CRD Bridges
#21
Posted 03 May 2008 - 08:52 AM
#22
Posted 10 June 2008 - 04:33 PM
If a replacement is required it's price would be "tens of millions of dollars" and would result in a massive tax increase.
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#23
Posted 10 June 2008 - 04:47 PM
A Channel reports that the City of Victoria has requested an engineering assessment to ascertain decide whether it's life can be extended or whether a replacement is required.
If a replacement is required it's price would be "tens of millions of dollars" and would result in a massive tax increase.
Er, what are we/you talking about? The Colwood bridge?
#24
Posted 10 June 2008 - 04:50 PM
My bad.
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#25
Posted 10 June 2008 - 04:59 PM
#26
Posted 10 June 2008 - 05:53 PM
#27
Posted 10 June 2008 - 05:54 PM
Hmmm, I wonder if it's feasable to build a fixed bridge, I guess it would have to have quite a large hump(?). What's the tallest vessel that HAS to be able to get under it to go to the dry dock etc.? Obviously that would doom the train.
Not necessarily, a modern lift bridge would work.
#28
Posted 10 June 2008 - 05:56 PM
Not necessarily, a modern lift bridge would work.
What I'm getting at is forget about a mechanical lift-bridge, just build a fixed one with a hump.
#29
Posted 10 June 2008 - 06:44 PM
#30
Posted 10 June 2008 - 06:57 PM
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#31
Posted 10 June 2008 - 07:08 PM
#32
Posted 10 June 2008 - 07:15 PM
This isn't tied directly to the bridge, but when the time comes to do replace/rebuild the thing the City should get rid of that silly curve on the Vic West side and streamline the traffic flow.
With my VHF-HUMPBRIDGEivTM design, there will be no reason for it as the railway will be gone, so that leaves lots of high-elevation land area on that side. It'll have to remain 30km/h though to prevent airborne vehicles.
Here, I whipped up a 1/12 scale model in my back yard this afternoon:
#33
Posted 10 June 2008 - 07:49 PM
If the city wants to continue to promote the working harbour concept, then a lift bridge would be the best option.
#34
Posted 10 June 2008 - 07:52 PM
#35
Posted 10 June 2008 - 07:59 PM
#36
Posted 10 June 2008 - 09:02 PM
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#37
Posted 11 June 2008 - 04:45 AM
#38
Posted 11 June 2008 - 01:13 PM
Meanwhile, there will come a time very soon where something will have to done about the Bay Street bridge. With all the new construction on near Bay and Tyee, there is a lot more traffic on the bridge. People living on the west side are commuting to other areas in the CRD, not just to Downtown or Selkirk.
Meanwhile the new offices there are drawing people from everyone else to commute to the neighbourhood for work.
The upshot is that the Bay Street bridge is becoming a bad bottleneck and will only get worse as time goes by.
Bay needs to made two lanes each way from Government all the way through to Esquimalt Road- this includes twinning the Bay Street bridge. Come to think of it, Bay should likely be made an arterial all the way through to Royal Jubilee.
This sort of a changed Bay will be able to divert more traffic away from the Johnson St bridge and into the downtown core.
Building the
#39
Posted 11 June 2008 - 01:51 PM
...This sort of a changed Bay will be able to divert more traffic away from the Johnson St bridge and into the downtown core.
Building the
Good points Bernard, but did someone cut you off while you were composing the above?
#40
Posted 11 June 2008 - 06:54 PM
The plans for the Roundhouse development include a train station (and a brew pub). Could the bridge be retired and not replaced? I can see planners in Victoria thinking we could have a bridge that can't be used that must be just looked at because it's heritage.
I did talk to Geoff Young and this is what he sent me via email.
"Thanks for your thoughts, Aaron. I think many will agree with your views on Knott garden, shops, Library, the outdoor stage - but I do not think this council will go for station within the square. We had a bit of a discussion on these issues a few days ago. The best I could do was get agreement the line would come up Pandora (not sure which side) cross Govt and end either next to the Macpherson or on the other side of the street sharing the area now used for access to the hotel/restuarant. Do you have views on (1) which side of Pandora should be used? (2) do we actually need a double track station - certainly not planned for in early stages.
Geoff "
Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users