Quote:
The structural feasibility study included a preliminary investigation of the impacts on the rail yard likely to result from the development anticipated in this framework document, using the Illustrative Concept Plan as a basis for the analysis. It was initially thought that some portions of the rail tracks would be able to pass below the development sites, however on further exploration it was determined that the required structural components for earthquake resistance would preclude
the ability to maintain rail lines under the buildings. The study concluded that there would be a loss of up to one third of the existing rail track length within the yard to accommodate the development in the Illustrative Concept Plan.
It may be possible to offset some of this loss through the provision of additional tracks to the north of the yard, however, these additional tracks may be required just to address additional demand for yard capacity resulting from the anticipated increase in container throughput at the port terminals. Further work will need to be undertaken to examine ways to maintain the capacity of the yard, including:
• Further analysis to explore the potential to reduce the impact of development on the rail yard e.g. through alternative structural design and/or reduction in building footprint.
• A comprehensive study of options for offsetting capacity losses within the yard and increasing capacity at other locations within the Burrard Inlet South Shore rail system.
This work will need to involve the developer(s) of the sites over the rail yard in close collaboration with CPR and PMV, and will need to include the development of a workable operating plan for the yard. Further work will also be required to determine how to mitigate temporary impacts on the rail operations during construction. Addressing these issues to the satisfaction of all parties is expected to be a major challenge.
|
What I'm seeing is that the railyard is
much less negotiable than the Port buildings.
Threaded Mode