News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

An article on the new french river bridges: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/french-river-bridge-design-highway-400-1.3761297

There is video about halfway down that has renders, and at the 27 second mark has the schematics. For those that dont know - the French River is deemed a navigable river and the entire channel has to kept clear of obstacles. It will be interesting to see when they hoist the middle section of the two bridges.
 
The channel being kept clear of obstacles is not a navigation requirement. Navigation requires a specific opening size depending on the waterway. For the French, it is likely a 20' high clearance requirement (6m) by maybe 1/3 of the channel width (about 20m). They are staying out of the water for 3 possible requirements.
  1. First Nation requirement.
  2. Fisheries or other Aquatic wildlife concerns.
  3. Constructability due to construction of piers in deep water.
For this crossing, it is likely all of the above. The choice of structure type is interesting. There are only 2 other such inclined leg rigid frame bridges in Ontario - Seine River and South Muskoka River., and both are significantly shorter than the French (and Pickeral) crossings.
I hope its not another Nipigon bridge where they put appeal ahead of function.
 
BurlOak said:
The channel being kept clear of obstacles is not a navigation requirement. Navigation requires a specific opening size depending on the waterway. For the French, it is likely a 20' high clearance requirement (6m) by maybe 1/3 of the channel width (about 20m). They are staying out of the water for 3 possible requirements.
  1. First Nation requirement.
  2. Fisheries or other Aquatic wildlife concerns.
  3. Constructability due to construction of piers in deep water.
For this crossing, it is likely all of the above. The choice of structure type is interesting. There are only 2 other such inclined leg rigid frame bridges in Ontario - Seine River and South Muskoka River., and both are significantly shorter than the French (and Pickeral) crossings.
I hope its not another Nipigon bridge where they put appeal ahead of function.
Click to expand...
Cable-stayed bridge can be ruled out then.
 
BurlOak said:
Highway 489?

http://www.townofbwg.com/link
Click to expand...
Maybe in 10-15 years? I don't see this government going to proceed with this project anything soon even through the EA was completed in 2002. By the time they actually want to build it, they'll have to do an amendment to the EA cause so much has changed.

They should also extend the 404 around the lake and hopefully connect to Highway 11 one day.
 
They are already at the point of needing an amendment.

They need to extend the 404 to Highway 48 in Sutton too while they are at it.
 
Just looking at the map, there are a few questions:
  1. I would have thought that 2nd Concession (Main Street) would have an interchange. It is 6km between Bathurst and Leslie, and both Bathurst and Leslie are only a partial interchange.
  2. The 400 interchange has the Westbound to Southbound ramp being 90 degrees and the Southbound to Eastbound ramp being a 270 degree loop. This makes sense since one would expect higher traffic volumes heading towards Toronto. However the 404 interchange has the Eastbound to Northbound ramp being 90 degrees and the Northbound to Westbound ramp being a 270 degree loop. This means the Toronto originating traffic gets lower priority.
  3. Will it be extended 8 km West to connect with the future highway 427 extension (to Barrie) :) ?
b_map.png
 
Last edited:
I think highways in such areas make sense.

The rural roads are getting a ton of traffic they are not designed for.
 
Jasmine18 said:
I think highways in such areas make sense.

The rural roads are getting a ton of traffic they are not designed for.
Click to expand...

But the residents in the area want subways, subways, subways. The cows would prefer to have them underneath, of course.
 
Steve X said:
Maybe in 10-15 years? I don't see this government going to proceed with this project anything soon even through the EA was completed in 2002. By the time they actually want to build it, they'll have to do an amendment to the EA cause so much has changed.

They should also extend the 404 around the lake and hopefully connect to Highway 11 one day.
Click to expand...

That is a realistic timeline, MTO still needs to put out a preliminary design to narrow down the preferred alignments and secure property. Then a few years of detail design with construction perhaps broken into a few contracts as it will be a huge job. Or they'll put it into a mega design-build like the 427 extension.
 
I doubt the 427 will every reach King City or Bolton in the next decade. A 427 extension to Barrie is just a dream. There's enough environmental concerns and fear of urban sprawl that prevents this to even go forward. MTO doesn't even seem to believe the 400 needs a relief unless shutdowns become a lot more often due to whatever reasons.

For relieving the 26, this highway is just too south to do any of that purpose. It's better to build the highway from Barrie.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top