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)

Glacier Mar 13, 2017 10:18 PM

Well highway 1 west of Revelstoke is shut down again today because of yet another head on collision. It's support to be shut down for 10 hours without a detour. Last week highway 97 south of Kelowna was shut down for several hours without a detour because a semi hit the concrete median, and an oncoming vehicle smashed into the concrete as it was pushed into the traffic.

When the F with the province start building highways with proper earthen divided freeways?

Vantage Mar 14, 2017 4:47 AM

I dont think that is economically viable in many places in BC.

Metro-One Mar 14, 2017 5:02 AM

This exact debate already happened on the Canada section about 2 weeks ago. Just go back a few pages and reread that entire conversation.

CGY-MG Mar 14, 2017 5:41 PM

Odd in what way?

I gave info, gave personal opinion. Isn't that what a discussion forum is all about?

Maybe it's because I put too many points in one post. :shrug: That's what paragraphs are for :haha:

I think the biggest issue in BC is that past governments virtually ignored the transcanada highway for the first 50 years after it was built. It wasn't the old excuses about geology or difficulty of terrain. They didn't even twin the relatively flat easy sections - and yes there are flat easy sections.

I might complain about the current pace - but I'm thankful that the current trend is to actually start twinning! I'm disappointed though that easy stuff like safety barriers dividing the finished highway aren't the standard. (3 semi accident yesterday with 1 death).

I just don't like the political double-speak where they imply they're twinning the highway when they clearly aren't. (Even members of their own party were fooled into thinking the 10 year plan for twinning meant it would be twinning it all in 10 years). They're twinning sections of the highway so putting up signs implying you're twinning it all is just a political lie. (It would be like NASA putting up a sign saying they're building a Mars base- sure someday)

I find it odd too that one reason they chose the bridge etc building by Golden over the tunnel is they could do the build in stages - yet we have to wait 2 years for them to even start. And then they're starting on it all at once. Oh well, glad they're starting it.:)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One (Post 7716066)
That was an odd post....

Thanks for the information though.

And yes, they do mean per km. Your comparison of the Calgary and Edmonton ring roads shows exactly why it is so hard to build highways in BC.

If BC were flat like the parries it would be much easier, cheeper, and quicker to twin the entire highway 1 project.

Sadly Canada does not have a national highway program, so BC has to spend its highway dollars on the Vancouver region (criss crossed with wide rivers and inlets), Vancouver Island (mountains, inlets), and of course the mainland (mountain ranges after mountain ranges, deep canyons, inlets, etc...). The massive changes in geology from spot to spot also does not help.

The only areas that the feds will pay for are the national parks, which they are finally starting to do in Yoho Park.

I agree that more focus should be made on the #1 in BC though, the speed is construction is too slow for my liking as well, and Salmon Arm should be completely by-passed.


Glacier Mar 14, 2017 8:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vantage (Post 7739658)
I dont think that is economically viable in many places in BC.

That excuse is getting old. The example I give is the 450 km "Cariboo Connector" from Cache Creek to Prince George. It's flat and mostly rolling hills. Very easy ground, much easier than most of the US or anything outside of the Prairies in Canada, and yet the province wants to do 4 laning with no proper medians the entire way.

libtard Mar 16, 2017 6:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One (Post 7739671)
This exact debate already happened on the Canada section about 2 weeks ago. Just go back a few pages and reread that entire conversation.

I don't appreciate you trying to stifle constructive criticism of BC highways. If Glacier wants to ask the question, he has a right to do that without people directing him to another thread.

I agree with you Glacier the excuse of "economic feasibility" just doesn't work for BC's pathetic highway system. Especially when they have a perfect example of how a highway through the mountains is SUPPOSED to be constructed less then an hour south of our border:

http://i66.tinypic.com/jrafkj.png

When is BC going to wake up and do TWO staggered cuts in a mountainside for opposing directions of traffic

libtard Mar 16, 2017 6:16 AM

SOUTH BOUND
http://i65.tinypic.com/11hdz49.png

NORTH BOUND
http://i67.tinypic.com/2cp5nol.png

libtard Mar 16, 2017 6:21 AM

Note the wide shoulders, steel guard rails (using them on the edge of a drop off is more appropriate than cement barriers), and rumble strips on BOTH sides. These are design features BC refuses to incorporate into the highways it builds.

Bobert Mar 16, 2017 11:04 AM

I wonder when that section of the I-5 was constructed, because it's not too different from Highway 1 east of Bridal Falls.

image: http://i.imgur.com/M3xbyo6.jpg

link to similar section of bc1

Now considering when this section of highway 1 was built, the funding allocation/mechanisms may have allowed this type of construction, I don't know. It doesn't seem too far out too suggest that earthern barriers are outside the modern BC twinning budget.

Cariboo Connector? Yea sure. Places like kicking horse? definitely not.

Metro-One Mar 16, 2017 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glacier (Post 7740276)
That excuse is getting old. The example I give is the 450 km "Cariboo Connector" from Cache Creek to Prince George. It's flat and mostly rolling hills. Very easy ground, much easier than most of the US or anything outside of the Prairies in Canada, and yet the province wants to do 4 laning with no proper medians the entire way.

Having driven the Cariboo Connector many times one reason for not spending the money on a earthen divide is the relatively low traffic count. I do agree that all the new 4 lane sections should have the concrete medium barriers in place (many of the new sections don't, which iI do think is penny pinching).

People look at specific road (such as the Cariboo Connector) and say that it is not so expensive to have an earthen divide, but the thing is the MoT has to share the same pot of money for the entire province. So to do so on the Cariboo Connector might mean the cancelation of a 4 landing project or two along the #1.

This earthen divide debate feels like an annoying distraction seeing how many first world nations use them sparingly (or not at all) and their highway networks are world class. Concrete barriers get 99% of the job done for a fraction of the cost. More than one way to skin a cat.

If earthen divides are the be all and end all that means every single urban highway in North America that only uses a concrete divider is a sub standard design ;)

Focus this energy where it should be, such as demanding that the MoT use interchanges on their upgrades and not traffic lights.

A 4 lane highway divided by a concrete barrier is a very standard highway design throughout the world, and given BC's relatively small population (with far flung pockets of population), vast expanses, rugged terrain of mountains, canyons, fiords, rivers, etc..., and the lack of a true federal highway program means that the extra expense for an earthen median is not worth it.

Our older highways did use them because highways were cheaper to build in the past, much of BC didn't have enough population to support 4 lane highways outside of the south coast, and most of the areas that have them are incredibly flat and easy to do so (most of the 99 and #1 through the valley is flat as a pancake).

Maybe if the island highway was built as a 4 lane highway with a concrete median instead of the earthen median it has it would have been built as complete free flow as originally intended with no traffic lights... (I am aware that there were other issues at play, but just maybe there would have still been enough funding left to build all the interchanges, which is far far far more important than an earthen barrier).

Vantage Mar 17, 2017 1:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One (Post 7742029)
Concrete barriers get 99% of the job done for a fraction of the cost. More than one way to skin a cat.

If earthen divides are the be all and end all that means every single urban highway in North America that only uses a concrete divider is a sub standard design ;)

Focus this energy where it should be, such as demanding that the MoT use interchanges on their upgrades and not traffic lights.

A 4 lane highway divided by a concrete barrier is a very standard highway design throughout the world, and given BC's relatively small population (with far flung pockets of population), vast expanses, rugged terrain of mountains, canyons, fjords, rivers, etc..., and the lack of a true federal highway program means that the extra expense for an earthen median is not worth it.

Our older highways did use them because highways were cheaper to build in the past, much of BC didn't have enough population to support 4 lane highways outside of the south coast, and most of the areas that have them are incredibly flat and easy to do so (most of the 99 and #1 through the valley is flat as a pancake).

I agree.

Glacier Mar 23, 2017 4:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One (Post 7742029)
Having driven the Cariboo Connector many times one reason for not spending the money on a earthen divide is the relatively low traffic count. I do agree that all the new 4 lane sections should have the concrete medium barriers in place (many of the new sections don't, which iI do think is penny pinching).

The Cariboo Connector has the traffic that highway 1 had when it was twinned between Chilliwack and Hope, and growing rapidly every year. If they don't do it properly the first time, it becomes prohibitively expensive, and given the long distances from anything up there, it's even more important to have fast, efficient highways in the 21st century.

Denscity Mar 23, 2017 6:11 PM

Please straighten out Highway 3! It looks like a heart monitor readout haha! It should only take us 4-5 hours to get to Vancouver but instead it takes 7-8!
Glad they've done some work on the Hope Princeton recently.

Calgarian Mar 23, 2017 6:38 PM

Anyone know the plans for the improvements of the #1 just east of Golden? saw signs for the project driving through there last weekend...

Bobert Mar 25, 2017 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calgarian (Post 7749537)
Anyone know the plans for the improvements of the #1 just east of Golden? saw signs for the project driving through there last weekend...

Yea, that section just got funded. The design has changed a lot from the original concept, it's all bridges now, and no tunnels. There's a bit of discussion on the previous page.

Metro-One Mar 25, 2017 10:36 AM

Original concept was just a tunnel.

Second concept was a mix of tunnels and bridges.

Now it is only tunnels and large amounts of blasting / retaining walls, and it will still be the most expensive stretch of highway in Canada ever built.

The curse of BC's topography.

VANRIDERFAN Mar 25, 2017 4:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One (Post 7751586)
Original concept was just a tunnel.

Second concept was a mix of tunnels and bridges.

Now it is only tunnels and large amounts of blasting / retaining walls, and it will still be the most expensive stretch of highway in Canada ever built.

The curse of BC's topography.

Is there any concept drawings of the finalized design?

I read that the phase 4 section is very unstable and that is maybe why they are going the tunnel route. I could be totally out to lunch though.

Metro-One Mar 26, 2017 12:56 AM

Sorry, I meant only bridges.

The stability issue is largely why they are not using any tunnels now.

There is one schematic available on the official website.

Bobert Mar 27, 2017 5:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One (Post 7751586)
Original concept was just a tunnel.

Second concept was a mix of tunnels and bridges.


Now it is only tunnels and large amounts of blasting / retaining walls, and it will still be the most expensive stretch of highway in Canada ever built.

The curse of BC's topography.


I did not know this! Do we have any documents/images/concepts of this?

Denscity Mar 28, 2017 11:08 PM

Just announced: Six laning Highway 1 from 216th to 264th!


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:28 PM.

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