & Taylor Engineering has already completed a study to complete the widening of the 2nd Narrows Bridge to accomodate "8 lanes to full modern standards, which almost doubles the width, as the current lanes are substandard, and for adding transit". However, it ain't gonna happen before 2010, maybe by 2020.

http://www.b-t.com/projects/snb.htm

Thanks for the link. It would be great if WEC or LRT could be extended to the North Shore. I don't think the Seabus alone could handle all the traffic. But then again, It would be great if they could build more seabus terminals around the GVRD.

^ not only that, but buy faster seabuses. god they're slow.

They need a Rapid Transit line to the north shore. I read somewhere that the Skytrain carries an equivalent number of passengers as ten lanes of car traffic. Rapid Transit is so much more efficient! It would also be much, much less expensive to build a Rapid Transit line in a tunnel than to build a highway tunnel.

^ not only that, but buy faster seabuses. god they're slow.

Yes! They're like snails in the mud.

They need a Rapid Transit line to the north shore. I read somewhere that the Skytrain carries an equivalent number of passengers as ten lanes of car traffic. Rapid Transit is so much more efficient! It would also be much, much less expensive to build a Rapid Transit line in a tunnel than to build a highway tunnel.

I'd much prefer that than another bridge/tunnel. Either we extend RAV or Expo line straight north from Waterfront Station or we extend RAV or the Expo Line by going northwest under Georgia and under the Stanley Park causeway and going under the inlet at its narrowest spot. For both situations, the line once reaching the North Shore would split in two (a T-shaped line) - going west it would terminate at the end of central West Vancouver and going east the line would eventually turn from tunnel to elevated and would terminate near the Second Narrows Bridge.



Regarding the Seabus, in Hong Kong, even those 1950s harbour ferries move faster than our Seabuses.

Here is San Francisco's refurbished transit ferry terminal:
http://www.sfcityscape.com/images/ferry_building.jpg

Here are San Francisco's ferries (and they do look a lot like the Harbour Lynx):
http://www.sfcityscape.com/images/ferry.jpg


I hope Translink isn't expecting commuters to use those Seaturtles for potentially new but much longer routes.