News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.6K     0 

nevermind the fact that not ALL drivers will be turned away with the rip down, probably around 70% of cars will still be able to go through.
 
Peter Kuitenbrouwer: Big private landowners have shocking proposal for the Gardiner Expressway — tear it down

Read More: http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/0...-for-the-gardiner-expressway-tearing-it-down/

.....

His company’s vision for the area just east of the Don River and north of Lake Shore Blvd. involves an office park they are calling “Canada’s Canary Wharf,” a reference to the redevelopment of port lands in London. In his grand vision, the site would also feature a sort of Penn Station of Toronto, with a GO train station, a stop on a new Broadview “LRT” connecting to Queens Quay, along with a subway stop on a future Downtown Relief Line.

.....




21_dvp_first_gulf_image_02.jpg
 
Grimace said:
In other words, you don't believe in science. What you propose is not a real world idea. Requiring all traffic to exit from either direction on one lane off ramps would be completely different from what is proposed and would not give us any sense of what the new proposal will achieve. You would be closer to reality if you just put up 4 sets of traffic lights on the Eastern Gardiner. No, I am not suggesting that.
Click to expand...

You do know you can get to Lake Shore from the DVP, right?
 
WislaHD said:
That definitely seems like something worth investigating further.

Are there examples of this method elsewhere in the world, for context?
Click to expand...

Ottawa (well, technically MTO) has done a series of rapid bridge replacements on the 417. That involved building the new bridge adjacent to the old one, and then sliding the old one out and the new one in place within 24 hours. I don't think the process would be the same (it would be trucked in instead of built nearby), but I would imagine the replacement mechanism would be similar.
 
gweed123 said:
Ottawa (well, technically MTO) has done a series of rapid bridge replacements on the 417. That involved building the new bridge adjacent to the old one, and then sliding the old one out and the new one in place within 24 hours. I don't think the process would be the same (it would be trucked in instead of built nearby), but I would imagine the replacement mechanism would be similar.
Click to expand...

They are doing the same with the expansion on the east end. I think 4 bridges are being done this way and 1 they are going to move it almost 1km to the location. (Belfast Road) I don't drive that way to work. So I don't know how the progress has been constructing these things
 
Mulder said:
They are doing the same with the expansion on the east end. I think 4 bridges are being done this way and 1 they are going to move it almost 1km to the location. (Belfast Road) I don't drive that way to work. So I don't know how the progress has been constructing these things
Click to expand...

Yup, it now seems to be the default mode in Ottawa when a bridge needs replacement on/over the 417. The only exception that I can think of is the replacement of the Ogilvie bridge, which was a 'standard' tear down and rebuild. All of the recent western rebuilds (Clyde, Carling x2, Island Park) and the future rebuilds in association with the current widening project are/will be rapid replacements.

I would imagine that by the end of that, there will be a pretty substantial number of MTO engineers who will have some pretty good experience with that kind of work. I wonder if Toronto could contract those engineers out if the Gardiner refurb were to go in the route described above.
 
gweed123 said:
I would imagine that by the end of that, there will be a pretty substantial number of MTO engineers who will have some pretty good experience with that kind of work. I wonder if Toronto could contract those engineers out if the Gardiner refurb were to go in the route described above.
Click to expand...

Don't quote me on this, but it's more likely MTO contracted out the design work.

There is major differences between how they would do it too. If the Gardiner was done in precast sections originally, we likely wouldn't be having the conversation on remove/replace/maintain.
They obviously can't just lift out sections of certain lanes in a direction. Lots of saw cutting required, but since this is out they replace bridges anyways, this isn't a problem. It's just the time it takes to tear down.

The traffic staging either way is going to be a pain. And I've designed alot of traffic staging. I'd say it makes more sense to use the precast sections as a per-direction-section (All east bound lanes is 1 section) & during staging just shift traffic to westbound lanes so you still have traffic. Tough but doable.
 
Mulder said:
Don't quote me on this, but it's more likely MTO contracted out the design work.

There is major differences between how they would do it too. If the Gardiner was done in precast sections originally, we likely wouldn't be having the conversation on remove/replace/maintain.
They obviously can't just lift out sections of certain lanes in a direction. Lots of saw cutting required, but since this is out they replace bridges anyways, this isn't a problem. It's just the time it takes to tear down.

The traffic staging either way is going to be a pain. And I've designed alot of traffic staging. I'd say it makes more sense to use the precast sections as a per-direction-section (All east bound lanes is 1 section) & during staging just shift traffic to westbound lanes so you still have traffic. Tough but doable.
Click to expand...

Makes sense. I don't have intimate knowledge of the design of the Gardiner, so I can't really say how big the precast sections would need to be, or how it would need to be staged, but what you're saying (from my perspective of admittedly limited knowledge on the subject) makes sense.
 
gweed123 said:
Makes sense. I don't have intimate knowledge of the design of the Gardiner, so I can't really say how big the precast sections would need to be, or how it would need to be staged, but what you're saying (from my perspective of admittedly limited knowledge on the subject) makes sense.
Click to expand...

The precast has to be about 120-150 feet long by X width.

There are 3 problems going to precast. 1) The steel girders are cantilever over the support bents. 2) Will the precast support beams be deeper than the steel girders with the road deck on top of it to maintain the same level of the roadway without adding support at the bents?

To deal with the cantilever issue, you will have to do more than one section when removing the existing deck.

The 3rd problem to build a new deck beside the existing section is space. Bathurst St and going over Loblaws propriety, Spadina Intersection are huge challenges areas due to no room. To deal with areas like this will require longer closure than a weekend to move the existing sections out and put new ones in.

The bridges for 417 are around 700 tones while the Gardiner will be close to 2,000+ tones. The precast bridge for West Toronto Diamond was 11m x 40m x 900mm weighing 900tonnes. Old Weston Rd was 11m x 90m x 900mm weighing 2,000tonnes that sat on a retaining wall.

At the end of the day, you can't remove a lane or 2 at a time, but all lanes must be remove at the same time if you want to do it in a short time frame.

Another issue to keep in mind is the ground under the new sections being moved into place as it is "ALL" land fill with a lake under it.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top