HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #5201  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 9:03 PM
jsbertram jsbertram is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberdeen5698 View Post
Interesting! I just happened to drive through that intersection yesterday around noon and I noticed that the guideway spanning Como Lake Road seemed to be a little bit out of alignment with the adjacent segment sitting on top of the pier on the north side of the road. I was wondering about it, and for good reason, I guess...

This is probably going to be a major piece of work to correct, not to mention that they'll probably have to figure out why it happened before building any more segments, and then do remediation on the ones already built if necessary.
Talking head on noon news segment suggested this was because it is the longest beam and curved, and significantly heavier because it has to get over all the Clarke lanes & sidewalks as well as the Como lanes & sidewalks while transitioning from west side of Clarke to east side.

Reporter says beam was on 'temporary supports' while being aligned with the other beams (north and south of this one) before being permanently attached.

Last edited by jsbertram; Mar 14, 2014 at 9:16 PM.
     
     
  #5202  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2014, 9:39 PM
Olden Retreiver Olden Retreiver is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFUVancouver View Post
Partnerships BC presents the Evergreen Line as a P3 (http://www.partnershipsbc.ca/files-4...Case-Study.pdf), however I agree that it is essentially a fairly conventional design-build contract.



The structure of the performance-based project still does transfer construction risk to the builder, so any delays or costs associated with this failure are to be borne by the builder. The builder also had to secure their own financing and they are being paid on a milestone-based performance payment system, so the delays resulting from this incident may prolong their borrowing period and costs.
Yes, that meets a very soft definition of P3.
     
     
  #5203  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2014, 1:12 AM
TransitFreak TransitFreak is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 188
I'm surprised they didn't use a superstructure or solid segment on top of column instead of a regular segment (i.e. TCH flyover or Home Depot respectively on Millennium line). The distance over Como Lake seems very large. IIRC, max span for traditional segment guideway was 10 segments, or 30m...could be wrong...
     
     
  #5204  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2014, 7:45 AM
GeeCee's Avatar
GeeCee GeeCee is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Posts: 2,474
     
     
  #5205  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2014, 7:06 PM
Olden Retreiver Olden Retreiver is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 259
EGRT won't use spacers anymore that failed on Como Lake Ave span:

http://www.tricitynews.com/news/250687671.html
     
     
  #5206  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2014, 9:20 PM
jsbertram jsbertram is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeeCee View Post
Drill baby, Drill!
     
     
  #5207  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2014, 6:02 AM
nname nname is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,002
Images I took today at the Lafarge Lake Station:

View from the other side of Pinetree at the north end of the station. This is the 2nd to 4th last columns of the line.


View south from the north end of the construction area, showing the last 3 columns


By the look of it, seems like:
1. These columns looks more like the one used for the grider on Lougheed than the one used with gantry crane (on North Road or No.3 Road). Not sure what the construction method will be used here.
2. Seems like the guideway may not end immediately at the last column?
3. The last column seems very very low. The guideway is at about the same level as where I'm standing, about 30m away from it. IF they going to extend the line further someday, then it will most likely have to be at-grade.
     
     
  #5208  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2014, 6:13 AM
Millennium2002 Millennium2002 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,699
The old renderings do show that there is some buffer space between the platform and the guide-way ending.

And yes... that guideway is rather low for sure... Not sure what they were thinking of there. Is that to hinder expansion, or to appease someone at city hall / Douglas College / the local high school who didn't want to see the "turd" down the street?
     
     
  #5209  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2014, 3:44 PM
AverageJoe AverageJoe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 140
Snapped a few shots yesterday of the construction going on in Port Moody. I think this section of the Skytrain system will have some of the most spectacular views when finished.


Where the guideway transitions out of the tunnel under Barnet Hwy (looking west):


The guideway construction had to knock a piece off of the building on the left:


The elevated section through Port Moody east of the tunnel:


Looking east along the at-grade guideway toward Port Moody WCE Station:


Another angle:


From the ground:
     
     
  #5210  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2014, 4:44 PM
aberdeen5698 aberdeen5698 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by AverageJoe View Post
Where the guideway transitions out of the tunnel under Barnet Hwy (looking west):
Nice shots, thanks!

Interesting that they're using precast beams for this elevated segment. I guess it's not long enough to justify the cost of transporting and assembling the launching truss, or perhaps it's a scheduling issue with the truss not being able to be in two places at the same time (and therefore saving on the cost of a second one).
     
     
  #5211  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2014, 5:27 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 26,322
Thanks for the pics!

There's also a switch there (someone on the forum mentioned it and you can now see the ledges to the side) - so that may also be a reason for the I beams.
     
     
  #5212  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2014, 5:36 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan_kuan View Post
The old renderings do show that there is some buffer space between the platform and the guide-way ending.

And yes... that guideway is rather low for sure... Not sure what they were thinking of there. Is that to hinder expansion, or to appease someone at city hall / Douglas College / the local high school who didn't want to see the "turd" down the street?
The renderings also showed the guideway as being very low here. Perhaps it is to make the track level, so that trains can be stored safely there? Any grade on the tail track would make it problematic to use the tail track as storage track.
     
     
  #5213  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2014, 7:07 PM
SFUVancouver's Avatar
SFUVancouver SFUVancouver is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kamloops
Posts: 5,301
As a thought, perhaps the use of concrete I-beams for this section of track allowed the builder to utilize conventional bridge-and-overpass sub-contractors and solicit more cost-competitive bids, as opposed to relying on specialized sub-trades that have familiarity with the launching truss?
__________________
VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis
     
     
  #5214  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2014, 10:43 PM
xd_1771's Avatar
xd_1771 xd_1771 is offline
(daka_x)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,554
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberdeen5698 View Post
Nice shots, thanks!

Interesting that they're using precast beams for this elevated segment. I guess it's not long enough to justify the cost of transporting and assembling the launching truss, or perhaps it's a scheduling issue with the truss not being able to be in two places at the same time (and therefore saving on the cost of a second one).
Man. The generation-over-generation improvements of precast beams. I can see the Expo Line out my window, but looking at this picture... My goodness they're so low profile that I'm drooling. mad.

I take it, it's a scheduling thing. The truss is the fastest way to get elevated segments in place..... but if you can get a perfectly acceptable precast job still going on at the same time elsewhere, you get double productivity of course
     
     
  #5215  
Old Posted Mar 25, 2014, 4:52 AM
aberdeen5698 aberdeen5698 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post
Man. The generation-over-generation improvements of precast beams. I can see the Expo Line out my window, but looking at this picture... My goodness they're so low profile that I'm drooling. mad.
What section of the Expo line are you looking at? The beams in the posted picture look pretty massive to me, in fact I was wondering if that was because this section is going to have a third storage track on it. Compare that to the Expo line that you can see, for example, from Google Street view where it descends to ground level along Vanness west of Nanaimo station. To me, the Expo line looks positively svelte by comparison.
     
     
  #5216  
Old Posted Mar 25, 2014, 4:57 AM
xd_1771's Avatar
xd_1771 xd_1771 is offline
(daka_x)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,554
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberdeen5698 View Post
What section of the Expo line are you looking at? The beams in the posted picture look pretty massive to me, in fact I was wondering if that was because this section is going to have a third storage track on it. Compare that to the Expo line that you can see, for example, from Google Street view where it descends to ground level along Vanness west of Nanaimo station. To me, the Expo line looks positively svelte by comparison.
There were a few other pictures posted on their Facebok page, I'm pretty sure, that make it more evident.
     
     
  #5217  
Old Posted Mar 25, 2014, 8:27 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 26,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post
Man. The generation-over-generation improvements of precast beams. I can see the Expo Line out my window, but looking at this picture... My goodness they're so low profile that I'm drooling. mad.

I take it, it's a scheduling thing. The truss is the fastest way to get elevated segments in place..... but if you can get a perfectly acceptable precast job still going on at the same time elsewhere, you get double productivity of course
The other problem with using precast beams instead of segmental construction is the length of the beams. For the Expo Line, roads had to be closed off overnight to transport the beams.
     
     
  #5218  
Old Posted Mar 25, 2014, 8:44 PM
nname nname is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,002
Comparing the columns at Lafarge Lake with the segment in Port Moody - seems like it might be using precast beams too?
     
     
  #5219  
Old Posted Mar 25, 2014, 11:22 PM
AverageJoe AverageJoe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 140
Thought I'd share a little tidbit of history that I managed to get as a souvenir. The following plans were from an unnamed bidder who was outbid for the Evergreen Line, i.e. this is NOT what's under construction right now. Perhaps in an alternate reality this is what they're building...?

Alternate universe Lougheed Station:


Polar-shifted Lougheed to Burquitlam section:


Ioco Station in the 12th Dimension:


Captain-Kirk-didn't-save-the-whales Coquitlam to Douglas section:
     
     
  #5220  
Old Posted Mar 26, 2014, 7:26 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 26,322
Thanks for posting.

That plan would just make use of the existing Lougheed centre platform for all train movements (btw PPS = Propulsion Power Substation, not a platform) - presumably, the reason it would have been rejected is that it would not easily accommodate short-turning Millennium Line trains (from Braid) at Lougheed.

The Ioco Station would not have been as easily accessible from the residential to the northwest.

Glad Douglas didn't end up as single track.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

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 12:21 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.