Jump to content

      













Photo

Mainland BC road infrastructure


  • Please log in to reply
97 replies to this topic

#21 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 10:21 AM

This. There is at least a slightly better chance that under an NDP government Vancouver Island won't be completely ignored when it comes to provincial infrastructure spending. Keep in mind that our last major transportation upgrade was financed and built before the Liberals took the reigns.

:confused:

What about the airport interchange?
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#22 sdwright.vic

sdwright.vic

    Burnside-Gorge

  • Member
  • 6,483 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 10:36 AM

:confused:

What about the airport interchange?


Wasn't that funded by the feds?
Predictive text and a tiny keyboard are not my friends!

#23 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 11:07 AM

Wasn't that funded by the feds?


The project was cost shared between the Province ($10.5 million), the federal government ($10.5 million) and the Victoria Airport Authority ($3 million).


Victoria International Airport (YYJ) - McTavish Road Interchange Project
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#24 sdwright.vic

sdwright.vic

    Burnside-Gorge

  • Member
  • 6,483 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 01:05 PM

Wasn't that funded by the feds?


Okay let me rephrase this... wasn't this funded because the conservatives won that riding and bit up their share of the money for the intersection and the Liberals where essentially "forced" to come up with the other half or it be bad optics for turning down infrastructure funding.
Predictive text and a tiny keyboard are not my friends!

#25 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 01:07 PM

Okay let me rephrase this... wasn't this funded because the conservatives won that riding and bit up their share of the money for the intersection and the Liberals where essentially "forced" to come up with the other half or it be bad optics for turning down infrastructure funding.


Correct. :teacher:
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#26 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 22,863 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 03:23 PM

:confused:

What about the airport interchange?


As per sdwright.vic's explanation, this really doesn't qualify much as Liberal investment on Vancouver Island. Coincidence that this was a Federal Conservative-BC Liberal riding?

#27 Urbanistco

Urbanistco
  • Member
  • 172 posts

Posted 01 October 2012 - 06:38 AM

Yeah the McTavish Interchange only happened because of Federal injection of cash. From funding approval to shovel in the ground was less then a year, hence the poor design...

Bluefox: thats not how the liberals will spin it, you have to think outside the rational box with these crooks.

#28 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 4,241 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 01 October 2012 - 12:45 PM

The current tunnel is not one that was dug but a series of concrete boxes that were sunk and then pumped dry to make the tunnel.

The location requires a very high bridge because a large portion of the Port of Vancouver is upstream from Deas Island location on the Fraser, the Surrey Docks. Car carriers and container ships need to get through. Take a look at the height of the Alex Fraser bridge - 154 meters.

#29 renthefinn

renthefinn
  • Member
  • 571 posts

Posted 01 October 2012 - 06:13 PM

The current tunnel is not one that was dug but a series of concrete boxes that were sunk and then pumped dry to make the tunnel.

The location requires a very high bridge because a large portion of the Port of Vancouver is upstream from Deas Island location on the Fraser, the Surrey Docks. Car carriers and container ships need to get through. Take a look at the height of the Alex Fraser bridge - 154 meters.


A bridge structure would likely have to have similar clearance to the Alex Fraser....

Still not an un-doable situation based on soil conditions only, cost would likely still be an issue...

#30 Benezet

Benezet
  • Member
  • 1,026 posts

Posted 01 October 2012 - 07:09 PM

Take a look at the height of the Alex Fraser bridge - 154 meters.


One small nit to pick - it has 55m of clearance. But it's still darn tall bridge at that.

#31 Urbanistco

Urbanistco
  • Member
  • 172 posts

Posted 02 October 2012 - 06:32 AM

A bridge structure would likely have to have similar clearance to the Alex Fraser....

Still not an un-doable situation based on soil conditions only, cost would likely still be an issue...


I don't think anybody is stating that it is impossible tobuild a bridge...it's just that the soil conditions are such that it is cost prohibited from being feasible. Here is an article from a 1959 Popular Mechanics that discusses some of the many challenges, article starts on p. 122

http://books.google.ca/books?id=vtsDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA122&dq=popular+mechanics+atomic+submarine&hl=en&ei=PC7aTMvrN8Wt8Ab6z6jTCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=popular%20mechanics%20atomic%20submarine&f=false

#32 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 02 October 2012 - 06:53 AM

^Nice find. Interesting to see the technical work that went in to it.

(And of course it wouldn't be Popular Mechanics without your mandatory miracle monster amphibious boat that will never see the light of day article.)
"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009

#33 D.L.

D.L.
  • Member
  • 7,786 posts

Posted 02 October 2012 - 07:59 AM

Why do we keep talking about a bridge here? What's wrong with a tunnel anyways?

Just the other day when I was going through that tunnel I wondered why another two lane section wasn't put in place. Nice to hear something is being planned.

Thanks for the article Urbanistco!!

#34 Urbanistco

Urbanistco
  • Member
  • 172 posts

Posted 02 October 2012 - 09:14 AM

I had to dig that deep out of the MoTI archives haha...as soon as the announcement came out, the hwy engineers we abuzz with why tunnel versus bridge.

#35 renthefinn

renthefinn
  • Member
  • 571 posts

Posted 02 October 2012 - 06:18 PM

I have no preference for bridge or tunnel, and a tunnel may make the most sense cost-wise. I work in the geotechnical field and am aware of the soil conditions near the tunnel. Depending on lifecyle costs and benefits, the tunnel may be the cheaper option, but not necessarily, there are plenty of costs incurred by tunneling and tunnel maintenance that are not by incurred by a bridge and vice versa, some of these are safety aspects and are difficult to analyze (assigning cost to life etc.). I wouldn't mind if they went with a tunnel option, cause as I believe someone mentioned before, there aren't many around, and they are kinda cool IMO.

#36 sdwright.vic

sdwright.vic

    Burnside-Gorge

  • Member
  • 6,483 posts

Posted 03 October 2012 - 04:17 AM

Yeah the McTavish Interchange only happened because of Federal injection of cash. From funding approval to shovel in the ground was less then a year, hence the poor design...

Bluefox: thats not how the liberals will spin it, you have to think outside the rational box with these crooks.


And would not of happened ANY other way...
Predictive text and a tiny keyboard are not my friends!

#37 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 4,241 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 05 October 2012 - 11:30 AM

One small nit to pick - it has 55m of clearance. But it's still darn tall bridge at that.

Sorry, a typo on my end - I meant 54m, though typed the extra digit.

It does need to rise a long way, that is equal to an 18 story building.

#38 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 07:38 AM

Fog and icy conditions are likely factors in a series of minor crashes on the Port Mann Bridge early Thursday that caused what one commuter called a "traffic nightmare."

Emergency crews have responded to multiple crashes involving about 25 vehicles on the slippery span in both directions, as traffic crawled across the bridge amid thick fog as of 7 a.m.


Read more: http://www.theprovin...l#ixzz2GvYk8RR3
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#39 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 10:49 PM

Problem solved on Port Mann Bridge???

So they have these cable scrapers with brushes that are supposed to scrape the slush off. They run up and down, being pulled by another lighter cable. Yup that's right, another cable flapping around in the breeze, and if that doesn't get the pesky ice off, then they will dangle peanuts down, and the squirrels will go up and brush the snow off with their tails.

Video
http://www.vancouver...0124/story.html

#40 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 20 September 2013 - 11:34 AM

This, and also...

Remember that time Christy promised $500 million in upgrades and renovations to St. Paul's Hospital, and then the same day Kevin Falcon blatantly contradicted her to say there was only up to $8 million available?

I'm just waiting for Mike de Jong or a deputy minister to come out and bring her back down to earth yet again...

She is the queen of politically-charged funding announcements for which there is no money available. I can't wait to see how she plans to pay for something like this (clearly a multi-billion-dollar infrastructure project of the same scope and depth as the Port Mann replacement).

Sorry, Christy, but I'll believe it when I see it.


Well, she announced a bridge today, to start in 2017. I guess technically you have not seen it yet though.
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

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