Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal
I agree with all the excitement and am also impressed with the designs.
Grumpy time: These could be reduced/simplified quite a bit so that the 'gold standard' budget could free up money to finish other road projects: finish the SFPR properly, or make the Mary Hill/Laugheed Hwy free flowing to Maple Ridge, as examples, etc.
Do we really need that level of exchange at Steveston Hwy? I thought of this when I squinted and the interchange looks like the meeting of two main freeways. But Steveston Hwy is far from that. It goes east to very little, and very little developable land for the future, and it goes west to a very low growth, low density area.
Here's a thought though: maybe Steveston Hwy will be extended east way out past No 9 Rd. and a connection with the Alex Fraser/Queensborough nexus. That might be a useful.
|
I know what you're saying, but I think going for much less than proposed would just mean needing to rebuild parts of the freeway in the medium-term anyway. Highway 1, to me, was designed very well and is very modern - something that we should be trying to emulate wherever possible on the 99.
The thing is, there are already some significant issues such as the Cambie Road overpass, and way too many needless merge points. And we haven't even seen the inevitable cutbacks yet. Anyone have any guesses as to what might be cut first? My first thought was that the Steveston interchange might be reduced from a fully grade-separated diverging diamond setup, to a more simplified one that still includes flyovers.
But I still think the Steveston interchange is pretty forward-thinking (well, as far as freeway interchanges go) in terms of how compact it is. Reducing the scope of it would mean sacrificing more productive farm land.
I could also see Steveston Highway being extended further east as the port lands grow. Although a future interchange at Blundell Road was meant to accomodate that...
Threaded Mode