HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum.

Since 1999, SkyscraperPage.com's forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web.  The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics.  SkyscraperPage.com also features unique skyscraper diagrams, a database of construction activity, and publishes popular skyscraper posters.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > SSP: Local Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3241  
Old Posted May 14, 2012, 7:41 AM
dharper dharper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North Surrey
Posts: 78
I didn't realize the gap in the middle was still that big. From other photos and driving by, I thought it was almost closed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3242  
Old Posted May 14, 2012, 2:53 PM
s211 s211 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
cool

in person it doesn't seem that big when you drive past - but from above you can really see how massive it is
Funny. Feels bigger to me when I've driven past!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3243  
Old Posted May 14, 2012, 6:15 PM
jhausner jhausner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon View Post
Total cost of ownership on most cars is a lot higher than just the cost of gas. Usually it's closer or over $0.50/km. Some of the costs however are definitely sunk.

I usually double the cost of gas for my actual operating expenses. But my car is old and has essentially stopped depreciating, newer cars will cost more in depreciation and less in maintenance.
The other numbers are actually quite meaningless because they are going to happen anyway. And if you do want to include them my car is quite expensive to have the oil changed @ about $100 per service at Mr. Lube just for oil.

So $100 / 5000km = 2 cents. So if I have to drive 10 km extra every day that/s a massive 20 cents extra per day. Like I said, quite meaningless in the grand scheme of things.

Now tire wear and tear? Again quite a meaningless number. If it is raining, what about the extra time my windshield wipers need to go for an extra 10km, I mean that's more wear and tear right?

Honestly the biggest factor in the decision is fuel costs. It is by far the most immediate, noticable, and largest amount of a car's running wear and tear. There is a difference if I were comparing driving to taking the bus. Then you need to factor in TCO.

But in this case we're just saying "what if you have to drive 10km more." in which case it doesn't really matter. The other factors would be there anyway because you NEED to drive that distance still.

Make sense?

It's not $0.50 cents a KM in the grand scheme of things though. It would be TCO wise but commuters will still need to commute. They don't have a choice. And if they take the toll bridge and drive less distance they won't magically sell or trade in their cars earlier saving money that way. People in general drive their cars into the ground. If you want to know real statistics though, your TCO on your average sized commuter car is closer to 25 cents a km. On a mini van you'd be up to around 30-35 cents per km. So if you factor everything into it, driving an extra 20km per day is around $5 so you're still technically saving if you factor everything in.

And my point that the government saying people will see "massive" cost savings is a major lie. I've heard everything from massive to huge used in their description of Gateway's cost savings to motorists.

They should instead say you will see TIME savings. But cost savings will not be there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3244  
Old Posted May 14, 2012, 6:39 PM
jhausner jhausner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,474
The GEB being a white elephant is actually too soon to call though. The only people I see calling it that are politically motivated bloggers. People here that pick it up just want to be "hip" so they repeat it over and over when there isn't actually any fact to it... yet.

As for the issues with the deck, it isn't due to foreign workers which cairnstone claims. I can claim I'm a roads engineer and now say a bunch of facts without backing them up. But the actual issue is the rush that was put onto the construction. They didn't give the concrete enough time to cure so that's why the degradation is happening. But that isn't the fault of the construction crews.

That's the fault of your elected officials who wanted the bridge rushed to completion for the Olympics.

That doesn't mean though the bridge isn't needed or shouldn't have been constructed. Every time I drive over it it is well used. Doesn't matter the time during the day. It's not devoid of people or cars like some would like you to think.

While traffic counts were lower than projections for the first few years, they are nudging up and up and it is pretty much fact that when the Port Mann is completed, there will be some traffic shift. The amount of people who will actually drive across the planet to avoid a toll is low but as it stands right now, taking the GEB vs the PMB is not a massive time savings for people in areas like Coquitlam unless traffic is involved.

With the construction and massive delays on the PMB though traffic counts on the GEB have been increasing healthily. So when the PMB is complete and the tolls are more expensive than the GEB, people will start taking the GEB more often when it is an option for them.

As for the usefullness of the bridge? I've done a lot of business in the Port Kells area and I know a lot of workers that work there are buying places now in the Maple Ridge area since it is at times cheaper than Langley actually. The GEB is the reason for that. So those people will need to commute to and from work.

It will take time and you can't really call it a white elephant until 1) translink misses a payment or 2) 10 years have gone by.

Look back in history and a lot of news paper articles called the Alex Fraser bridge a huge white elephant as it was "a massive bridge to nowhere" as they used to call it. 25 years later and I don't think anyone could imagine the region without that bridge. Oh and let us not forget the AFB never had tolls so it was 100% tax payer funded with no recoup... unlike the GEB and PMB.

Oh those were the days.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3245  
Old Posted May 14, 2012, 9:15 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 16,508
Great shot.

I drove past over the weekend - and there is still a pretty big gap - bigger than what the webcams suggest.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3246  
Old Posted May 15, 2012, 1:58 AM
Stingray2004's Avatar
Stingray2004 Stingray2004 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: White Rock, BC (Metro Vancouver)
Posts: 1,908
Yeah. That's a great shot. I've been looking for some cool aerials of the project for some time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhausner View Post
The GEB being a white elephant is actually too soon to call though.
Well, according to last week's figures released by Translink, the GEB is currently at 93% of projected traffic volumes. Not too shabby.

Considering that the NE sector as well as Ridge/Meadows will witness continued large population growth over the next few decades, a 6-lane link in that area (already contemplated decades ago) is looking toward the future. Again, my only complaint is the GEB Connector, which should have been constructed as a 90 km/hr expressway standard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhausner View Post
Look back in history and a lot of news paper articles called the Alex Fraser bridge a huge white elephant as it was "a massive bridge to nowhere" as they used to call it.
Yep, the usual cast of characters back then.

Go back further into the late 1950's and the provincial opposition lambasted the George Massey Tunnel as a "tunnel to nowhere" back then as well.

I also suspect that the 8-lane Granville St. Bridge in 1954 (widest in NA at the time IIRC), was also lambasted in a similar fashion. Again by the usual cast of characters.

The GSB was probably the only structure that properly accommodated for "the future". Obviously not so the AFB or the GMT.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3247  
Old Posted May 15, 2012, 4:25 PM
sacrifice333 sacrifice333 is offline
Vancouver User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,294
Just posted a pic to my Flickr (link in sig) going under the Port Mann Bridge... Can't grab the code from the mobile site... UPDATED


Untitled by sacrifice333, on Flickr
__________________
Check out TripStyler.com {locally focused travel blog} | My Flickr {Development Photos} | My instagram {Life Photos} | Vancouver Autos Tumblr {Solo Parking Photos}

Last edited by sacrifice333; May 16, 2012 at 2:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3248  
Old Posted May 15, 2012, 4:46 PM
DKaz DKaz is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Fleetwood, Surrey BC
Posts: 2,935
Quote:
Originally Posted by sacrifice333 View Post
Just posted a pic to my Flickr (link in sig) going under the Port Mann Bridge... Can't grab the code from the mobile site...
Which building is that, third pic down? With the random mish mash of blocks?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3249  
Old Posted May 15, 2012, 5:19 PM
TransitJack TransitJack is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by sacrifice333 View Post
Just posted a pic to my Flickr (link in sig) going under the Port Mann Bridge... Can't grab the code from the mobile site...
Are they planning to fill in the gap between the two roadways decks?

The gap made me think of that fella who leaped over the railing on the the Upper Levels Hwy a few years ago thinking it connected to the other lanes and fell to his death below.

Any gap on the new PMB could be an issue in a similar way. Unless of course the province is planning to anti-suicide the gap or the railings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3250  
Old Posted May 15, 2012, 5:34 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SEFC, Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,204
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKaz View Post
Which building is that, third pic down? With the random mish mash of blocks?
Pharmaceutical sciences building at UBC I'm pretty sure.
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3251  
Old Posted May 15, 2012, 6:14 PM
DKaz DKaz is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Fleetwood, Surrey BC
Posts: 2,935
Quote:
Originally Posted by TransitJack View Post
Are they planning to fill in the gap between the two roadways decks?

The gap made me think of that fella who leaped over the railing on the the Upper Levels Hwy a few years ago thinking it connected to the other lanes and fell to his death below.

Any gap on the new PMB could be an issue in a similar way. Unless of course the province is planning to anti-suicide the gap or the railings.
Did his car break down? There should be no reason any pedestrians should be on the roadway. Even if one's car did break down, stay in your vehicle!!!

They will not be filling in the gap anyway, although there may be access between the two directions at the two columns.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3252  
Old Posted May 15, 2012, 7:23 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 16,508
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3253  
Old Posted May 15, 2012, 8:13 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by TransitJack View Post
Are they planning to fill in the gap between the two roadways decks?
I sure hope not. The gap is about 3 lanes wide. It would be a massive waste of money to fill that in for no reason. Nevermind the additional load on the towers etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3254  
Old Posted May 16, 2012, 2:41 AM
sacrifice333 sacrifice333 is offline
Vancouver User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKaz
Which building is that, third pic down? With the random mish mash of blocks?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrenegade View Post
Pharmaceutical sciences building at UBC I'm pretty sure.
Believe that's correct. UBC. There's another recent pic of it in the UBC/UEL thread from another chap...
__________________
Check out TripStyler.com {locally focused travel blog} | My Flickr {Development Photos} | My instagram {Life Photos} | Vancouver Autos Tumblr {Solo Parking Photos}
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3255  
Old Posted May 20, 2012, 9:14 AM
adrianroam95 adrianroam95 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Coquitlam, BC
Posts: 147
Some pics I shot yesterday

Preload at the Gaglardi interchange:



The new overpass being built at Gaglardi:



HOV and general purpose lane split westbound west of Gaglardi:



Median divider



Patched up sign



HOV ramps at Grandview





New signage





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3256  
Old Posted May 20, 2012, 1:41 PM
trofirhen's Avatar
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,186
Cool photo thread! Like being there in the car. Thanks!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3257  
Old Posted May 21, 2012, 6:42 AM
allan_kuan allan_kuan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,461
Cheap signage much? I can't help but notice the gap in the gantries on the last photo. Unless they're staggered, they could have joined the two together... but anyway. Otherwise it looks pretty good for a construction site so far. =O
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3258  
Old Posted May 21, 2012, 6:41 PM
dharper dharper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North Surrey
Posts: 78
They still say the project will go until 216th in Langley, but it looks like they will end just east of the 208th overpass. They paved the gravel that was there, and that tapered back into the existing lanes, just east of 208th street overpass.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3259  
Old Posted May 21, 2012, 8:05 PM
Cypherus's Avatar
Cypherus Cypherus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Surrey
Posts: 821
Quote:
Originally Posted by dharper View Post
They still say the project will go until 216th in Langley, but it looks like they will end just east of the 208th overpass. They paved the gravel that was there, and that tapered back into the existing lanes, just east of 208th street overpass.
The new 3rd lane will end at the new 216th interchange. I drove through the section on Saturday and the 3rd lane tapers off at about where the 216th interchange will be. In reality, this lane will not taper off as it will become the left flow-through lane after the interchange. Take a look at the schematics here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3260  
Old Posted May 22, 2012, 2:36 AM
dharper dharper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North Surrey
Posts: 78
All I am saying is that tapered point of the new pavement is at about 210th not at 216th. On the schematic drawing, you can see the roofs of the chicken barns to the south of the 216th proposed interchange, and the newly tapered pavement in quite a bit shy of that point.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > SSP: Local Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:14 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.