HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 2:20 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
with glowing hearts
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: █♣█ Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 12,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yume-sama View Post
Really? I thought it was per day...
....not to mention that they built both bridges in just about 2 years. They must've had an entire army of underpayed workers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 2:28 AM
northwest2k northwest2k is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Richmond
Posts: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by eduardo88 View Post
How would that at all help to pay for the bridge if you're discouraging people from commuting? Anyway it'd probably be way more efficient and cheaper to move freight by ship...its slower, but one ship can carry what hundreds of trucks can do in a single trip. Theres no logic in transporting by truck across the straight.

Anyway a bridge across is probably not economically feasible, perhaps even technologically feasible due to the extreme depths. The money would be much better spent improving infrastructure in Metro Vancouver and augmenting ferry services.
Tell that to the hundreds of semi-trucks that travel from the mainland to the island everyday by ferry.

It is very economically feasible. All the traffic that the ferries carry each day would instead be taking the bridge. And since BC Ferries just announced it's 3rd fee hike in the last couple of years due to oil prices, I'm sure people would much rather pay a toll everyday and drive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 2:29 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
with glowing hearts
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: █♣█ Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 12,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by northwest2k View Post
Tell that to the hundreds of semi-trucks that travel from the mainland to the island everyday by ferry.

It is very economically feasible. All the traffic that the ferries carry each day would instead be taking the bridge. And since BC Ferries just announced it's 3rd fee hike in the last couple of years due to oil prices, I'm sure people would much rather pay a toll everyday and drive.
A $300 toll versus a few dollars more in a fee hike?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 2:30 AM
northwest2k northwest2k is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Richmond
Posts: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x2 View Post
A $300 toll versus a few dollars more in a fee hike?
You have no proof that the toll would be $300. Please stick to confirmed facts
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 2:41 AM
eduardo88 eduardo88 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Berlin + Madrid
Posts: 1,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by northwest2k View Post
You have no proof that the toll would be $300. Please stick to confirmed facts
That would probably be the only way to make this economically feasible.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 2:54 AM
Nutterbug Nutterbug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,135
When are they going to build a tunnel to Japan?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 3:09 AM
northwest2k northwest2k is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Richmond
Posts: 240
As long as they build a fixed link to the island I don't care what form it takes

Who says the tunnel has to be underground?


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 3:34 AM
Nutterbug Nutterbug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,135
I have a better idea.

Don't live on the Island if you don't want to take the ferry.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 3:38 AM
amor de cosmos amor de cosmos is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: lodged against an abutment
Posts: 7,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x2 View Post
....not to mention that they built both bridges in just about 2 years. They must've had an entire army of underpayed workers.
Well the country has 40 times as many people as Canada..... Beijing alone has more people than Ontario & Quebec.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 3:59 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
with glowing hearts
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: █♣█ Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 12,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by northwest2k View Post
You have no proof that the toll would be $300. Please stick to confirmed facts
Consider that a study from the 1980's estimated that a one-way toll fee would be between $180-$300. Three decades later, the same toll would probably have to be a minimum of $300.

If you want a source, look at the website where you got your images from.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 4:04 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
with glowing hearts
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: █♣█ Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 12,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by northwest2k View Post
As long as they build a fixed link to the island I don't care what form it takes

Who says the tunnel has to be underground?


And you think a floating tunnel is feasible how?

Also consider that the technology is not proven, and the longest and ONLY floating tunnel in the world is in China and it's barely 100-metres long.

One big storm, and a floating tunnel in the Strait of Georgia would be a write-off. Again, don't forget about the maximum depth of the Strait either:



But really, the main issue is cost. If we ever have $30-billion to spend, I'd rather see it spent on other things.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 5:43 AM
baggab baggab is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by northwest2k View Post
You have no proof that the toll would be $300. Please stick to confirmed facts
If you put a bridge to Vancouver Island, we'll need to twin the lions gate bridge or something like that. Traffic is pretty much at the limit for that bridge, imagine all the extra traffic a Van Island bridge would bring.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 6:15 AM
Punkster Punkster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by northwest2k View Post
Tell that to the hundreds of semi-trucks that travel from the mainland to the island everyday by ferry.
Except for last minute deliveries, most freight isn't shipped by BC Ferries anyways. It's shipped by Seaspan http://www.coastalintermodal.com/

Even BC Ferries current prices are too expensive for shippers, I don't think the time savings of a bridge/tunnel would add anything to a company's bottom line.

This issue pops up in the Times Colonist in Victoria at least one a year and usually a majority are against having a fixed link. Maybe if the population of the Island was a few million people or something significant.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 6:47 AM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by eduardo88 View Post
How would that at all help to pay for the bridge if you're discouraging people from commuting? Anyway it'd probably be way more efficient and cheaper to move freight by ship...its slower, but one ship can carry what hundreds of trucks can do in a single trip. Theres no logic in transporting by truck across the straight.

Anyway a bridge across is probably not economically feasible, perhaps even technologically feasible due to the extreme depths. The money would be much better spent improving infrastructure in Metro Vancouver and augmenting ferry services.
Thank you. Well said.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 7:19 AM
raggedy13's Avatar
raggedy13 raggedy13 is offline
Dérive-r
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kamloops, BC
Posts: 4,427
I would agree with the majority of the posters so far that such a link is just not currently feasible. Both the Lower Mainland and the Island would need to see much larger populations and economic interreliance to make this a worthwhile investment.

You really have to think about opportunity cost. What would be a better investment at this point in time... multi-multi-billions spent on one bridge that perhaps shaves 30 mins off crossing time or investing that same huge amount of money on intra-city transit/road/sewage treatment/etc infrastructure and/or healthcare/education/public institutions/etc... or hosting the summer olympics!

So in other words we can choose between amazingly beneficial local projects or getting to our aunt's house on the island 30 mins earlier for Thanksgiving dinner that one time a year we bother to make the trip across.

It would be ideal to have a bridge but I don't think we'll have one for a long time.
__________________
Terminal City
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 7:48 AM
Pinion's Avatar
Pinion Pinion is offline
Lower Lonsdale YIMBY
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: City of North Vancouver
Posts: 4,144
Wouldn't a floating bridge interfere with the massive cargo ships/cruise ships? I'm no expert but I thought they could only go on areas where large ships don't (like Lake Washington).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 7:56 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
with glowing hearts
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: █♣█ Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 12,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by raggedy13 View Post
You really have to think about opportunity cost. What would be a better investment at this point in time... multi-multi-billions spent on one bridge that perhaps shaves 30 mins off crossing time or investing that same huge amount of money on intra-city transit/road/sewage treatment/etc infrastructure and/or healthcare/education/public institutions/etc... or hosting the summer olympics!
I'm pretty sure we could do all of that with the $30-40 billion we'll be spending on a crossing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 12:04 PM
Hourglass Hourglass is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Here and there
Posts: 638
Well, who knows. If the price of natural gas and oil continues to skyrocket, BC could well go the way of Norway, a country that is swimming in oil money. They'll spend money to bore a highway tunnel through a mountain to connect a village of a couple of hundred people
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 4:40 PM
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 6,397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nutterbug View Post
I have a better idea.

Don't live on the Island if you don't want to take the ferry.
We have a winner!

I think a bridge to the Island would be great, but its too deep to make a normal bridge, and the water is too violent in areas for a good floating bridge.

Show me a bridge to Gibsons first! Its not even an island!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2008, 4:46 PM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,267
Show me decent public transit in Vancouver and Victoria first. Forget this white elephant bridge nonsense.

Bridge probably wont happen in our lifetimes, maybe maybe near the end of our lifetimes. That and it couldn't be a bridge for many reasons, it would have to be a tunnel if built at all.
1. too long
2. Too deep
3. Too much shipping
4. Gulf Islands parks and environmentalists.
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 > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:26 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.