HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2010, 7:39 PM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,442
Roads Fantasy Thread

We all keep speaking of this purported future H-99 project. It is understandable that no thread exists for a project that is but a thought, but since a major rebuild of Highway 99, the Oak Street Bridge, and the George Massey Tunnel is likely, I thought a thread was warranted.

So, lets put speculative ideas together and design this massive 'gateway-esque' project!
Would you add a C/D system?
Which interchanges should be completely reconfigured, added (or removed?) Would you advocate linking H-99 to Boundary Road instead of Oak Street?
How will the George Massey Crossing expanded? (laning?)
Would you have truck lanes?
Would you factor in space to extend the Canada Line?
Or go with Rapid Bus?
When would this start / finish construction, and finally...
who pays for it? (tolls!)

Its all speculative of course, but theres enough talk about H-99 to start putting it all together.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2010, 8:22 PM
Stingray2004's Avatar
Stingray2004 Stingray2004 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: White Rock, BC (Metro Vancouver)
Posts: 3,145
I''l take a stab from south to north:

1. Third GP lane add/on drop-off from 32nd Ave. to KGH;

2. 6-lane cross-section from KGH to Hwy 17/SFPR;
(does not take into account future Serpentine/Southern Freeway connections to Hwy 99 - ensure overpasses have enough clearance for at least 4 lanes per direction)

3. 8-lane cross-section from Hwy 17 NB;

4. New 6-8 lane cable stayed Bridge; Retain GMT for HOV lane + shoulder; GMT still requires considerable seismic upgrading;

5. 8-lane cross-section from GMT to WH/Hwy 91 exits;

6. New 4-lane Steveston Hwy interchange;

7. New Blundell Rd. interchange;

8. New WH interchange;

9. Short C/D system for WH/Hwy 91 S access/egress points;

10. 6 lanes from WH to Hwy 91 N egress/access points;

11. 8 lanes northward to 8 lane OSB, with drop-off lane at Marine Dr.

12. 6 - 8 lane expansion of Knight St. Bridge;

BTW, Delcan engineering did some preliminary review of the Hwy 99/Oak St. Bridge expansion at page 7 of the following link with cost estimates of ~$800 million. You can probably double or triple the cost estimates based upon their other estimates contained therein.

http://www.gvgc.org/pdf/MCTS_EconImpAnalys_appendR.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2010, 8:23 PM
ClearDop ClearDop is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 30
HWY 99 needs to be twinned all the way to the border. Which means the Massey Tunnel needs to be twinned too. Vancouver also needs to lift its moratorium on adding more lanes into the city. Once thats done, the Oak St. bridge can be rebuilt as an 8 lane bridge, 6 of which lanes would link up the the 6 lanes on Oak Street, and 2 lanes for exit/entrance ramps. Oh and the HOV lanes need to be moved into the middle lane. Having them on the outside lane is just wrong.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2010, 8:27 PM
Mininari Mininari is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,442

Hmm, last I checked Hwy 99 *is* already twinned (4-lanes) and freeway to the border.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2010, 7:47 AM
ClearDop ClearDop is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mininari View Post

Hmm, last I checked Hwy 99 *is* already twinned (4-lanes) and freeway to the border.
Twinned again. Making it an 8 lane highway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2010, 8:35 AM
Alex Mackinnon's Avatar
Alex Mackinnon Alex Mackinnon is offline
Can I has a tunnel?
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: East Van
Posts: 2,102
I doubt that will happen very soon. In that case I would be much more in favour of making a new ROW connecting up to Boundary Rd, meeting up with the 91 and then going across to the SFPR.
__________________
"It's ok, I'm an engineer!" -Famous last words
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:34 PM
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 22,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon View Post
I doubt that will happen very soon. In that case I would be much more in favour of making a new ROW connecting up to Boundary Rd, meeting up with the 91 and then going across to the SFPR.
Yes. More options is a much better idea than jamming everyone on to some mammoth highway.

But even tha t might not be necessary. Should we really be encouraging sprawl in all of that high quality farmland?

Surrey and east is one thing, but Richmond/Delta should remain farms IMHO.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2010, 10:20 AM
mrjauk mrjauk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 555
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClearDop View Post
Twinned again. Making it an 8 lane highway.
And what happens when it gets to Oak Street? Moreover, there won't be the need for an 8-lane H99 for a hell of a long time, if ever.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2010, 10:03 PM
urbanizer405 urbanizer405 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: YVR-SEA-PDX
Posts: 47
Here's my take:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Green: HOT/bus ramp connecting Knight St to H-99
Light red: Half-SPUI interchange at Westminster Hwy
Red: Braided ramp to/from H-91 & WH to H-99
Light blue: Braided ramp to PARCLO interchange @ Blundell Rd
Blue: 4-6 lane Blundell overpass (extra lane to on-ramp)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2010, 11:20 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,303
^ All of your red ramps in the northbound direction are currently under construction as part of the HOV project.

Nothing is being built for southbound for now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2010, 11:36 PM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,747
Is there a need for Blundell ramp? I don't think so. What needs improving is the Steveston one: a four lane replacement (with future expansion space) to better move the traffic through the area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2010, 7:41 AM
ClearDop ClearDop is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 30
Hate to be a downer but I honestly don't see a complete HWY 99 over haul happening any time soon, or even in the far off future. Why spend all this money and time on piece-meal work if its inevitably going to get torn down. It just doesn't make sense. And will the SFPR overpass even leave enough room underneath for future expansion? Something tells me it'll be hugging the northbound/southbound lanes of HWY 99....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2010, 4:08 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,303
^ Yep, Hwy 99 mainly serves South-of-Fraser, not Richmond residents. The residential section of Richmond is further to the west and has other bridges serving it more directly, and residential Richmond is not likely to sprawl any further due to the ALR.

The congestion issue on Hwy 99 is not as bad as it was for the Port Mann; but that's sort of like saying that the congestion on 2nd Narrows is not as bad as the Port Mann, and therefore, why should we ever expand 2nd Narrows? After the new Port Mann opens, Hwy 99 will probably take the crown for worst congestion in the province.

The fact is that the Hwy 99 infrastructure is quite old (built 1957-1959) and some of it is near end-of-life. There are some safety constraints since the crossings have narrower lanes than the bridges from the 1960's and later. Overall capacity in the corridor is unchanged since 1974.

There is plenty of right-of-way for a freeway upgrade, but the overpasses generally need replacing for this to happen. Some of them have only 2 lanes' width between pylons. And there is the issue of where the traffic goes at the Vancouver end; which is why Boundary Road keeps coming up in this discussion.

Realistically, the new Port Mann is just the beginning. It may take a decade to pay for each megaproject, but there has to be a major investment in Hwy 99, and another at 2nd Narrows, sometime in the coming decades.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2010, 5:10 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,303
^ Commuter rail is a neat idea, but the places you mentioned are not laid out linearly. 1) There is no existing rail crossing of the South Arm to serve Ladner or to loop past Steveston, 2) it is a massive detour to send Surrey/White Rock people over to Ladner when their trains could go straight north to New West instead.

The best hope for Ladner is probably to shoehorn an ALRT line into one of the tubes of the George Massey Tunnel after a replacement bridge is built for car traffic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2010, 5:17 PM
DKaz DKaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Kelowna BC & Edmonton AB
Posts: 4,270
South Surrey, not regular Surrey. Have it parallel along 99 with new tracks, follow 10 a bit into Ladner then cross the Fraser and join onto tracks on Shell Rd. Cross the Fraser at the rail bridge parallel to the Oak St. Bridge, then go up Arbutus corridor into Vancouver.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2010, 10:22 PM
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,877
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DKaz View Post
I'd much rather see White Rock and South Surrey linked to Vancouver with commuter rail (with a station in Ladner, Steveston, and somewhere in central Richmond). That'll be a busy line right there.
I like that idea, but have to ask: is there enough population density to warrant a decent train frequency? That's what seems to attract people from their cars: frequency of service.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zassk View Post
^ Commuter rail is a neat idea, but the places you mentioned are not laid out linearly. 1) There is no existing rail crossing of the South Arm to serve Ladner or to loop past Steveston, 2) it is a massive detour to send Surrey/White Rock people over to Ladner when their trains could go straight north to New West instead.

The best hope for Ladner is probably to shoehorn an ALRT line into one of the tubes of the George Massey Tunnel after a replacement bridge is built for car traffic.
Another good idea of putting ALRT into a GM Tunnel tube if/when it gets twinned or expanded. Here, my question is:
1: What routing would it take?
2: What type of technology? Rotem, to link to the Canada Line, or another (e.g. Bombardier...) if it takes another route?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2010, 10:56 PM
DKaz DKaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Kelowna BC & Edmonton AB
Posts: 4,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by trofirhen View Post
I like that idea, but have to ask: is there enough population density to warrant a decent train frequency? That's what seems to attract people from their cars: frequency of service.
West Coast Express has 5 trains each way a day spaced 30 minutes apart, no problems attracting 10,000 riders a day to that service. A single 9 car train with a seating capacity of just over 1500 is standing room only between Port Moody and Waterfront.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 12:56 AM
go_leafs_go02 go_leafs_go02 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London, ON
Posts: 2,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKaz View Post
West Coast Express has 5 trains each way a day spaced 30 minutes apart, no problems attracting 10,000 riders a day to that service. A single 9 car train with a seating capacity of just over 1500 is standing room only between Port Moody and Waterfront.
Yeah, if something run SoF from Chilliwack/Abbotsford through to Surrey, I would easily get out of my car and take a West Coast Express, provided I had an easy connection from a station to get to my work. That means frequent direct bus service to that location. However, seems like that won't ever happen - that rail for the valley group doesn't seem to be going anywhere. I would be first in line to try a tram from Chilliwack to Scott Road if it existed, even for a day trip.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2010, 5:13 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,593
Does everyone here forget that the Oak Street Bridge cannot be expanded? The CoV will not let anyone (province included) build more lanes into the city. That is going to be a major impediment to any H99 upgrade, at least from the 91 interchange northbound. I suppose technically they could add more lanes exiting the city but I doubt that would be very cost efficient. That being said the infrastructure south of the 91 interchange definitely needs improvements, but I don't see them happening until after the Pattullo bridge replacement.
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2010, 5:24 PM
Stingray2004's Avatar
Stingray2004 Stingray2004 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: White Rock, BC (Metro Vancouver)
Posts: 3,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by awvan View Post
Does everyone here forget that the Oak Street Bridge cannot be expanded? The CoV will not let anyone (province included) build more lanes into the city.
Grandview Hwy east of Boundary Rd. is currently 4 lanes and will be expanded into 6 lanes feeding into Vancouver's 6 lanes of Grandview Hwy on the other side of Boundary as part of the Hwy 1 expansion. That is, more lanes being built into the CoV.

Same concept would apply with the OSB. Expand to 8 lanes, have a drop-off lane at Marine Dr. and the remaining 2 lanes would increase to 3, which coincides with the 3 lanes on Oak St.

I doubt that the CoV would be able to call the shots when the province (which supercedes the CoV in terms of jurisdiction) would be stick-handling the matter and the OSB expansion is for regional purposes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:43 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.