SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//index.php)
-   Alberta & British Columbia (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//forumdisplay.php?f=127)
-   -   BC Highway Construction (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//showthread.php?t=187593)

Zassk Nov 22, 2013 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kev_427 (Post 6333032)
A bridge over Shuswap Lake has been discussed, obviously long term. I've only seen options for bypassing Salmon Arm, I think they could build it farther north and bypass SA and Sicamous.

Why not go south from Sicamous instead? Follow close to the existing 97A alignment down to Enderby, then west along the 97 alignment to Monte Creek? According to Google Maps this existing route is only 14 km longer than the existing TransCanada route, but you could straighten the route out to avoid going as far south as Armstrong. This would save you from building a ridiculously expensive bridge across Shuswap Lake and hugging a freeway along so many miles of rugged lakefront.

Daguy Dec 20, 2013 7:07 PM

Cariboo Connector
 
There are quite a few updates on the website for Phase 2:

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/cariboo_connector/overview.htm


Interesting to see that Stone Creek Bridge to Williams Road will be a split-grade segment, and that Williams Lake IR to Lexington will have an interchange!

Procrastinational Jan 31, 2014 2:58 AM

Maybe I'm just imagining things... But I've been driving a lot around the Okanagan lately, and I've been noticing something and wondering about it. Seems somewhat relevant given all the four-laning of highway 1 and 97 in BC lately.

At some point in the 90's, did highway design standards in BC or the process behind expressway/freeway design decisions change in the province?
I ask this because it seems like most of the major routes conceived prior to the mid to late 90's seem relatively similar to in other places in Canada, whereas since then everything they have been building seems quite under-built to me.

For instance, the Coquihalla, 97C and the Inland Island Highway fit into the first category, and they all have relatively high design speeds (somewhere between 110 and 130 I'm guessing?), and *where possible*, they have a grass median. They also have reasonably wide shoulders on the outside where space is available. In a nutshell, they feel, for the most part, like they could be from the interstate network in the states.

Everything since then strikes me as completely different (South Fraser Perimeter Road, Sea to Sky, improved sections of interior highways, etc). I have yet to hear of anything being built at a higher design speed than 100 km/h over the past decade, the shoulders seem a bit narrower, and the medians are completely different. Why do they never twin routes with a grass median? Wouldn't it be cheaper to do that instead of laying the extra pavement in the middle?
The biggest question I have though, is why the government keeps four-laning in that strange configuration (quite common on highway 97) of two yellow lines separated by 3 or four feet of pavement in the middle of the highway, with no barrier or grass median?

It's all better than nothing, but most other jurisdictions in North America seem to be outdoing us. That being said, I'd probably be fine with the 100 km/h design speed roads if they consistently built interchanges rather than intersections.

craner Jan 31, 2014 5:01 AM

^That's a very accurate observation - good post.

red-paladin Feb 11, 2014 9:24 AM

The Highway 17 SFPR is not meant to be like the Trans Canada in the final configuration. Neither is the Sea to Sky. They are not meant to be eventual freeways, but expressways.

Daguy Feb 11, 2014 9:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Procrastinational (Post 6430687)
Maybe I'm just imagining things... But I've been driving a lot around the Okanagan lately, and I've been noticing something and wondering about it. Seems somewhat relevant given all the four-laning of highway 1 and 97 in BC lately.

At some point in the 90's, did highway design standards in BC or the process behind expressway/freeway design decisions change in the province?
I ask this because it seems like most of the major routes conceived prior to the mid to late 90's seem relatively similar to in other places in Canada, whereas since then everything they have been building seems quite under-built to me.

For instance, the Coquihalla, 97C and the Inland Island Highway fit into the first category, and they all have relatively high design speeds (somewhere between 110 and 130 I'm guessing?), and *where possible*, they have a grass median. They also have reasonably wide shoulders on the outside where space is available. In a nutshell, they feel, for the most part, like they could be from the interstate network in the states.

Everything since then strikes me as completely different (South Fraser Perimeter Road, Sea to Sky, improved sections of interior highways, etc). I have yet to hear of anything being built at a higher design speed than 100 km/h over the past decade, the shoulders seem a bit narrower, and the medians are completely different. Why do they never twin routes with a grass median? Wouldn't it be cheaper to do that instead of laying the extra pavement in the middle?
The biggest question I have though, is why the government keeps four-laning in that strange configuration (quite common on highway 97) of two yellow lines separated by 3 or four feet of pavement in the middle of the highway, with no barrier or grass median?

It's all better than nothing, but most other jurisdictions in North America seem to be outdoing us. That being said, I'd probably be fine with the 100 km/h design speed roads if they consistently built interchanges rather than intersections.

It's all about cost. Roads cost more to build in BC due to terrain, and often routes are not adjacent to crown land (land is more expensive to expropriate than in the past).

Phase 2 of Monte Creek to Pritchard of HWY 1 was originally split grade in the eastern section, but consultation with stakeholders prompted the design to include an interchange at Pritchard. In order to offset the increased cost they switched to a median barrier.

I've noticed that the four-lane projects most recently announced on highway 1 mostly or all have median barriers, as do the current projects between Kamloops and Chase, so someone may be listening. Highway 97 on the other hand mostly no, and that might be due to differences in traffic count.

Procrastinational Feb 11, 2014 8:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daguy (Post 6446375)
It's all about cost. Roads cost more to build in BC due to terrain, and often routes are not adjacent to crown land (land is more expensive to expropriate than in the past).

Phase 2 of Monte Creek to Pritchard of HWY 1 was originally split grade in the eastern section, but consultation with stakeholders prompted the design to include an interchange at Pritchard. In order to offset the increased cost they switched to a median barrier.

I've noticed that the four-lane projects most recently announced on highway 1 mostly or all have median barriers, as do the current projects between Kamloops and Chase, so someone may be listening. Highway 97 on the other hand mostly no, and that might be due to differences in traffic count.

Fair enough... I wonder if more significant federal highway funding, like they have in the States, and a number of European countries would resolve this... It can't be cheap to build freeways in Colorado, or Washington state for instance, yet they have proper freeways.

To be perfectly fair, the only 4-laned BC highway I've noticed that has no proper divider, and that feels somewhat dangerous is the short portion of highway 97C between Merritt and the Connector. People on that stretch tend to drive 110-130, and when you are in the left lane with only about 3 feet of road between you and head on cars coming at you at that speed, it's not exactly confidence inspiring. The relatively large traffic volumes also don't help.

red-paladin Feb 11, 2014 11:54 PM

In that case, the province initially wanted to extend 97c all the way to highway 5 on a new alignment. However the local population along 5a revolted and prevented it. That's why it was left in an unfinished state, with 5a 2 lanes for many years. When it became clear that extending 97c to 5 would never happen, 5a was upgraded to 4 lanes.
To make the story short, it wasn't the government's fault.

Klazu Feb 12, 2014 1:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by red-paladin (Post 6447396)
In that case, the province initially wanted to extend 97c all the way to highway 5 on a new alignment. However the local population along 5a revolted and prevented it. That's why it was left in an unfinished state, with 5a 2 lanes for many years. When it became clear that extending 97c to 5 would never happen, 5a was upgraded to 4 lanes.
To make the story short, it wasn't the government's fault.

Ah, thank you for that information. I was wondering about that when driving back from Kelowna yesterday.

It's actually not a big deal, as the road is in excellent condition and very nice to drive on.

SOSS Feb 12, 2014 6:34 AM

Another couple of items wrt highway standards have to do with location. If it goes through ALR land it is considerably more difficult to acquire land required for a divided 110km standard road. For good reason, since we have such limited farm land available - SFPR is a perfect example. Also, highway 5 and 97C were essentially built in the middle of nowhere. Instead of expanding existing roads they built brand new ones away from most environmentalist groups and general public.

Back when 5 was conceived, BC was in dire need of a decent road to the interior - so worth it. They should have kept the toll and directed funds to maintenance and other infrastructure projects. Too bad. They could have used funds to directly pay for Kamloops to Alberta 4 lanning or 97 4-lanning or Highway 3 4-lanning or, or, or.

craner Feb 14, 2014 7:09 PM

^Good points about keeping the toll and using it for other highway projects.

SOSS Feb 17, 2014 2:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by craner (Post 6452614)
^Good points about keeping the toll and using it for other highway projects.

I was told at one time (not sure if it was true) that was one of the tolls initial intents - after paying off the capital expense of the project, Highway 3 was to be upgraded to 4 lanes from Hope to the Okanagan.

go_leafs_go02 Feb 17, 2014 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOSS (Post 6455847)
I was told at one time (not sure if it was true) that was one of the tolls initial intents - after paying off the capital expense of the project, Highway 3 was to be upgraded to 4 lanes from Hope to the Okanagan.

That should remain a very low priority. volumes on there are quite low. There are some spots that should see some investment to help aid safety and remove some very tight corners through Manning Park and towards Princeton.

However, the cost of these projects versus the benefits would be difficult to promote it compared to other priorities in BC.

the toll should have remained on the Coquihala, don't know anyone who really complained about it, and that funding now would be helpful.

dmuzika Apr 16, 2014 6:33 PM

I found some interesting information posted by the Third Crossing Society, a group that wants to create a highway corridor between the Interior of British Columbia and the Pacific coast via Powell River. The corridor is proposing upgrading Hwy 99 between Cache Creek and Squamish, a new two lane highway between Squamish and Powell River, and increased use of the Powell River-Comox ferry to Vancouver Island.

The reasoning for the project is a 24/7, overland route between Powell River and Squamish (eliminating 2 ferries between Powell River and the rest of the mainland, even though Powell River is located on the mainland) and an alternate route between Vancouver Island and the mainland which completely bypasses Greater Vancouver.

A link to the Third Crossing Society can be found at http://www.thirdcrossingsociety.com while a map of the proposed route connecting Highways 99 and 101 can be found at https://powellriverregionaldistrict....ay.aspx?Id=556 (see page 16).

splashflash May 18, 2014 8:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02 (Post 6456518)

the toll should have remained on the Coquihala, don't know anyone who really complained about it, and that funding now would be helpful.

It would have been good if the toll were taken off after the capital costs were paid off, but why should Coquihalla drivers pay for other projects. Toll other projects such as Kicking Horse directly to pay for them.

craner Jun 29, 2014 7:05 AM

Is there a reason newly twinned sections of highway in BC don 't have concrete jersey barriers installed down the center any more?
Is it simply a cost saving measure?
:shrug:

Daguy Jun 30, 2014 1:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by craner (Post 6635989)
Is there a reason newly twinned sections of highway in BC don 't have concrete jersey barriers installed down the center any more?
Is it simply a cost saving measure?
:shrug:

Yeah! lol

I think enough people have made comments about this issue that most or all of the future projects will have them. The segments between Monte Creek and Chase that are currently under construction should have median barrier throughout.

The bridge deck for the Pritchard interchange is now being worked on, and work seems to progressing quickly.The power lines have been realigned north of the highway at Hoffman's Bluff, and a shoulder barrier is now in place, suggesting that Phase II of Pritchard to Hoffman's Bluff will be announced soon.

craner Jul 1, 2014 7:15 PM

Just did the Calgary - Penticton & back drive. Only about 56kms left to twin between Golden & Alberta - will be nice to have this done. And then keep pecking away between Golden & Kamloops.

craneSpotter Jul 2, 2014 8:20 PM

Yay!

B.C. raises speed limits on some provincial highways.

Most of the new speed limits will come into effect over the summer, but increases to the Coquihalla, as well as highways near Peachland and the Fraser Valley begin today.

BC is also introducing new “variable” speed limits zones (like Wash State/ Europe etc) on three highways — a section of Trans-Canada Highway, Coquihalla and Sea-to-Sky highway — where the speed limit can be raised or lowered on a LED sign, depending on weather and road conditions.

BC will also change legislation to give better enforcement tools to police so they can ticket slow-moving drivers who refuse to pull into the right lane and clog up traffic in the left passing lane. BC will also install new signs directing slower motorists to use designated pullout sections if they are impeding more than five vehicles (like Wash State) behind them.

New 120 km/hr Speed zones:

BC 5 Coquihalla Hope to Kamloops; BC 97C (Okanagan Connector) Aspen Grove to Peachland; BC 19 (Inland Island Highway) Parksville to Campbell River.

New 110 km/hr Speed Zones:

TCH 1 Exit 95 to jct. BC 3 (74 km in Fraser Valley ); BC 97C Merritt to Aspen Grove; BC 97 - 70 mile house to 100 mile house.

New 100 km/hr Speed Zones:

A bunch of 80/90 km/hr zones are being increased to 100 km/hr, some pending a review to see if median barriers (concrete or cable) are required based on speed/median width/sight distance formula involved.

full list of changes: http://www.newsroom.gov.bc.ca/2014/0...-highways.html


New signage:

http://i62.tinypic.com/4jwefq.jpg

http://i58.tinypic.com/r2wcwg.jpg

libtard Jul 4, 2014 5:40 AM

Why hasn't BC adopted guard rails along any of their highways? Instead of jersey barriers in some spots.

Modern guard rail design is safer and more forgiving then pre-cast barriers ever could be....


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.