HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1801  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2019, 12:45 AM
red-paladin red-paladin is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 3,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
B.C. acts as if they have the worst terrain in the world for building highways. They don't. They're just extremely cheap when it comes to building roads. ON on the other hand believes in safety and consistent standards. Users of a major national highway should be able to expect the same standards no matter what part of the highway they're using. Given the vast importance of Highway 1 thru B.C. I think the feds should finance a lot more of it and have third parties design the upgrades. Remove the B.C. government from the equation as much as possible.
There is no national highway system. Unless it's a National Park or a special case of bridge in Ontario/Quebec, it's not the federal government's jurisdiction, so they have no say in the standards.

Have you seen how expensive some of the BC Highway sections have been to date?
Quote:
In 2016, former minister Todd Stone announced that the fourth phase of the Kicking Horse Canyon project was expected to cost $450 million, which he said was likely to make it the most expensive roadwork per kilometre in Canadian history.
Quote:
The final phase of a 26-kilometre Trans Canada Highway upgrade project will widen 4.8 kilometres of roadway east of Golden, B.C., to four lanes. The highway is expected to be closed for weeks at a time during the project, which is expected to be completed by winter 2023-24. (B.C. Ministry of Transportation)
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...ises-1.5272695


https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/k...roject-updates

"Oh no! We have lots of terrain like this all over Ontario! We should spend an extra three hundred million dollars on this project, which British Columbians are paying for, to put in a median so that it can look more like Ontario, so that it can look more like the States!"

Last edited by red-paladin; Dec 16, 2019 at 1:13 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1802  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2019, 1:30 AM
Corndogger Corndogger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by red-paladin View Post
There is no national highway system. Unless it's a National Park or a special case of bridge in Ontario/Quebec, it's not the federal government's jurisdiction, so they have no say in the standards.

Have you seen how expensive some of the BC Highway sections have been to date?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...ises-1.5272695
I meant it's a national highway in a geographic sense. Just b/c the network isn't under federal control doesn't mean we don't have such a network.

Yes, I've seen the costs of some projects in B.C. but what does that have to do with my point? There are plenty of other places that have worse terrain and much better roads. B.C. has demonstrated over and over that they want to do the bare minimum when it comes to building highways. You live there so how could you not know this? Your current government has cancelled damn near every project that was proposed by the previous government.

And yes, you should have to meet standards. Enough with the excuses and putting peoples lives at risk as well as the national economy.

One last point, most of the rising costs are due to government policies. Stop implementing such nonsense and you'd be able to build more and better with the same number of dollars.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1803  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2019, 3:24 AM
craner's Avatar
craner craner is offline
Go Tall or Go Home
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 6,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
No. It means 21 companies make up the three consortia bidding on the project. Which ever one wins will be comprised of the companies listed under them.

I'm surprised they announced what they expect the project to cost before selecting the winning consortium. I'd also like to know why they need so long to pick a winner. Pick the winning team by spring so they can start work right away.
I agree, that's a ridiculously long selection process. Unless there are reasons for wanting to start work in the fall rather than the spring.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1804  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2019, 7:20 AM
Corndogger Corndogger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by craner View Post
I agree, that's a ridiculously long selection process. Unless there are reasons for wanting to start work in the fall rather than the spring.
Political? I believe their next election is May 2021. Would they be complete jerks and have next to nothing done next fall and winter and then cancel the project during the election campaign to cater to the anti-car nuts in the lower mainland and/or try to get the feds to cough up more money? The upgrading of this stretch has been going on for 15 years apparently. If they had done it as a P3 to begin with it would have been ages ago and for a lot less money.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1805  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2019, 11:37 AM
Dengler Avenue's Avatar
Dengler Avenue Dengler Avenue is offline
Road Engineer Wannabe
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Côté Ouest de la Rivière des Outaouais
Posts: 8,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
Political? I believe their next election is May 2021. Would they be complete jerks and have next to nothing done next fall and winter and then cancel the project during the election campaign to cater to the anti-car nuts in the lower mainland and/or try to get the feds to cough up more money? The upgrading of this stretch has been going on for 15 years apparently. If they had done it as a P3 to begin with it would have been ages ago and for a lot less money.
P3? Not with the NDP. On a somewhat related note, ever since N.S. proceeded with P3 to twin their portion of TCH between Sutherlands River and west end of Antigonish, there’s this one vocal union that’s been complaining. For a closer example, just see how SK NDP has been criticizing Regina Bypass project...

Don’t get me wrong: I’m the type of person that wanna see projects done quickly using a P3 though. I hope MIT (Manitoba Infrastructure & Transportation) does that for Winnipeg Perimeter Highway...
__________________
My Proposal of TCH Twinning in Northern Ontario
Disclaimer: Most of it is pure pie in the sky, so there's no need to be up in the arm about it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1806  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2019, 2:04 PM
youngregina's Avatar
youngregina youngregina is offline
Edan
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Victoria Park, Calgary
Posts: 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by craner View Post
I agree, that's a ridiculously long selection process. Unless there are reasons for wanting to start work in the fall rather than the spring.
Construction on the #1 through BC is usually slated post peak season. The summer sees more ground-transportation of goods (think fruit, lumber). It would decimate local business in some areas to close the TCH during their busiest, and in some cases ONLY, profitable season. During the widening of kicking horse pass, the TCH will be re-routed south on BC 95 through Radium, then north and east up BC 93. This will add roughly 3 hours drive time travelling between Calgary and Vancouver - something that needs to be avoided during peak travel season.
__________________
#YYC

Last edited by youngregina; Dec 16, 2019 at 2:06 PM. Reason: Spelling
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1807  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2019, 7:25 PM
Mazrim's Avatar
Mazrim Mazrim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
I'm surprised they announced what they expect the project to cost before selecting the winning consortium. I'd also like to know why they need so long to pick a winner. Pick the winning team by spring so they can start work right away.
The province does a study to roughly determine the cost before proceeding with bidding. Bidders then need to take the design, check it themselves, make any optimizations they want, and then cost it out themselves. That is why it takes so long to pick a winner. All they did was tell those three consortiums that they can start work to submit their designs and bids.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
B.C. must be the only place in North America that seems to think not having proper medians on major highways isn't a big deal. For example, this isn't much of a safety feature. The location is Donald to Forde Station Road. At least this short stretch has nice shoulders and protection for the railroad!
I'm genuinely curious - what makes you feel like that median is unsafe? Why do you feel like concrete barriers are unsafe?

There's a few things to consider here - if you look elsewhere in the world, there are plenty of high speed freeways in Europe and Asia that have narrow medians with barriers, and they function just fine. The land cost and construction cost of doubling your right-of-way for an open design in mountainous terrain is not probably going to save you much in the lifetime costs of accidents. If someone leaves the road, the percentage of them that get in serious collisions in a wide median is high enough that the cost benefit of what you're asking for is probably not worth it. If you're looking at it from a Vision Zero perspective, the likelihood of someone getting in a fatal collision when there are barriers on both sides of each direction of travel is likely lower in most collision types, especially since head-on collisions are removed.

Even when you design a road for a wide open median by current standards, the risk of someone traveling all the way across it is high enough that Alberta has recently started installing cable barriers on wide medians on some highways.

BC has been using the standard you're not happy with for many years now and continue to use it moving forward, which I imagine they wouldn't do if they started seeing more serious collisions and/or lawsuits because of it. The same cross section is being used by Parks Canada for the Trans Canada widening as well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1808  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2019, 8:00 PM
craner's Avatar
craner craner is offline
Go Tall or Go Home
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 6,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by youngregina View Post
Construction on the #1 through BC is usually slated post peak season. The summer sees more ground-transportation of goods (think fruit, lumber). It would decimate local business in some areas to close the TCH during their busiest, and in some cases ONLY, profitable season. During the widening of kicking horse pass, the TCH will be re-routed south on BC 95 through Radium, then north and east up BC 93. This will add roughly 3 hours drive time travelling between Calgary and Vancouver - something that needs to be avoided during peak travel season.
There is some disscussion about this on page 86 this thread - including this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmuzika View Post
At the very least the detours are not supposed to occur between May 15-Sept 15 (summer) and Nov 30-Apr 1 (winter/ski season). Personally, I don't usually travel into BC outside the summer. What's Radium traffic like during the fall and spring when it's not a long weekend?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1809  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2019, 9:22 PM
DoubleK DoubleK is offline
Near Generational
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue View Post
https://www.on-sitemag.com/roads/b-c...re/1003966398/
B.C. has prequalified 3 consortia for the last phase of KHC.
I just skimmed through the breakdown of each consortium. Does that mean a total of 21 construction companies will be participating in the project?
Crazy not to see SNC on a bidders list anymore.

Also shocked not to see Graham or Stantec as a part of the pre-qualifications, must not have made it through the first stage.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1810  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2019, 3:31 AM
red-paladin red-paladin is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 3,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazrim View Post
The province does a study to roughly determine the cost before proceeding with bidding. Bidders then need to take the design, check it themselves, make any optimizations they want, and then cost it out themselves. That is why it takes so long to pick a winner. All they did was tell those three consortiums that they can start work to submit their designs and bids.


I'm genuinely curious - what makes you feel like that median is unsafe? Why do you feel like concrete barriers are unsafe?

There's a few things to consider here - if you look elsewhere in the world, there are plenty of high speed freeways in Europe and Asia that have narrow medians with barriers, and they function just fine. The land cost and construction cost of doubling your right-of-way for an open design in mountainous terrain is not probably going to save you much in the lifetime costs of accidents. If someone leaves the road, the percentage of them that get in serious collisions in a wide median is high enough that the cost benefit of what you're asking for is probably not worth it. If you're looking at it from a Vision Zero perspective, the likelihood of someone getting in a fatal collision when there are barriers on both sides of each direction of travel is likely lower in most collision types, especially since head-on collisions are removed.

Even when you design a road for a wide open median by current standards, the risk of someone traveling all the way across it is high enough that Alberta has recently started installing cable barriers on wide medians on some highways.

BC has been using the standard you're not happy with for many years now and continue to use it moving forward, which I imagine they wouldn't do if they started seeing more serious collisions and/or lawsuits because of it. The same cross section is being used by Parks Canada for the Trans Canada widening as well.
Thank you!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1811  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2019, 7:47 AM
flipper316 flipper316 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 863
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1812  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2019, 8:26 AM
Corndogger Corndogger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by flipper316 View Post
Thanks for posting that link. Proves my point that the B.C. government doesn't care about highways and they definitely don't care about road safety.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1813  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2019, 1:25 PM
Dengler Avenue's Avatar
Dengler Avenue Dengler Avenue is offline
Road Engineer Wannabe
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Côté Ouest de la Rivière des Outaouais
Posts: 8,236
Forget it. Just swarm Schwartz Bay, take the ferry to Tsawassen, then from there to Duke Point. It’ll probably cost as much and take as long, but at least it’ll be a comfortable ride for the most part.
__________________
My Proposal of TCH Twinning in Northern Ontario
Disclaimer: Most of it is pure pie in the sky, so there's no need to be up in the arm about it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1814  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2019, 4:20 AM
Dengler Avenue's Avatar
Dengler Avenue Dengler Avenue is offline
Road Engineer Wannabe
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Côté Ouest de la Rivière des Outaouais
Posts: 8,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by flipper316 View Post
Then this comes in: https://www.google.ca/amp/s/beta.ctv...1_4734181.html.

It’s quite a slap in the face, huh?
__________________
My Proposal of TCH Twinning in Northern Ontario
Disclaimer: Most of it is pure pie in the sky, so there's no need to be up in the arm about it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1815  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2019, 5:57 AM
Corndogger Corndogger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue View Post
Then this comes in: https://www.google.ca/amp/s/beta.ctv...1_4734181.html.

It’s quite a slap in the face, huh?
Worse than that. Horgan and his supporters are okay with people dying just so they can fuck over drivers?

Last edited by Corndogger; Dec 18, 2019 at 6:27 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1816  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2019, 6:10 AM
ssiguy ssiguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 10,739
I don't know what it is with BC. None of the parties have ever shown any interest in building a proper highway system. BC routes are not only completely inadequate but also downright dangerous, even major ones. BC has the shortest merging lanes onto freeways requirements in the country and many of them would be closed anywhere else.

Overpasses are almost NEVER built regardless of traffic or safety demands. The 91A just got a new overpass but it was over 30 years in the making. That one stop light stopped the freeway from being just that despite it's very heavy traffic volumes but it still took 30 years to get just one overpass built. When new roads are built, like the SFPR, they are built to the lowest common denominator in terms of capacity and safety.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1817  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2019, 5:02 PM
swimmer_spe swimmer_spe is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 10,738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue View Post
Then this comes in: https://www.google.ca/amp/s/beta.ctv...1_4734181.html.

It’s quite a slap in the face, huh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
Worse than that. Horgan and his supporters are okay with people dying just so they can fuck over drivers?
The problem you have with it is 1) it goes through a provincial park and 2) it has sheer cliffs on either side. I am not excusing it, but that route really cannot be updated any better than it is.

The real problem is that it has become so busy due to the high housing costs in the CRD, so people move up island to cheaper properties.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1818  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2019, 7:11 PM
Mazrim's Avatar
Mazrim Mazrim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy View Post
BC routes are not only completely inadequate but also downright dangerous, even major ones. BC has the shortest merging lanes onto freeways requirements in the country and many of them would be closed anywhere else.
This is quite the anecdotal claim to make. Since BC is nice enough to make their design standards freely available to anyone who wishes to look at them, I took quick glance through their guidelines.
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/t...-survey/tac-bc

I was impressed with how detailed their design supplement was. They make it very clear on the webpage and throughout their supplement that the Canadian and American national road design standards are to be followed in the vast majority of cases, and many of the design tables in their supplement are verbatim recreations of the numbers used by TAC and AASHTO.

You'll be interested to know that the merging lanes you're unhappy with are based directly off the AASHTO (ie. American) road design standards, so I'd be curious to know what you think of interstate ramp merges. If you're talking about 30+ year old ramps, then that's not terribly surprising given how standards have changed over the years. Overall, I saw nothing in here to suggest they're cheating their way to "dangerous" conditions that wouldn't be allowed anywhere else.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1819  
Old Posted Dec 25, 2019, 7:43 AM
N McCity N McCity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Calgary
Posts: 40
I don’t know what it will take for someone to come in one day and just commit to a solid plan to twin the thing fully divided the whole stretch from Kamloops to the border so that we can drive between Vancouver and Calgary on fully divided highways. As it stands now I would rather drive through the US so I’m glad I have access to Air Canada employee travel so that I can get affordable flights instead of risking my life on that road.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
Worse than that. Horgan and his supporters are okay with people dying just so they can fuck over drivers?
That’s the problem with that side of the political sea. They will spend money, but often not so much on this these days. I get that they don’t want to build bigger roads or have more cars than they already do in the middle of Victoria or Vancouver, but out in the middle of nowhere it isn’t destroying any walkability score! Now, to be fair, the Malahat isn’t nearly as bad of a design as the 2 lane portions of the TCH are in interior BC. I wouldn’t say that they really don’t care at all about people dying because you could say the exact same about the fiscally conservative governments as well and then that would mean everyone doesn’t care about people dying. It’s more like they’re not sure what they’re supposed to do, doing anything will be terribly expensive, and that will take a lot of money away from running the province, so just leave it. It’s not a good solution, but it’s different than saying cars are evil polluting machines so we won’t do anything to improve driving conditions. That would be more along the lines of Green ideas and even then...

The other side of that coin is more conservative (including B.C. Liberal I guess) governments doing the same but just because they refuse to spend the money so we’re basically screwed either way I think.

It’s like Highway 22 over here. Over capacity 2 lane junk with a lousy old cloverleaf hooking up to TCH. Too many have died on that thing. Should’ve been replaced years ago. I believe under our previous government drew a plan to replace this one and improve access from TCH but that seemed to be it, just a drawing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy View Post
I don't know what it is with BC. None of the parties have ever shown any interest in building a proper highway system. BC routes are not only completely inadequate but also downright dangerous, even major ones. BC has the shortest merging lanes onto freeways requirements in the country and many of them would be closed anywhere else.

Overpasses are almost NEVER built regardless of traffic or safety demands. The 91A just got a new overpass but it was over 30 years in the making. That one stop light stopped the freeway from being just that despite it's very heavy traffic volumes but it still took 30 years to get just one overpass built. When new roads are built, like the SFPR, they are built to the lowest common denominator in terms of capacity and safety.
Sounds about like Calgary or just about anywhere over here. Our entire Glenmore trail which is the only real East-West skeletal is either awful cloverleafs too close together, really short merges, or traffic lights that should’ve even gone years ago. At least there they can actually build a real interchange between two freeways; here it’s put part of a cloverleaf and make some stupid offramp that goes through an obstacle course with traffic lights to make up for the missing loop ramp between the two busiest roads, make a plan to build a real interchange, and then never do it. Our city pushes for improvements, our provincial government started listening near election as usual and now with this one who knows, I suspect half of the improvements to be scrapped or dumbed down.

And then there’s that one traffic light on what otherwise would be a freeway stretch of our MacLeod Trail which reminds me of that 91 and 72 Ave, but we have no real plan to replace it. Then there’s the freeway exits that immediately cross a CPR and LRT line. That’s smart...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazrim View Post
I'm genuinely curious - what makes you feel like that median is unsafe? Why do you feel like concrete barriers are unsafe?

There's a few things to consider here - if you look elsewhere in the world, there are plenty of high speed freeways in Europe and Asia that have narrow medians with barriers, and they function just fine. The land cost and construction cost of doubling your right-of-way for an open design in mountainous terrain is not probably going to save you much in the lifetime costs of accidents. If someone leaves the road, the percentage of them that get in serious collisions in a wide median is high enough that the cost benefit of what you're asking for is probably not worth it. If you're looking at it from a Vision Zero perspective, the likelihood of someone getting in a fatal collision when there are barriers on both sides of each direction of travel is likely lower in most collision types, especially since head-on collisions are removed.

Even when you design a road for a wide open median by current standards, the risk of someone traveling all the way across it is high enough that Alberta has recently started installing cable barriers on wide medians on some highways.

BC has been using the standard you're not happy with for many years now and continue to use it moving forward, which I imagine they wouldn't do if they started seeing more serious collisions and/or lawsuits because of it. The same cross section is being used by Parks Canada for the Trans Canada widening as well.
I imagine Jersey Barries work just fine considering how much they are actually used. You don’t have to go as far as Europe to find highways divided by them. Any newer urban freeway will be divided in this way to save land. The grass medians are less violent when they work, but sure don’t seem to work so well on the older parts of Deerfoot here which is why they started putting up a wire, but I don’t remember the concrete barrier of the newer part failing as bad. I wouldn’t want to test it though. You can also go looking around the US too. There’s the Florida’s Turnpike for example that seems to be built to a similar standard as the twinned TCH in BC as far as dividing goes. It’s 4 lane divided by a Jersey Barrier, but it has the odd little break in it. That road however is grossly over capacity.

Last edited by N McCity; Dec 25, 2019 at 7:57 AM. Reason: New to this specific Forum software so I don’t know how to quote multiple replies
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1820  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2020, 6:36 AM
flipper316 flipper316 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 863
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
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:54 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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