HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2010, 9:17 PM
cabotp cabotp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,813
I think the only problem with the cut-and-cover construction was the way they did it.

What they did was just tear up one side of the road for blocks and blocks and blocks leaving no way to cross for long stretches. So anyone on one side was unable to access a store on the other side. Even if they wanted to. So they probably just gave up.

If they had done it in sections. It might not have been as disruptive. It still would of been a mess though, just not as bad. And any in a car or a pedestrian could of easily crossed if more crossing points were available.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2010, 9:31 PM
NetMapel's Avatar
NetMapel NetMapel is offline
Hello World
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by officedweller View Post
I suppose the flip side is that the businesses that now benefit should make payments to InTransitBC/Canada Line Co for increased business.
I posted that exact opinion before, haha. Then I was told it will basically happen with increased property taxes. So I think it balances out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2010, 10:24 PM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by cabotp View Post

If they had done it in sections. It might not have been as disruptive. It still would of been a mess though, just not as bad. And any in a car or a pedestrian could of easily crossed if more crossing points were available.
If it's done in sections, it probably won't be open by now. We, instead, chose to rip out the entire corridor all at once to make the deadline.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2010, 10:30 PM
Yume-sama's Avatar
Yume-sama Yume-sama is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Vancouver / Calgary / Tokyo
Posts: 7,523
Yeah, I could imagine the only thing more embarrassing than unfinished building wraps is a partial rapid transit line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2010, 10:39 PM
mezzanine's Avatar
mezzanine mezzanine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,998
Quote:
Originally Posted by officedweller View Post
BTW - If I recall correctly, the lawsuit failed on claims of misrepresentation (i.e. it failed on the "bait & switch" "bored to cut & cover" claims) but succeeded on the basis of nuisance (which is potentially much much worse (in terms of setting a precedent) for any governmental entity building infrastructure (i.e. roads, sewers, watermains, etc.).

True that.

Quote:
There is no evidence to support the allegation that the representation made in mid-2003 with respect to the method of tunnel construction was false or negligent. While that should have been apparent to the plaintiff and its counsel well in advance of trial, the claim in relation to that representation was not abandoned until the plaintiff’s closing submissions.
....
On the evidence, I find that Ms. Bird did not negligently misrepresent the likely duration of actual open trench construction. The representation was based on information and advice on which she was entitled to rely and was not untrue, inaccurate, or misleading at the time it was made.

Moreover, there is no evidence that Hazel & Co. relied on the representation that was made to make any decisions or do anything that affected its business. There is some evidence that purchasing and manufacturing decisions may have been affected by the representation. However, the consequences of such decisions will be reflected in the overall assessment of loss sustained by Hazel & Co.

It follows that the claim for damages resulting from either negligent or false
misrepresentation is dismissed as against all defendants.
http://www.cbc.ca/bc/news/bc-090527-...ine-ruling.pdf (page 30, onwards)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2010, 10:53 PM
BCPhil BCPhil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
If it's done in sections, it probably won't be open by now. We, instead, chose to rip out the entire corridor all at once to make the deadline.
I think there were also engineering considerations. I believe the original plan was to do it in large sections with precast dropped in segments. (the section at the south end was finished and covered up completely before the rest afterall), But the entire thing had to be excavated at once because the floor had to be poured as continuously as possible due to unfavorable soil conditions in sections.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2010, 10:59 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 38,229
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetMapel View Post
I posted that exact opinion before, haha. Then I was told it will basically happen with increased property taxes. So I think it balances out.
I suppose so - depends on the amounts, I guess.

*******

From what I understand, the tight timeline caused them to abandon the precast method (which apparently was more of a unidirectional approach, and a delay would have had a serious impact) in favour of building on a number of fronts simultaneously.

********

BTW - anyone else notice all of the new trees planted on he Cambe Boulevard -
i.e. between the big Sequoias and all along the boulevard near Oakridge - including directly above the Oakridge Station
(interesting given that there aren't even any shrubs over the Broadway-City Hall Station (could be closer to the surface I guess)).
I think there was a one for one or a two for one strategy of replacing lost trees?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2010, 9:18 AM
cabotp cabotp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
If it's done in sections, it probably won't be open by now. We, instead, chose to rip out the entire corridor all at once to make the deadline.
Makes sense. I figured it had something to do with being faster
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2010, 9:36 PM
lightrail lightrail is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 809
Quote:
Originally Posted by cabotp View Post
Makes sense. I figured it had something to do with being faster
Part of the problem was not the technology but the way the surface of Cambie was used. The contractor could have covered the trench quicker and repaved it and opened it to traffic. They chose not to and instead, the area was used as parking for people working on the line. Now for that I support the merchants because it was a complete disregard for their concerns and needs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2010, 10:07 AM
cabotp cabotp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightrail View Post
Part of the problem was not the technology but the way the surface of Cambie was used. The contractor could have covered the trench quicker and repaved it and opened it to traffic. They chose not to and instead, the area was used as parking for people working on the line. Now for that I support the merchants because it was a complete disregard for their concerns and needs.
That is a disregard. I always thought when they did start building it they would dig up the trench and try to get a working road above as soon as possible. It didn't have to be nicely paved or green grass. But something that could be used. But alas it wasn't to be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2010, 4:01 PM
VanCvl VanCvl is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by cabotp View Post
That is a disregard. I always thought when they did start building it they would dig up the trench and try to get a working road above as soon as possible. It didn't have to be nicely paved or green grass. But something that could be used. But alas it wasn't to be.
It may not be obvious if you don't have an engineering/construction background but after the roof section is poured there is a 28 day period that's required before any backfill can be completed to ensure the concrete is at sufficient strength. As well, you can just open a partially built road! There are utilities to be replaced, storm drains to be hooked back up as well as streetlighting and signal conduits. It's more than just backfill and asphalt.

Someone earlier was complaining about the lack of crossings on Cambie but all the arterials and some collectors were always open: Marine Dr., 49th, 41st, KE, 19th, 16th, 12th, Broadway and 2nd.

Given the budget constraints - it was the best delivery method. People need to stop talking about boring from KE because that would have more than tripled the cost of the stations and tunnel in that section and made the project unfeasible.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2010, 5:04 PM
jsbertram jsbertram is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanCvl View Post
It may not be obvious if you don't have an engineering/construction background but after the roof section is poured there is a 28 day period that's required before any backfill can be completed to ensure the concrete is at sufficient strength. As well, you can just open a partially built road! There are utilities to be replaced, storm drains to be hooked back up as well as streetlighting and signal conduits. It's more than just backfill and asphalt.

Someone earlier was complaining about the lack of crossings on Cambie but all the arterials and some collectors were always open: Marine Dr., 49th, 41st, KE, 19th, 16th, 12th, Broadway and 2nd.

Given the budget constraints - it was the best delivery method. People need to stop talking about boring from KE because that would have more than tripled the cost of the stations and tunnel in that section and made the project unfeasible.
The major arterials may have had temporary bridges built over the Cambie trench, but ALL off them had net lane reductions. I took Broadway buses (9 and 99) across Cambie during the entire time of construction, and always wondered why Broadway's 6 lanes were squeezed into 4 lanes at Cambie. 12th Ave's 4 lanes were reduced to 2 lanes (one in each direction), 41st was reduced from 6 lanes to 4, and 6th/4th/2nd Ave was also reduced from 4 lanes to 2.

The diamond lanes on Broadway were an attempt to get the 9 and 99 running faster along Broadway, but with the Cambie bottleneck the running times between Oak and Main actually increased by up to 4 minutes.

From an engineering viewpoint there were no issues why the temporary bridges crossing Cambie couldn't have kept the full number of vehicle lanes and sidewalks, but because it was a PPP project, saving bucks at any cost was part of the mandate.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2010, 5:44 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbertram View Post
From an engineering viewpoint there were no issues why the temporary bridges crossing Cambie couldn't have kept the full number of vehicle lanes and sidewalks, but because it was a PPP project, saving bucks at any cost was part of the mandate.
That doesn't really have anything to do with it being a PPP. RavCo could have specified full lane crossings in the project requirements. They obviously did not. We got the level of disruption that was specified by RavCo, regardless of it being a PPP. They are the ones who are responsible for how the construction was conducted; SNC/Lavalin would have merely followed the project spec.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Sep 7, 2018, 8:25 PM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 22,106
The BC Supreme Court awarded three more Cambie merchants damages over the cut and cover fiasco:

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-...e-construction
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2018, 5:39 PM
aberdeen5698's Avatar
aberdeen5698 aberdeen5698 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
The BC Supreme Court awarded three more Cambie merchants damages over the cut and cover fiasco...
I support the decision. I always felt it was unfair - cut and cover reduced construction costs but didn't have to pay for the "externalities" of disruption it caused. I think it's better to require the construction consortia to have to pay for those kinds of disruptions because that's the only way to make sure that they're taken into account during the bidding and decision making process.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2018, 11:30 PM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant
Posts: 6,847
Quote:
Schein, Dubberley and Gautam were pulled out of the class-action and their suit was put forward as a test case. The ruling sets a potential precedent for other judgments still to come.
Maybe this is part of the reason why the Broadway extension has increased in cost. At every station except for GNW there will be major disruptions as the stations will need to be excavated. Example being the downtown section of the Canada Line (which was a bored tunnel). Granville Street between Robson and Georgia was hugely disrupted for an extended period of time. The Broadway line stations will be much larger.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 5:14 AM
Klazu's Avatar
Klazu Klazu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Above Metro Vancouver clouds
Posts: 10,182
$180,000 is actually a tiny sum of money if constructions costs end up being even 1% less due to that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 9:23 PM
misher's Avatar
misher misher is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 4,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by logan5 View Post
Maybe this is part of the reason why the Broadway extension has increased in cost. At every station except for GNW there will be major disruptions as the stations will need to be excavated. Example being the downtown section of the Canada Line (which was a bored tunnel). Granville Street between Robson and Georgia was hugely disrupted for an extended period of time. The Broadway line stations will be much larger.
Good point. Perhaps they will argue that long-term sales gains from being beside a station outweigh losses? If they can keep the sidewalks open most of the time it shouldn't be too bad.

The cases that won proved that sales went down bigtime during construction.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2018, 4:17 PM
CanSpice's Avatar
CanSpice CanSpice is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: New Westminster, BC
Posts: 2,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by misher View Post
Good point. Perhaps they will argue that long-term sales gains from being beside a station outweigh losses? If they can keep the sidewalks open most of the time it shouldn't be too bad.

The cases that won proved that sales went down bigtime during construction.
The cases didn't win because of a loss of sales. Those cases had been thrown out of court earlier. These cases won because the construction caused a drop in property value.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2018, 4:30 PM
roger1818's Avatar
roger1818 roger1818 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Stittsville, ON
Posts: 6,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanSpice View Post
The cases didn't win because of a loss of sales. Those cases had been thrown out of court earlier. These cases won because the construction caused a drop in property value.
Interesting. Presumably property values rebounded once construction was complete. If so, only those who sold for reduced value during construction (and possibly those who tried to sell but couldn't) should be compensated.
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 10:11 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.