Port of Vancouver Discussion

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

The harbour gets shallower to the east, so there are less areas that are ideal for deepwater docks.

Shallower than the Fraser, where there are smaller ports in Surrey?

[Alex Mackinnon]

Bathymetric charts.

[fredinno]

And yet we have Pacific Coast Terminals at Port Moody, at the shallowest segment of it as well...

[officedweller]

Overpass planned for Vancouver port expansion to block view of iconic Rogers Sugar warehouse
http://www.straight.com/news/867541/...ugar-warehouse


Future view of Rogers Sugar warehouse from Powell Street overpass with proposed Centennial Road overpass on the left.
AECOM
http://www.straight.com/news/867541/...ugar-warehouse

[Pinion]

Whooo cares, view was already blocked by the Powell Street overpass.

It needs to be done.

[Metro-One]

I guess we are going to have to make Roger's Sugar warehouse view cones now.

It is not as if the entire view will be gone either. Also, it is an industrial building in an industrial area.

Curious, did the Straight do a similar article about losing the view of BC place Stadium behind all the new towers around Cambie Bridge? Or are they just focusing on this because its a road structure....

Either way it is federal property so there is nothing the city can do about this.

[Alex Mackinnon]

I've got to say it's too bad they're doing all these little viaducts piecemeal.

Adding them all together you have an almost completely grade separated Waterfront Rd. It's like an unintentional almost freeway, where they probably should have just put a proper freeway.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

I've got to say it's too bad they're doing all these little viaducts piecemeal.

Adding them all together you have an almost completely grade separated Waterfront Rd. It's like an unintentional almost freeway, where they probably should have just put a proper freeway.

http://searcharchives.vancouver.ca/p...-burrard-inlet

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

I've got to say it's too bad they're doing all these little viaducts piecemeal.

Adding them all together you have an almost completely grade separated Waterfront Rd. It's like an unintentional almost freeway, where they probably should have just put a proper freeway.

The ground level is still used for access to various companies and needs to stay. The real question is why did they take so long to build this second overpass over the vanterm/agt rails. Rail switches cause huge back ups for 20-50+ minutes several times per day and these overpasses just completely solve the problem.

[Feathered Friend]

I attended one of the small group discussions for the proposed Centerm Expansion yesterday.

The following is what I managed to pick up:
The largest ships that can be docked are Neo Panamax vessels. This is due to both the height of the Lion's Gate bridge, and the shallowness of the narrows. There was a study that was conducted to see if it was feasible to raise the bridge deck, however it was deemed so outlandish that it would be more realistic to appeal to cruise ships that could raise and lower their upper decks.

Rising sea levels are not being factored into this current plan, and raising the land would be a very costly option. The current diesel cranes will be phased out for cranes that are both electric powered and have a longer/deeper reach. Centerm will also be expanding the shore power program to cargo ships. Initially only one dock will have the capability, but the second morage will have a charge station added when needed.

Currently there is not a defined community contribution amount. Discussions so far have lead to funding ideas for Crab Park and various community programs in the surrounding neighborhoods. There was a member of the park board, Catherine Evans, in attendance at this meeting. The idea of a pedestrian crossing between Crab Park and Gastown has been discussed. There are also discussions with Translink over providing some sort of service for employees in the port area.

One other aspect that the Port has not looked at in any capacity is where they would prefer/veto a third Burrard Crossing; it simply hasn't been on their radar.

Unfortunately, I have to say attendance for both this small discussion and a larger open house were underwhelming. The Open House at SFU was virtually unattended by members of the public. The small form discussion did have a good turn out, but consisted of individuals who seemed to come in with set agenda's unrelated to the project. Those who hate the rail companies, who want port operations moved to the valley with the current facility serving as an unloading facility only, and even one person who advocated that the port should be shut down because globalization is bad.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

I attended one of the small group discussions for the proposed Centerm Expansion yesterday.

Very interesting, thanks for taking the time to relay what you learned.

[jlousa]

They are accepting feedback until the 24th so feel free to email comments in. Heres some additional notes for those interested.

Centerm Expansion Project
Rogers Sugar Warehouse, “A” building on VHR
Ballantyne Pier Shed No.1, “A” building on VHR
Mission to Seafarers, “A” building on VHR and municipally designated The Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (VFPA) has received a project permit application from the VFPA Infrastructure Delivery Centerm Expansion Project team to construct an expansion to the Centerm container terminal at 777 Centennial Road in Vancouver.
The project seeks to increase the terminal throughput by expanding the terminal footprint used to store and transfer containers, and through a suite of reconfigurations and investment in equipment at the site. The project also includes off-terminal improvements in the area,
including investments in road and rail infrastructure.
The VFPA is a federal agency and is both the applicant and the approving authority for this application. The VFPA is seeking input from Stakeholders including the City the proposed project activities and components include:

Marine
•Expanding the land area at both the west and east ends of the existing terminal. Approximately 4.2 hectares (ha) of marine area will be infilled on the west and 4 ha on the east;
•In -water marineworks include dredging to remove unstable substrates;
•Constructing new rock dykes;
•Infilling open water areas within the dykes;
•Dredging to enhance a navigational turning basin for the East Canada Place cruise ship berth in the area between Centerm and the SeaBus south terminal.

Land
•Removing existing warehouse structures and rehabilitating the Ballantyne Pier (while retaining the Ballantyne Pier heritage façade and constructing a new office and operations building);
•Reconfiguring the terminal intermodal yard to extend the existing tracks;
•Removing the Heatley Avenue Overpass;
•Reconfiguring the terminal container yard;
•Establishing new storage facilities, increasing terminal parking;
•Reconfiguring the terminal entrance area;
•Upgrading terminal control systems and yard equipment;
•Replacing two quay cranes with larger versions, installing up to five new electrified rail mounted gantry cranes, and;
•Adding up to 20 new diesel-powered internal transfer vehicles.

Off-Terminal
•Constructing an overpass to the entrance of the terminal (Centennial Road Overpass or CROP);
•Removal of the Southern Railway rail crossing at Centennial Road;
•Rail yard modifications to the CP tracks south of the terminal;
•Westward extension to Waterfront Road.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

I attended one of the small group discussions for the proposed Centerm Expansion yesterday.

...

Unfortunately, I have to say attendance for both this small discussion and a larger open house were underwhelming. The Open House at SFU was virtually unattended by members of the public. The small form discussion did have a good turn out, but consisted of individuals who seemed to come in with set agenda's unrelated to the project. Those who hate the rail companies, who want port operations moved to the valley with the current facility serving as an unloading facility only, and even one person who advocated that the port should be shut down because globalization is bad.

That is the standard thing to happen with open houses. Unless you have property directly impacted, and thus have a reason to be there, the most typical open house will be people pushing a NIMBY agenda, even if they are not impacted.

In the long term, the terminals may eventually have to be moved, or rebuilt since changes in sea level will eventually make old terminals too dangerous to be used. However short of a tsunami wrecking everything, the terminals are going to stay.

However most climate change models regarding sea level don't apply to the Pacific coast the same way they do to the Gulf coast or Atlantic coast. The Atlantic coast is literately sinking. The Pacific coast is rising, and until the megathrust earthquake we are overdue for happens, there won't be any sudden rapid changes in sea level.

The worst case scenario is that all the ice melts on earth and places like the ports and Richmond end up 50 meters under water. That is not going to be a high-speed event.

[jollyburger]

We will have grown gills by that time and land will have no meaning to us as a species.

The only part of the Rogers Building now worth looking at is the top portion and this won't do much that hasn't already been "ruined" by the new overpass.

And please send me a message the last time anyone at CoV cared about industrial buildings (look at False Creek, Mount Pleasant...)

[Large Cat]

Originally Posted by Pinion

Whooo cares, view was already blocked by the Powell Street overpass.

It needs to be done.

Agree.

[Pinion]

x-post from north shore thread

Originally Posted by Pinion

@Seaspan posted a photo of their new HQ at the base of Pemberton, say it's 75% complete.

[Feathered Friend]

I was checking the Centerm expansion website tonight, and it looks like the second round of community consultations are going on. The first meeting has already passed, but the second one is today at:

http://porttalk.ca/centermexpansion

Saturday, May 27
1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.
Morris J Wosk Centre for Dialogue
Strategy Room 320
(enter via Seymour Street courtyard entrance) 580 West Hastings Street, Vancouver

I'm unsure how informative the meeting itself will be, as it seems all the info is already up on the website.

Round 2 Discussion Book
http://www.portvancouver.com/wp-cont..._final_web.pdf

Round 1 Consultation Report
http://www.portvancouver.com/wp-cont...0503-Final.pdf

[Sheba]

This seemed like the closest place to post this:

Crewless electric cargo ships may be on the horizon in Norway

SpaceX's drone landing ships have already proven that uncrewed vessels can handle some of the most dangerous jobs at sea. Now, two Norwegian companies are poised to put robo-boats into one of the most dull: hauling cargo down the fjord.

...

Birkeland will be a relatively small "feeder" cargo ship; its journeys will be short jaunts down a fjord on Norway's Baltic Sea coast from Yara's factory to a larger port. There, containers of fertilizer will be loaded onto larger seagoing ships for international transport. Currently, Yara ships these containers over land.

"Every day, more than 100 diesel truck journeys are needed to transport products from Yara's Porsgrunn plant to ports in Brevik and Larvik," Yara's president and CEO, Svein Tore Holsether, said in a statement issued by the two companies. "With this new autonomous battery-driven container vessel we move transport from road to sea and thereby reduce noise and dust emissions, improve the safety of local roads, and reduce nitrous oxide and CO2 emissions."

Possibly from Roberts Bank to points up the Fraser?

[Millennium2002]

Cruise sector raises concerns over Vancouver capacity

Ballantyne Pier closure, Lions Gate Bridge clearance threaten to limit cruise ship industry growth in the Port of Vancouver

By Glen Korstrom | July 31, 2017, 8:08 a.m.

Cruise line operators are concerned that the Port of Vancouver’s (PoV) 2014 decision to close Ballantyne Pier to cruise ships has left them with less room to increase traffic...

https://www.biv.com/article/2017/7/c...ncouver-capac/

There is a reaction thread on reddit about this article and it appears that no one over there is really concerned about this... And yet, personally seeing the Seattle numbers outpace Vancouver is kind of disconcerting for some reason.

I know we try to stay away from predicting the future in this forum, but was wondering where else we could put an additional cruise terminal if Ballantyne Pier is not a suitable place...? I can come up with a few Metro Vancouver locations off the top of my head but they all look like pipe dreams right now...

• Lonsdale Quay - easy connection to SeaBus, adds berth capacity; may annoy residents not expecting a new terminal at their doorstep, North Shore bridges constrain car traffic, does not solve Lions Gate Bridge limitations
• Ambleside / Dundarave - both locations not subject to Lions Gate Bridge height restrictions and have easy transit access to Vancouver, but will definitely be opposed by area residents who may not like increased traffic or noise, and north shore bridges will still be bottlenecks.
• Horseshoe Bay - existing transit connections to Vancouver, no Lions Gate Bridge height restrictions, less noise than ferries; ferry to Nanaimo might need to move to make room (perhaps closer to YVR or UBC...), North shore bridges are bottlenecks
• UBC - Not subject to Lions Gate Bridge height restrictions, relatively easy connections to transit (even better if SkyTrain built down the line); area and connecting roads might need upgrading, nearby neighbourhoods may complain about ruined beaches, added noise, and extra traffic
• Scott Road Station - currently an industrial area that Surrey proposes to turn into commercial / residential zone, connection to Skytrain possible; current and future bridges / tunnels constrain ship size and require capacity bumps
• Squamish - far-fetched but noted in article, may require improved roads and rail service
• Victoria - alternate existing Canadian port with local airport, currently a stopover but could turn into home-port, close to Vancouver, benefits capital region; ferries, airport, and area roads may need upgrades
• Prince Rupert - alternate existing Canadian port with local airport, currently a stopover but could turn into home-port, benefits northwest region; not close to Vancouver, requires extensive infrastructure upgrades for improved access via air, road, or rail

What do people think about this?

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by Millennium2002

There is
What do people think about this?

If the increasing size of boats is that big of a concern, it's time to start looking at raising or replacing the LGB.