Sunshine Coast Fixed Link

[Alex Mackinnon]

Well somebody in the government appears to have been paying attention to the advocates for a fixed link to the Sunshine Coast. About time I'd say.

Price Tags

CBC Article

Sunshine Coast Connector Advocacy Blog

[LeftCoaster]

I'm going to post my response to this that I made in the BC/Alberta section here, since no one goes to the BC/Alberta section...

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

I don't understand this at all, where would this bridge even go? At it's shortest point near Furry Creek Howe Sound is still over 3KM wide, this would make any bridge here among the world's longest spans and likely immensely expensive. Not to mention you would have to drive all the way to Furry creek, then all the way back to Gibsons on the other side of Howe Sound. it probably wouldn't even save you time when compared to the ferry.

The other alternative, of bridging to Bowen then a road across Bowen then bridging to Keats island, then a road across Keats then another bridge to Gibsons would require another roughly 3KM span bridge (assuming you can't cross at the shortest point, Whytecliff Park) and a 2.2KM span bridge to Keats and a third 750M span crossing to Gibsons. Just for reference the body of water the Lions Gate crosses is only 450M.

And this is all to connect the Lower Mainland to how many people? 50,000?

I don't understand why you even need a study. It's a non starter.

Can someone explain this to me? It makes no sense to me whatsoever.

[s211]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

I'm going to post my response to this that I made in the BC/Alberta section here, since no one goes to the BC/Alberta section...

Can someone explain this to me? It makes no sense to me whatsoever.

The only explanation I've heard that makes any sense is the high consumption levels of pot in BC, because it's only under the influence of same that this proposal makes any sense.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by s211

The only explanation I've heard that makes any sense is the high consumption levels of pot in BC, because it's only under the influence of same that this proposal makes any sense.

I'd like to add that on aesthetic basis, this would be an ugly slash over a magnificent fjord and island stretch, that it would cost mega mega $$$ which could be used on more pressing infrastructure issues, and that it could either enhance market values of the Sunshine Coast, with perhaps more housing and shopping, and places like Madeira Park, Sechelt (parts of it, anyway), becoming even more chic and valuale and very possibly an $up prices around Gibson's Landing, already undergoing extensive "ritsicondo" and hotel construction.

Or ....... it could attract people seeking lower housing, which is very valid, but it might just render the Sunshine Coast "The North Surrey of The North." I applaud Surey for taking bold measures on combatting urban renewal, but the city has known it's social problems in the past. A friend in Gibsons recently informed that already, the Sunshine Coast already has about, if not THE, highest rate of drug abuse and civil crime in the GVRD region and adjacent municipalities. Will building an expensive $$$$brdge address any of that, or would equivalent (proportional) funding of medical centres, drug treatment centres, and enhanced social services for not only the sunshine cost, but for elsewhere such as Gambier and Bowen Islands, be more worthy of such $expenditure?

1.* As a footnote, however, I have to say that looking at the link, I think that a network of passenger commuter ferries would be great.

[204]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

A friend in Gibsons recently informed that already, the Sunshine Coast already has about, if not THE, highest rate of drug abuse and civil crime in the GVRD region and adjacent municipalities.

This is entirely anecdotal. The Sunshine Coast is not known for high crime rates. Crime rates are actually low and declining. The crime rate is lower than in West Vancouver.

"The Sunshine Coast ranked third best among 26 regional
districts in B.C. in the Regional Socioeconomic Index for 2012.
This index, compiled by B.C. Stats, is a weighted composite of
statistics measuring crime, health, education, human economic
hardship, children at risk and youth at risk."

Either way, hopefully this bridge will never be built. As it is now, the riff-raff stays away.

[red-paladin]

My take on it is that they are producing the report because of the lobbying/interest by various groups, and that the report will outline that the road/bridge project would be orders of magnitude more expensive that people think.

I expect it will end up just like this official report on the possibility of a fixed link to Vancouver Island, which concluded that it was impossible in the near-medium term future.

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/publications...fixed_link.htm

(Not that people don't bring it up all the time anyway on a certain forum!)

[Bdawe]

I agree with the first point. A well designed bridge can be a scenic addition to a landscape. But MOTI has a recent history of building butt-ugly bridges

[AMTDGT]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

I agree with the first point. A well designed bridge can be a scenic addition to a landscape. But MOTI has a recent history of building butt-ugly bridges

I am a boater and know the area intimately. I absolutely disagree that a bridge would either be an aesthetically wise or even possible.

I think the plan is to repurpose the Evergreen line TBM to build the Gibson's Landing link. Think of the fun we would have with "routine maintenance" stops at greater than 800 feet under water.

[Rico]

Wow, they have managed to outdo themselves with this plan, I did not think they could do worse in the transportation portfolio...then bam...obviously I set my expectations to high. As an aside I would love to sit in a meeting where they try and come up with a business case for this...'how about the positive effects of making it easier for the folks with the pot plantations to market in Vancouver, how much value should we give that...'

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

Well somebody in the government appears to have been paying attention to the advocates for a fixed link to the Sunshine Coast.

When's the next election?

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Jebby

When's the next election?

2017 just won't come soon enough

[GeeCee]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

2017 just won't come soon enough

That's what we (or I at least) said last time..

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by GeeCee

That's what we (or I at least) said last time..

The difference is I couldn't vote last time

[BCPhil]

A bridge is probably a bad idea, and pretty much impossible or overly expensive that the gains can't possibly justify the costs.

But a highway connection to Squamish I think is justified. It doesn't need to be nice. I'm thinking the quality of the 99 between Pemberton to Lillooet. It just needs to exist.

Most people would probably take the ferry, as it would save like 2 hours. It would probably even cost around the same when you think of how much gas most cars use on a twisty mountain road.

But there are times when the road would be handy. There are times when the ferries are really busy. And even times when they are not running (like at night).

I was over there one weekend this summer, and it was so busy coming back on Sunday that I got there for a ferry around 5pm, and didn't get on until the last one. I probably would have driven around if I could have as that would take around the same time. If I didn't make the last ferry (like some unlucky souls) I would have just been stuck there all night.

It would also be handy for when the Sea to Sky is closed for it's routine crash cleanup. If you are in a hurry, you could take the ferry to bypass the closed highway.

And it would be kind of cool to actually connect highway 101 with highway 99 on the map.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

A bridge is probably a bad idea, and pretty much impossible or overly expensive that the gains can't possibly justify the costs.

This is just the same "remove a ferry, replace with a bridge" scam that the province has been doing for a while now with bridges that cross rivers and lakes. In some cases the bridge just replaces the (cable-)ferry because of traffic volume, in other cases the bridge either increases or decreases the traffic off another route.

The irony in some cases is that the Province will replace a ferry with a bridge, and then change the highway connection so that that traffic ends up bypassing the bridge anyway. Like, if the ultimate goal was to create a series of bridges that eventually link to Vancouver Island, I could see that being the end-goal, but right now this seems like "BC Ferries wants to stop serving this money-sucking route", so we're seeing studies on it just to prove to the government it's worth subsidizing that ferry route.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by Kisai

This is just the same "remove a ferry, replace with a bridge" scam that the province has been doing for a while now with bridges that cross rivers and lakes. In some cases the bridge just replaces the (cable-)ferry because of traffic volume, in other cases the bridge either increases or decreases the traffic off another route.

The irony in some cases is that the Province will replace a ferry with a bridge, and then change the highway connection so that that traffic ends up bypassing the bridge anyway. Like, if the ultimate goal was to create a series of bridges that eventually link to Vancouver Island, I could see that being the end-goal, but right now this seems like "BC Ferries wants to stop serving this money-sucking route", so we're seeing studies on it just to prove to the government it's worth subsidizing that ferry route.

There are 2 kinds of people who live in a ferry dependent community: Those that love the quaintness of ferries above all other concerns, and those that hate the government dependence and cost (but still like ferries, or else you wouldn't live there).

Studies like this are usually to either appease or coerce the sides. You either give them lip service, and show you try and that the ferries are the really only choice and the cost is justified. Or you scare them with the threat of taking the ferries away and destroying their lifestyle. You end up pitting the community against itself, and they all decide that in the end, the way it is is the best.

But this is one of those cases where having a highway as backup to the ferries might benefit the provincial economy without taking anything away from the ferry lifestyle of the communities.

P.S. what ferries has the province removed and replaced with bridges?

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

There are 2 kinds of people who live in a ferry dependent community: Those that love the quaintness of ferries above all other concerns, and those that hate the government dependence and cost (but still like ferries, or else you wouldn't live there).

Studies like this are usually to either appease or coerce the sides. You either give them lip service, and show you try and that the ferries are the really only choice and the cost is justified. Or you scare them with the threat of taking the ferries away and destroying their lifestyle. You end up pitting the community against itself, and they all decide that in the end, the way it is is the best.

But this is one of those cases where having a highway as backup to the ferries might benefit the provincial economy without taking anything away from the ferry lifestyle of the communities.

P.S. what ferries has the province removed and replaced with bridges?

Look around the Kootenay-Columbia area. There used to be a cable ferry below the Hugh Keeleyside dam, that was replaced with a bridge IIRC in the late 80's, and shifted traffic around (and then the the Highway 3 overpass was changed in the late 90's and all of the city's major businesses moved south of the overpass.) There were threats to outright remove the Glade ferry on the Kootenay river. (Glade doesn't have a lot of people to begin with.) The government instead has replaced the older ferries with newer models.

My familiarity with this that somewhere around the time the Liberals were elected, "P3'ing all the inland ferries" became a hot topic, and there was panic and outrage that several of these communities might lose their ferry entirely (like Glade which has 139 houses.)

Here's a map of all the in-land ferries.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

P.S. what ferries has the province removed and replaced with bridges?

The Albion ferries were replaced with the Golden Ears Bridge.

[cornholio]

As someone who travels to the Sunshine Coast several times per month and understands the area well this study is long over due. At the end of the day once this study is done it will recommend a fixed link connection via Squamish or a 2 km bridge near Portea Cove / Furry creek, both to Port Mellon. Through Squamish it would connect Wood Fiber to the city, something the LNG project wants and which makes it easier to push the project through, but there are some nasty slopes there and it would add to the trip time. A bridge near Portea Cove would be inexpensive but it would miss wood fiber and have some nimby opposition regarding the 2-3km bridge, but the router would be much quicker and miss most of the most challenging slopes. I figure the costs either way for a two lane sfe modern highway with a few passing lanes in the valleys would be in the $1 billion range and be worth every penny. Obviously no connection will ever be built across the islands due to costs/depths/island trusts/etc., but it still needs to be studied so that all the options can be compared.

As for the ferries they would be taken out of service, refitted for LNG like all the other ferries and re introduced in to service on other routes for another decade or two of their remaining life.

I will tell you 100% that a fixed link be recommended and I my guess is it will be built within a decade of this study. It is long over due. Th economic benefits to the SSC and province will pay for a fixed link 100 times over.

[dandor31]

I'm sure BC Ferries would be supportive of this move. The Horseshoe Bay ferry terminal is congested with both marine traffic and limited storage for waiting vehicles. Reducing the terminal to service only Nanaimo (Departure Bay) and Bowen Island would likely be very beneficial. It is also quoted as requiring a $200 million upgrade just to maintain the status quo. If the Langdale route was removed perhaps this number could come down.

There was also talk of cancelling the Dept Bay-Horseshoe Bay route because of these problems, but that was shot down my Minister Stone.

This Globe and Mail article sums up most of these things:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle22609804/