HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2016, 7:09 AM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infrequent Poster View Post
Much of the road is already there. Granted it is logging road, and yes it would still be very exspensive, but there is road from powell river all the way to the top of jervis inlet. It ends right at the base of mount alfred. I believe its the same coming from squamish. There is not really that much distance between the ends of each road (I used to know the exact amount). I believe its something like 15 to 20 km of new road they would need to build. Less if they incorporate a tunnel.

I do agree though would still be more money then anyone would be willing to spend.
These guys have a pretty cool annotated flyover of the route.
http://thirdcrossingsociety.com/a-cl...proposed-road/

Agreed, it would be expensive, a nightmare to keep clear of snow in the winter, and the proposed tunnel to connect those two existing logging roads should not queue jump the Kicking Horse Canyon Tunnel! BUT, it would open up a very spectacular region to eco-tourism, recreation, etc. One needs to look at this idea as what it could stimulate as opposed to what existing users it would service.

However, I think the Howe Sound Crossing is more likely (if anything proceeds). I could see them pursuing the two-bridge Anvil Island Route, although I do question their estimated project cost. The impact factors show a glowing positive impact on property values, which is probably an angle to justify this whole scheme. That said, it would effectively convert the eastern parts of the Sunshine Coast to full 'suburb' status. A property boom would more than justify the cost of the project, especially if a significant road toll exists. Win-win for many, except those who want to preserve the quiet Sunshine Coast lifestyle.

Last edited by Mininari; Nov 1, 2016 at 7:29 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 12:15 AM
BCPhil BCPhil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut View Post
Sure, but two of those monsters'd cost $4.6 billion in capital costs alone... to benefit just 25-26,000 residents, give or take a few hundred vacation homeowners and/or tourists?

Even 20-30 years down the road, I don't see how that could be practical.
That's a bit flippant. Have you never been on a sailing? There's easily a hundred tourists on a single sailing all summer long. And it is not the same 100 people that repeatedly travel to the Sunshine Coast, it's tens of thousands of different individuals that enjoy trips to the sunshine coast each year.

But the real problem is that there are only 30,000 residents, because they are isolated. And it is a serious problem. The population has hit a bit of a plateau, while other areas of the south coast see much larger increases. And this is making the Sunshine Coast have a higher proportion of old people. If the trend continues, it could literally mean the economy will collapse, and social services will just need to be subsidized by taxpayers outside the region.

So we could spend the money on a bridge, and open up some of the best land in the province (that's not on Vancouver Island) to development, expand the population there, stabilize and improve the economy, and generate taxes... or we could just send them the cash to pay for their health and seniors care.

Another interesting stat, only 20% of the ALR on the Sunshine Coast is actively farmed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 12:22 AM
BobLoblawsLawBlog's Avatar
BobLoblawsLawBlog BobLoblawsLawBlog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Metrotown
Posts: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by red-paladin View Post
This is the bridge that the BC government referenced in the pdf.
Norway's Hardanger Bridge. It's 1400 metres long, with 2 vehicle lanes and a pedestrian/bike lane.

Imagine two of these to cross Howe Sound:




From: http://www.byggutengrenser.no/inspirasjon/hardangerbrua



From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardanger_Bridge
Sure, those bridges look nice, but in reality the BC will end up building something boring and generic like the New Massey Tunnel Bridge or Pattullo.
__________________
"Looks cheap and spandrelly, as expected. But it's good that they're adding density, or whatever." -csbvan
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 2:58 AM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLoblawsLawBlog View Post
Sure, those bridges look nice, but in reality the BC will end up building something boring and generic like the New Massey Tunnel Bridge or Pattullo.
The Norway bridge is in fact just a simple generic suspension bridge, nothing particularly nice or fancy about it. Both the Massey or Pattullo bridges are cable stayed designs, a completely different type of bridge which won't be used to go over the Howe Sound, as a clear span is required (ie a suspension bridge). So yes, the potential bridges would look very similar to the Norway example.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 4:04 AM
Millennium2002 Millennium2002 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,688
The other thing about a potential Howe Sound bridge is that it'll have to be tall enough for navigation due to the Port of Squamish being upstream. So most likely it'll be at Lions Gate Bridge height, if not a little higher. The Norway example seems a little on the low side for that.

(IIRC the Lions Gate Bridge was a little too low such that they had to ship in new container cranes with their tops folded down.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 4:22 AM
red-paladin's Avatar
red-paladin red-paladin is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 3,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan_kuan View Post
The other thing about a potential Howe Sound bridge is that it'll have to be tall enough for navigation due to the Port of Squamish being upstream. So most likely it'll be at Lions Gate Bridge height, if not a little higher. The Norway example seems a little on the low side for that.

(IIRC the Lions Gate Bridge was a little too low such that they had to ship in new container cranes with their tops folded down.)
The display boards say both bridges would need to have 60+m clearance over the water.

That Hardanger bridge is 55m according to wikipedia. I think the length of the bridge (being longer than Golden Gate) makes it look deceptively low.
Golden Gate has apparently 67.1m clearance at high tide.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 4:45 AM
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,723
The concrete work is actually nicer on the Port Mann bridge (less visible seams between lifts). Between that, Golden Ears, Pitt River, Coast Meridan, Canada Line and now the Massey Bridge, I can't help but wonder if Gordon Campbell is somewhere in the background pulling strings to get everything cable stayed in some grand scheme to create his legacy brand or something lol
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 10:46 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,519
I have got to think that there are better ways to spend $3B, but I think that the Anvil island bridge option or the road to Squamish would be pretty great. The Squamish road option would probably be the best balance of providing access while not turning it into another suburb, but the travel time from Vancouver would almost definitely be longer than the current ferry (although much more flexible/reliable). It would be a hell of a road though.
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 11:13 PM
ClaytonA ClaytonA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by dleung View Post
The concrete work is actually nicer on the Port Mann bridge (less visible seams between lifts). Between that, Golden Ears, Pitt River, Coast Meridan, Canada Line and now the Massey Bridge, I can't help but wonder if Gordon Campbell is somewhere in the background pulling strings to get everything cable stayed in some grand scheme to create his legacy brand or something lol
Cable stays are cheaper until you get to a clear span threshold-IIRC it's on the order of 1.5km? i.e. under 1.5km it's cheaper to build a cable stay than a suspension bridge given current technology.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 11:17 PM
ClaytonA ClaytonA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 300
Haven't read the thread, or materials. The only worthwhile project here is the highway or logging road improvement (maybe to lesser standard?) to Powell River. It is the community that's suffering big time from ferry cut backs. Not so much Gibsons and Sechelt. Going there is just to encourage real estate speculation. By that line of thinking, the ferry cut backs causing much lower property values throughout the Gulf Islands were a mistake.

Why should we use limited capital to fund Gibsons/Sechelt and not other communities recently thrown under the bus? Much better provincial investments out there-of course politics is different.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2016, 3:09 AM
waves's Avatar
waves waves is offline
waves
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Vancouver
Posts: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaytonA View Post
The only worthwhile project here is the highway or logging road improvement (maybe to lesser standard?) to Powell River.
It's already a 2.5 hour road to Squamish at 80km/h. How much longer would you suggest it should take? The problem with the 2.5h logging road is that it's a lot of money to improve access only to Powell River; it would have little to improvement to access to the Sunshine Coast.

If connecting Powell River is the most important factor, then from my perspective, a connection from Saltery Bay to Earls Cove make more sense.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2016, 7:02 PM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,300
Todays news about the Woodfibre LNG project could have some bearing on what ends up getting built (if anything):

http://www.news1130.com/2016/11/04/w...ng-project-bc/

Woodfibre LNG moves ahead with project, BC's first

Local

by NEWS 1130 Staff and The Canadian Press

Posted Nov 4, 2016 11:07 am PDT

Last Updated Nov 4, 2016 at 11:10 am PDT

...
SQUAMISH (NEWS 1130) – Woodfibre LNG says it is proceeding with its proposed liquefied natural gas development near Squamish, in what would be the province’s first LNG project. The liquefied natural gas facility will be built at the former pulp mill site on Howe Sound.
...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2016, 10:12 PM
ClaytonA ClaytonA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by waves View Post
It's already a 2.5 hour road to Squamish at 80km/h. How much longer would you suggest it should take? The problem with the 2.5h logging road is that it's a lot of money to improve access only to Powell River; it would have little to improvement to access to the Sunshine Coast.

...
Does the Sunshine coast need improved access to the same degree?
Powell River is really suffering due to ferry cut backs.
Google "powell river" ferry cutbacks.

Sunshine Coast not so much. I wouldn't expect people from Sechelt/Gibsons to even use a highway from Powell River to Squamish unless they lived on the north end of the peninsula and were driving to the BC interior north of Kamloops (i.e. via Duffey Lake).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2016, 10:21 PM
ClaytonA ClaytonA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 300
There's better uses for limited capital funds. Do a study, sure. But I'll be disappointed if any of this actually gets built in the next 20-30 years unless something big changes. Still need to plan for the long term though.

How much should we subsidize people to live on islands or on the Sunshine Coast?

Is it fair for people to live on Quadra and work in Campbell River, for the province to subsidize that lifestyle? Or Saltspring working in Sidney/Saanich/Victoria? Bowen in Vancouver? Gibsons in Vancouver? Why should I subsidize your lifestyle? To quote: "get your own damn boat, pay for your own moorage..."

Some subsidy, OK. Are they getting it about right? Opinions differ. But maybe it's a local issue and more subsidy is not something we, the province, can afford if we're going to have government revenues at the level people seem to want when they vote.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2016, 11:53 PM
red-paladin's Avatar
red-paladin red-paladin is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 3,308
Remember that at one point, people from the North Shore travelling to Vancouver was seen as a local issue, not worthy of government expense, and a private toll bridge was built...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2016, 1:00 AM
Bdawe Bdawe is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sunrise
Posts: 311
Quote:
Originally Posted by red-paladin View Post
Remember that at one point, people from the North Shore travelling to Vancouver was seen as a local issue, not worthy of government expense, and a private toll bridge was built...
ah, back in the olden days when property development schemes were expected to do more to pay their way
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2016, 5:53 AM
jhausner jhausner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,519
I think the bigger issue is the fact we live in a Province with $237 billion GDP per year and we gripe over $3 billion (1.26%) in infrastructure spending spread over 25 years. That's kind of like someone making $237,000 per year losing sleep over buying a $3,000 house.

There's always going to be a segment of the population that thinks any 1 project is stupid and pointless, especially if it doesn't affect them daily which is true for probably 95% of the people in BC for every project and really the money isn't much if the business case is sound.

For this specifically, I think it is a neat concept. My thoughts and opinions right now are:

1. Given the options presented, costs, and populations of Powell River + Sunshine Coast combined being just shy of 40,000 people, the reason for this absolutely has to be about goods and resource movement/access, not people's homes. If its just about the people living there having faster driving access to the mainland, then I'd say none of these are worth it and yes the money then could be better spent elsewhere even for goods movement like putting it toward a faster link between Metro Vancouver and Prince Rupert for example.

2. I wonder what the real issue is ultimately. A few have said it is the ferry cut backs for Powell River. If that's the case then just the link between it an Sunshine Coast could help that by giving access directly to SC. That said would that not just move the problem then to the Sunshine Coast ferry link?

3. I'm a little confused as to if multiple options are available or if the options are all exclusive. Aka could they do a road to Powell River then the bridge link to Sunshine Coast from Powell River? Or could they do both bridge links to Sunshine Coast & Powell River. Or is it like only options A, B, C, or D.

Maybe I missed that somewhere.

4. $3 billion which is the most expensive one is pocket change in the grand scheme of things infrastructure wise (we've just spend $10 billion+ in the last decade in metro Vancouver alone and last I checked all the infrastructure through kicking horse pass near Golden doesn't service much population if that's what matters...), especially if new resource access is opened up. Think it could be especially useful for Powell River which is double detached from Metro-Vancouver right now (2 ferries and a long drive to get there). With direct road access there, the town could see a boom of industry especially with links to Squamish which is already starting to see a boom in recent years.

5. Overall I think this will help Squamish out a bunch more than Metro-Vancouver.

6. People need to get over the fact that houses are being built everywhere. We live in a world where people can't stop multiplying by the millions every year, so get used to it. The cities are going to grow bigger and bigger and any towns within a rock throw distance from Metro-Vancouver which in 50 years will be 4+ million people, will feel the affects of that.

For those counting, yes by 2050 projections are Metro-Vancouver will add another Metro-Vancouver within the same boundaries it is today. That's Vancouver City @ 1 million+, Surrey at 1 million+, etc. etc.

If the people in the Sunshine Coast or Chilliwack or Abbotsford or Squamish etc. want to feel like they live in the middle of nowhere near nobody and in the great vast wilderness, they better be prepared to eventually move up to Fort Nelson BC.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2016, 7:03 AM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 5,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaytonA View Post
There's better uses for limited capital funds. Do a study, sure. But I'll be disappointed if any of this actually gets built in the next 20-30 years unless something big changes. Still need to plan for the long term though.

How much should we subsidize people to live on islands or on the Sunshine Coast?

Is it fair for people to live on Quadra and work in Campbell River, for the province to subsidize that lifestyle? Or Saltspring working in Sidney/Saanich/Victoria? Bowen in Vancouver? Gibsons in Vancouver? Why should I subsidize your lifestyle? To quote: "get your own damn boat, pay for your own moorage..."

Some subsidy, OK. Are they getting it about right? Opinions differ. But maybe it's a local issue and more subsidy is not something we, the province, can afford if we're going to have government revenues at the level people seem to want when they vote.
You do realize that many of these ferries are a money-losing endeavor, right?

Either we raise prices for the ferries or build a bridge and get a toll to pay for the infrastructure. The thing with Ferries is that they don't scale well. They get MORE expensive to run, not LESS.

For the record, I agree with you about subsidizing their lifestyle and I think Ferry costs should go UP. It makes projects like building fixed links both more palatable and more realistic.

If you're charging 50¢ for lemonade that costs a $1 to make, then how are you going to get people to buy a home lemonade that will cost them $50 up front and 65¢ / cup?

We need to cost ferries appropriately, to do a true comparison.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2016, 7:07 AM
ClaytonA ClaytonA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 300
$3 billion's a lot of money. Will bridges be cheaper than the ferries? You think they'll toll it after not tolling Hwy 99/Sea 2 Sky? What's the acceptable alternate route?

They do these studies regularly. Here's links to another bridge project touting economic benefits. First promised 50 years ago when they built the dam, they even had the design done in 2005, and it was purportedly two months away from starting construction.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...-hold-1.558066

http://politicsinbc.blogspot.ca/2005...e-too-far.html

http://conf.tac-atc.ca/english/resou...s6/furtado.pdf

The ocean, marine transport, is the cheapest way to move resources, not a highway and or bridges. That's why so many raw logs get shipped overseas or down to Bellingham on the coast when that doesn't happen in the interior. It's related to why Alberta wants a a pipeline at tidewater. Once you're on the ocean, cheap transport's easy for things like resources. Yeah some goods like groceries and home hardware is on trucks via the ferries. It's consequential to Gibsons/Sechelt's cost of living, but an economic argument-no.

It's great engineers get a fun, neat project to work on for a bit. There's many of these projects and studies if you use the wayback machine on MOT's website. They were going to build a highway between Harrison Mills and Pemberton/Mt Currie in the late 1990s. A road between Cumberland and Port Alberni. Between Port Alberni and north Qualicum via Horne Lake. Between Port Alberni and Lake Cowichan.

Where do we get the biggest bang for our buck? My vote with transit is Broadway subway. Or the whole Mayor's Plan. Throw some money CN's way to improve the tunnels on the old BC Railway, so they can double-stack containers. Match the recent federal investment at the Ashcroft Inland port to take pressure of the ALR. Or help out with a CNG locomotive pilot, or port handling innovation, port logistics upgrades for bigger ships, or the Deltaport expansion. We've got to compete with a Panama Canal expansion bringing costs down on the east coast.

For roads it's any of Hwy 15 from #1 to US Border, Hwy 5 north of Kamloops, Highway 16, TransCanada to Alberta, Cariboo/Hwy 97, Hwy 3 in the Columbias/Kootenays (Alberta border to Kingsgate i.e. to Spokane), Hwy 97 in the Okanagan, Malahat, Hope Princeton to suck some commerce from north Washington State. Lots of more worthy road projects out there to spend more than $3 billion on. Hell, they should lower gas taxes rather than bridges to Gibsons/Sechelt. 3.5cent/L is what $200-300 million per year? Stimulate the economy that way. Just spit-balling.

Last edited by ClaytonA; Nov 6, 2016 at 7:24 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Nov 7, 2016, 5:21 PM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 5,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaytonA View Post
$3 billion's a lot of money. Will bridges be cheaper than the ferries? You think they'll toll it after not tolling Hwy 99/Sea 2 Sky? What's the acceptable alternate route?
The S2S upgrades were to a previously "FREE" highway, and were billed as Safety enhancements.

A SC Bridge would be a convenience bridge replacing a non-free alternative. People pay for convenience. Tolling it will be a non-issue.
Quote:
They do these studies regularly. Here's links to another bridge project touting economic benefits. First promised 50 years ago when they built the dam, they even had the design done in 2005, and it was purportedly two months away from starting construction.
Yes, sad to say that bridges between smaller towns usually get put on the back burner as there are few people to complain about the lack of one.

Yes, they do these studies often, but let's be honest, the S2S is close enough to the province's main economic engine (Vancouver) that it makes it much more likely.

Ocean transport can be efficient, but it doesn't scale. There's too much latency and not enough capacity.

Interestingly, the 54km Seikan tunnel in Japan was only built after a typhoon wiped out five ferries and 1,430 lives in 1954. These risks aren't present in BC, which is why long connections to Vancouver Island are hard to justify. Smaller hops north island may be justified, but that's not as sexy as a massive tether tying Vancouver and Victoria to each other.

The SC bridge, though... well that makes a lot of sense. $3B would be amortized over the life of the project and BC's debt level is quite low. With interest rates so low right now, long-term loans are very cheap to do these kinds of improvements to infrastructure.
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 5:32 PM.

     

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