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
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted: May 17, 2012, 4:45 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 25,344
^^^ its in the bb code guide... or if you choose the go advanced option to reply there is a youtube button

Video Link
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted: May 17, 2012, 6:26 PM
Pinion's Avatar
Pinion Pinion is offline
Lower Lonsdale YIMBY
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: City of North Vancouver
Posts: 1,489
I am impressed with the amount of effort being put into this - the old version was fine, the new version is even better.

I like the de-emphasizing of 3rd and St Andrews as major thoroughfares (Low Level/Esplanade and St Georges are supposed to be the main/truck routes, but a lot of people choose 3rd due to the thoughtless design of the intersections). The suspension bridge is interesting too - could have a nice view of Metrotown etc.

No sidewalk on low level is no big deal. I find the noise levels to be more than unpleasant even from the bluff - would never want to walk down there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted: May 17, 2012, 6:59 PM
biketrouble biketrouble is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 182
I don't completely hate this, but I really wish they would listen to the VACC/Hub people and move to a two-way bike lane on the south side. The westbound bike lane is going to be one of the most unpleasant rides ever, sandwiched between truck traffic and 50 feet of concrete retaining wall. What on earth are they thinking?


Last edited by biketrouble; May 17, 2012 at 7:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted: May 17, 2012, 7:50 PM
aberdeen5698 aberdeen5698 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 994
Quote:
Originally Posted by biketrouble View Post
I don't completely hate this, but I really wish they would listen to the VACC/Hub people and move to a two-way bike lane on the south side.
YES, I agree 100%. A separated bike lane is desperately needed when you're dealing with so much heavy truck traffic. The problem is that motorists can't see around the trucks and so the cyclists are invisible until it's too late.

And putting one two-way lane on the south side would save on road space by eliminating the need for two sets of separating barriers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted: May 23, 2012, 5:56 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SEFC, Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,001
The Public Meeting for the Low Level Road Upgrade will be held this evening at 6pm in the City Hall chambers (141 West 14th Street). I encourage you to come out to support this project if you have the time. The more support it has, hopefully the faster it will happen!
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted: May 24, 2012, 7:40 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SEFC, Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,001
Bit of a gong show there last night. There are still many very ill-informed people who were taking up soooo much time talking about non-sense (including one batshit crazy woman demanding to know how deep a hole was dug on the Neptune lands because somehow that could mean the the road could be tunneled? To paraphrase her, "they built the Chunnel under the english channel, so we could do that here"). Anyways, I think there was a pretty decent balance of informed people who still want to see tweaks to the project but do support it and the crazies. The main concerns continue to revolve around the overall height of the road, the lack of a sidewalk on the south side of Low Level Road, the implementation of the bike lane, the St. Andrews intersection and noise (from the road, rail operations and the terminals). Council will make their decision on June 11th. I urge everyone to write to the Mayor and Council expressing your support of this project. It is important that it is approved soon as the project must be complete by March 2014 to meet the Federal deadline. Construction is anticipated to start in September and take 16 months (15-18 month range) so there isn't really much flexibility. I believe that most of the small issues (sidewalk maybe not) can be solved in the detail design phase, but the City needs to vote to support it first before we can get there.
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted: May 25, 2012, 7:07 AM
Pinion's Avatar
Pinion Pinion is offline
Lower Lonsdale YIMBY
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: City of North Vancouver
Posts: 1,489
Quote:
North Van city hosts lengthy Low Level Road meeting

An expectedly full city council chamber was the scene of an expectedly long open house Wednesday night.

The proceedings marked the final opportunity for the public to share its thoughts on the potential overhaul of the Low Level Road and for Port Metro Vancouver, project coordinators, to outline its preferred design before city council debated and voted on the controversial project on June 11.

Like many of the open houses, community meetings and workshops held to date, worries over the height of the road, changes to local traffic and noise were offered by residents.

And the port had the opportunity to share recent successes such as the 166 feedback forms received from open houses held in March, the 1,200 views of its project video and the 85-per-cent approval rating from respondents who felt the latest design addressed community input.

But the meeting also highlighted a new batch of concerns: unfinished engineering reports from PMV, a lack of access in the design to businesses in the 300 block of East Esplanade Avenue and the question of whether or not a covenant can be placed on the land the city is giving to the port to ensure it remains used for rail purposes.

Data on both the noise and environmental impacts of a new Low Level Road weren't available at the meeting as the port has yet to finish the final drafts of either document. That information, however, is significant material needed to evaluate the project and was repeatedly asked for by both council and residents. Its absence caused each member of council to express their concern that the port had once again arrived at city hall without the requisite information.

"I expected to receive these materials, detailed engineering designs, well in advance of yesterday's meeting," Coun. Pam Bookham told The Outlook, in a phone interview Thursday afternoon.

"They [the port] have had a year. That's ample time to complete this work. We need time to get as many answers as we can. I'm prepared to continue this discussion for as long as it takes."

Councillors Don Bell, Rod Clark, Guy Heywood and Bookham each said they were uncomfortable with the port returning to council on June 11 for a final decision because they felt there isn't enough time for them or the community to digest the forthcoming reports.

In its preferred design option released last month, PMV outlined a handful of changes to East Esplanade Avenue. One of those changes, a new signalled intersection at East Esplanade and St. Andrews avenues, has caught the ire of businesses in the area who worry about the change to east-west traffic the job will bring.

If approved, cars travelling east on East Esplanade will be able to access shops in the 300 block by turning north at the new intersection. Those travelling west will not have the same option and will be forced to turn north at St. Georges Avenue, then head east around the block to get to the stores. Cars going south on St. Andrews will also have to turn west at Esplanade and double-back to get to the 300 block.

Paul McAlduff, owner of Tireland Performance Centre Ltd. at 300 East Esplanade, said restricted access to his and other nearby shops may force customers to look elsewhere because of the comparative ease of getting to similar businesses in other areas. Couple that with the threat of detours during the construction period — assumed to begin in September and to last about 16 months, although not all of that time will be spent working near the shops in question — and McAlduff worries about losing one of his staff because of a possible downturn in sales.

"City council has to be sensitive to local businesses. These businesses are serving residents. You don't want them to start travelling, you want to stay local and it doesn't matter if its auto shops, flower shops or coffee shops," McAlduff told The Outlook.

"We've never said 'no' to the cleanup of the Low Level Road. It is fabulous what they [the port] area planning. But the months of October, November and December are critical months. Conservatively, it represents about 50 per cent of the year's business. If council isn't sensitive to that it will effect staffing and service."

City engineer Doug Pope fielded numerous questions about the proposed design for the intersection and stressed the city had evaluated the area from all perspectives. The final scheme, he added, represented the best option for both safety and access.

As part of of the North Shore Trade Area Agreement, a sweeping plan designed to increase Canada's competitiveness in emerging Asian markets signed by the city in principle a few years ago, land transfers for associated projects have typically been given in-kind and haven't been subject to lease agreements or covenants dictating their future use.

But both councillors Bell and Heywood inquired about establishing a covenant on the city land being given in the deal. The rationale behind the inquiry was city staff's valuation of the land at $15 per square foot, totalling $4 million. That value was assigned under the assumption the land will remain used for rail purposes in the future.

If that use changes to, for example, light industrial concerns, then the plot becomes more valuable — $13 million, according to city estimates — and the city should see a piece of that increase, said Bell.

"It seems to me, if the value of the land is in the $4 million-$13 million range, and that's valued into the package, then that's fine as long as it remains railway use. But if its used for another purpose of higher value in the future then the city should benefit," said Bell.

"It would be a shame to pass up on the economic benefits of those lands in the future."

June 11 remains the date scheduled for PMV's return to council and a final decision on the Low Level Road.

According to a staff report, the city will receive the following improvements if the project is approved:

Drainage, paving and upgrade to the Low Level Road — $7 million.

Slope stability work — $10 million.

Spirit Trail — $6 million.

Sub total — $23 million.

Value of city's financial contribution — $800,000.

Net value of works received by the city — $22.2 million

Estimated value of land contributed by the city — $4 million ($15 per square foot if considered for rail use) — $13 million ($50 per square foot if considered for light industrial use).

Total project cost — $100 million.
Source: http://www.northshoreoutlook.com/news/153855595.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted: May 25, 2012, 2:39 PM
aberdeen5698 aberdeen5698 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinion View Post
Source: http://www.northshoreoutlook.com/news/153855595.html

"Data on both the noise and environmental impacts of a new Low Level Road weren't available at the meeting as the port has yet to finish the final drafts of either document."
Really? They're relying on the port to produce this material? Isn't that rather like asking a salesman to come clean on the shortcomings of his product...?"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted: Jun 21, 2012, 7:45 AM
Pinion's Avatar
Pinion Pinion is offline
Lower Lonsdale YIMBY
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: City of North Vancouver
Posts: 1,489
Ladies and gentlemen, the opportunity to get side-swiped by a train is officially coming to an end in the City of North Vancouver.

Quote:
City council approves Low Level Road

It’s over. Actually over.

For the past year and a half, City of North Vancouver council has rejected, debated and finally supported an overhaul of the Low Level Road after a 5-2 vote on the controversial issue Monday night.

Council’s final vote on the project was scheduled for last week but was delayed to allow councillors more time to digest the noise, environmental and slope stability reports, all of which were released by Port Metro Vancouver within days of council’s June 11 meeting.

The added week did little to quell some councillors reservations about the project. Both councillors Rod Clark and Pam Bookham, the two dissenting voices Monday night, spoke at length about lingering problems, in particular the bike lane planned for the north side of the road — which will sit between a retaining wall and traffic — and the need for more complete data on the noise implications of a raised road and the longer trains expected to come to the area once construction is completed.

“Once again, council is not standing up for itself,” Clark told The Outlook, in a phone interview Tuesday morning.

“We need to have the Low Level Road, I understand the rationale for the job. But there are loose ends and they need to be tied up. I want to see noise and pollution monitoring done by the port in the future and action done by them if need be.”

Clark attempted to attach a clause to the Low Level Road motion that would force Port Metro Vancouver to produce a new noise study before the project could go ahead. It was defeated.

Bookham attempted to have the decision deferred again so the city and the port could hammer out details on a new bike path and more accessible Spirit Trail connections. Bookham also sought the removal of the Third Street overpass, which connects the Low Level Road to the Spirit Trail north of Third Street, and one of the two new rail lines planned by CN Rail. Those plans were also defeated.

Coun. Don Bell, who supported the project, proposed that the port establish noise and environmental baseline assessments so the city can revisit the data one year after the road has been redesigned to see what, if any, changes had occurred. If either scenario had gotten worse, then the city could attempt to fix the problems. His motion was referred to staff and will return to council chambers in the future.

“I was trying to acknowledge that both Port Metro Vancouver and CN talk about the environmental objectives and greenness of their companies. So, in acknowledging that, we want that as well,” Bell told The Outlook.

“They maintain the belief there will be a reduction in air pollution and noise with the changes to the Low Level Road. Residents are worried about potential negative impacts in these areas, but PMV says its an improvement. So, lets establish some baselines in those areas and one year later we’ll go back and measure.”

The city and the port will be signing a legal agreement for the project by June 30. City engineer Doug Pope said he expects construction to begin by late fall but the final say on the schedule will be determined by the port.

After a lengthy town hall meeting held at city hall last month, the design of the Low Level Road was altered slightly, now allowing southbound traffic on St. Andrews Avenue to turn left and access the shops in the 300-block of East Esplanade.
http://www.northshoreoutlook.com/news/159739095.html

Can't wait to catch glimpses of the growing Metrotown skyline from the raised road on my daily travels east. I think people will be surprised at how scenic that stretch will become.

Can wait for the temporary increased traffic on my street.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted: Jun 21, 2012, 5:04 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SEFC, Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,001
So happy this was finally approved. I unfortunately wasn't able to make it to the council meeting until well after the vote. I admit the bike lane issue remains, but I honestly don't see how it could be fixed without raising the road more to allow for more width. If that were done, the residents above would scream bloody murder. It also can't really but moved to a combined separated lane on the south side because the 2m bike lanes also have to double as shoulders for vehicle traffic. The lack of a sidewalk is disappointing to some as well, but I think the new Spirit Trail connection will solve most of those issues.

Also, what in god's name was councillor Bookham thinking trying to REMOVE the 3rd Street Spirit Trail overpass? That is one of the best parts of this project. It was always in the long term plan but the CNV didn't have the money for it and now the Port is offering to pay. Glad her motion was defeated. (Also, why would the Port spend $100M to add 2 new rail lines and then just accept a 50% reduction in capacity. Ya, that makes a lot of sense.)

My understanding from talking to both Port Metro and City Engineers is that the traffic delays should be relatively minor. The only closures expected on the road will be at night, most of the work will be able to be accommodated by alternating lanes and flag people.
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted: Feb 15, 2013, 6:03 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SEFC, Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,001
This project is moving ahead. They have a shortlist of contractors (The five selected contractors are B&B Heavy Civil Construction Ltd, Dragados - GIG Joint Venture, Kiewit Infrastructure Group, PCL Constructors West Coast Inc and Giffels Westpro) and will announce the selected group in early March, with construction to begin after that. Completion is scheduled for Fall 2014.

Can a moderator please update the thread status to approved?
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted: Mar 20, 2013, 9:05 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SEFC, Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,001
B&B Heavy Civil has been announced as the main contractor for the project. Preliminary scheduled for the next 2 months:

- Contractor site set up (on 300 Low Level Road – empty block by Vancouver Dry Dock and Richardson) – commencing in March
- Pre condition surveys of adjacent residences – late March
- Fortis utility relocation (on Port land, outside the Vancouver Dry Dock facility) – March to end of April
- Clearing and grubbing of the devegetation area – in April
- Internal Port road improvements – in April

More info: Port Talk
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted: Mar 21, 2013, 1:47 AM
spm2013 spm2013 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 270
They're now protesting a new high-voltage transmission line:

http://www.nsnews.com/technology/Por...713/story.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
 
 
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 6:05 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.