Metro Vancouver Road Infrastructure Discussion

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

The Cape Horn interchange isn't between Surrey and Chilliwack though, it's in Coquitlam on the other side of the Port Mann.

Drove by another accident this morning. 5-6 cars scattered in the HOV and fast lane. This is the 5th straight workday with a major accident nearly shutting down Hwy 1.

The BC MOT needs to add some delineators at this particular stretch. Too many vehicles are trying to get into the HOV lane from the Mary Hill. Vehicles coming off the Port Mann are going over 120km/hr while these merging vehicles from the offramp are going 60-70km/hr.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

Drove by another accident this morning. 5-6 cars scattered in the HOV and fast lane. This is the 5th straight workday with a major accident nearly shutting down Hwy 1.

The BC MOT needs to add some delineators at this particular stretch. Too many vehicles are trying to get into the HOV lane from the Mary Hill. Vehicles coming off the Port Mann are going over 120km/hr while these merging vehicles from the offramp are going 60-70km/hr.

Isn't the Port Mann supposed to have a 90km/hr limit? If so, it sounds like something needs to be done to enforce it.

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Isn't the Port Mann supposed to have a 90km/hr limit? If so, it sounds like something needs to be done to enforce it.

Like someone said, vehicles are going over 120km/hr on Hwy 1. You sometimes see drivers going over 160km/hr and weaving in and out of traffic.

The RCMP have practically ceased all speed and HOV enforcement during rush hour as a visual distraction can cause congestion and further issues. Furthermore, police resources are stretched super thin to a point where traffic enforcement is now practically non-existent. Also, it's very well known that you can dispute your ticket, and can potentially get out of the ticket if the police officer is off-duty or busy responding to something.

Idiot proofing roads and photo radar would be an appropriate solution.

Fridays accident was caused by an Amazon delivery driver. Go figure.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

Too many vehicles are trying to get into the HOV lane from the Mary Hill.

What I don't get about the HOV lanes is why they restrict access to the dashed-line segments and prohibit lane changes anywhere else. It compresses all the lane changes to and from the HOV lane to short segments, which has to reduce safety by forcing everyone to jockey for position over just a couple of dozen seconds at a time.

What's worse is that traffic merging onto the freeway that wants to get over to the HOV lane (or move from the HOV lane to an off ramp) is forced to lane-change across several lanes of traffic within a short distance in order to get there fast enough not to miss those access points.

What's the point of all that? Wouldn't it be safer to simply allow lane changes to and from the HOV lane anywhere? Then people could take their time, be less frantic and more cautious.

I get that there's a safety issue if traffic in the general lanes is stopped and someone tries to merge into fast-moving traffic in a free-flowing HOV lane. But that danger exists in the dashed-line segments anyway, and I could argue that compressing all those changes into one small area makes it worse.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

What's the point of all that? Wouldn't it be safer to simply allow lane changes to and from the HOV lane anywhere? Then people could take their time, be less frantic and more cautious.

I get that there's a safety issue if traffic in the general lanes is stopped and someone tries to merge into fast-moving traffic in a free-flowing HOV lane. But that danger exists in the dashed-line segments anyway, and I could argue that compressing all those changes into one small area makes it worse.

You answered your own question.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

You answered your own question.

Tell me how restricting lane changes to a small fraction of the length of the HOV lane prevents someone moving slowly from unsafely pulling into the HOV lane even in that small fraction.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Tell me how restricting lane changes to a small fraction of the length of the HOV lane prevents someone moving slowly from unsafely pulling into the HOV lane even in that small fraction.

Suasion-people generally like to follow rules. TBH there should be flex posts if people are making unsafe moves.



In the modern era, the trend is to reduce the number of merges, and especially short bi-directional weaves as they reduce capacity of each lane (why we see old cloverleafs being replaced by PARCLOs).



Long bi-directional weaves are an acceptable compromise - think ones of 1.5 km or longer.



But having the long weave when the speed difference could be very large is very unsafe and in effect reduces the HOV lane speed to below the speed of the congested traffic if there is high HOV demand as well.



It is all compromises and adapting a system we have instead of rebuilding at great expense.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Tell me how restricting lane changes to a small fraction of the length of the HOV lane prevents someone moving slowly from unsafely pulling into the HOV lane even in that small fraction.

Because of predictability.

The entrances to the HOV lanes are in defined areas, usually near interchanges.
Drivers already in the HOV lane will know to look out for merging drivers and adjust their speed accordingly.

The biggest danger is when the general lanes are stopped up and someone decides, on the fly, to pull into the HOV lanes without looking (or cannot comprehend the closing distance) as they try to move from a stop to 110km/h.

[jollyburger]

Wilkinson replied that short-term priorities are rapid buses and partial upgrades to the Upper Level Highway, but that the North Shore is going to need some form of dedicated rapid transit going forward. However, he noted the significant challenge posed by the replacement of the Ironworkers Memorial Bridge in the next 10 to 20 years.

Lifespan of the Second Narrows just magically dropped

https://www.nsnews.com/local-business/no...ansportation-housing-immigration-7683688

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Lifespan of the Second Narrows just magically dropped

https://www.nsnews.com/local-business/no...ansportation-housing-immigration-7683688

i wouldnt trust anything the federal government says. theyre a bunch of idiots.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Because of predictability.

I'd be more willing to buy that argument if there was signage that gave you some advance warning about where the allowable lane change stretches started and ended. As it is right now, you have to keep your eyes glued to the lane separation markings hoping that (a) a section will start soon so that you can make a lane change, or (b) the section won't stop soon so that you'll have time to synchronize to traffic in the adjacent lane and make your change before the section ends.

The sections simply aren't predictable as they are now, they're surprises. That's the antithesis of safe design, IMHO.

Sorry, I just can't get on board with this whole idea of restricting the lane changes to small sections and forcing everyone to jockey for position within them. Allowing lane changes anywhere reduces the pressure to make the lane change NOW! BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE! REGARDLESS OF CONFLICTING TRAFFIC!

[officedweller]

A driver should be able to determine when there's an entrance to an HOV lane.
It's like obvserving that your lane is exiting because the dashed white lines on the left become thicker.
Watching the lane markings is a part of driving.

Here's a speed differential crash:
• Video Link

and another:
• Video Link

and another:
• Video Link

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I'd be more willing to buy that argument if there was signage that gave you some advance warning about where the allowable lane change stretches started and ended. As it is right now, you have to keep your eyes glued to the lane separation markings hoping that (a) a section will start soon so that you can make a lane change, or (b) the section won't stop soon so that you'll have time to synchronize to traffic in the adjacent lane and make your change before the section ends.

The sections simply aren't predictable as they are now, they're surprises. That's the antithesis of safe design, IMHO.

Sorry, I just can't get on board with this whole idea of restricting the lane changes to small sections and forcing everyone to jockey for position within them. Allowing lane changes anywhere reduces the pressure to make the lane change NOW! BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE! REGARDLESS OF CONFLICTING TRAFFIC!

Absolutely disagree. There are many blind spots in turns along Hwy #1 where there's lots of stop-and-go traffic and too much variability in speeds to suggest there should be lane changes.

Prior to 2017 or so, it was a bit safer as there was more observance to the white solid road markings and better enforcement. However, I drive highway #1 every day now and it's a free for all across all stretches and collisions in the left lane/HOV lane have increased tenfold.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

Absolutely disagree.

Well, looks like I'm in the minority on this one.

I will opine, though, that traveling at high speed in the HOV lane when traffic in the adjacent lane is stopped is a dangerous practice, even though you have the right of way.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Well, looks like I'm in the minority on this one.

I will opine, though, that traveling at high speed in the HOV lane when traffic in the adjacent lane is stopped is a dangerous practice, even though you have the right of way.

By its very design, the HOV lane is intended to provide a faster route / speed advantage over the traffic jams in the general lanes.
That isn't always the case where the general lanes are free flowing, but what you consider a "dangerous practice" is exactly how they are intended to operate and why the HOV rules are in place.

That's similar to why the Port Mann Bridge's general lanes are divided (by a barrier) into express and collector/local lanes.
To avoid free for all mixing and crazy merging across so many lanes. People can have poor judgement.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by officedweller

By its very design, the HOV lane is intended to provide a faster route / speed advantage over the traffic jams in the general lanes.
That isn't always the case where the general lanes are free flowing, but what you consider a "dangerous practice" is exactly how they are intended to operate and why the HOV rules are in place.

That's similar to why the Port Mann Bridge's general lanes are divided (by a barrier) into express and collector/local lanes.
To avoid free for all mixing and crazy merging across so many lanes. People can have poor judgement.

I'm still sayin' that traveling at 90 or 100 km/h a few feet from traffic that's at a crawl when you're well aware that some of those crawlers are itching to get into your lane is, IMHO, pretty poor judgement.

If the highway designers really intended for HOV traffic to flow freely when the rest of the freeway is stopped, then they should physically separate it just like they did with the Port Mann collector lanes.

But ya know what? That wouldn't work either, 'cause at some point HOV users want to exit into the general lanes, and if those lanes are stopped then they're going to have to stop too in order to merge right. So good luck with that.

The only really viable solution is true express lanes with real access ramps. IMHO it's unreasonable to expect the existing HOV lanes to flow freely at unreduced speed after congestion has reached a certain level.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I'm still sayin' that traveling at 90 or 100 km/h a few feet from traffic that's at a crawl when you're well aware that some of those crawlers are itching to get into your lane is, IMHO, pretty poor judgement.

On the flip side, seeing cars travelling slower (ie 70km/h) in the HOV because of the possibilty of someone illegally merging simply invites violations.
Seeing cars flying down at high speed will cause drivers to recognize the hazard and think twice about even trying it.

Same goes for jaywalking. People jaywalk because they know that the drivers will accommodate them.
Even Canada Geese recognize that and freely wander across the road, because, they know that the cars won't hit them.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Even Canada Geese recognize that and freely wander across the road, because, they know that the cars won't hit them.

...except when they do.

[MIPS]

Friends of mine across the street from the Ironworks Development on Victoria have been complaining that ever since the new building went up the curbside parking almost entirely vanished during the day, which was weird because we both saw the inner courtyard is gated parking.

Well we finally found out why so many tenants are parking on the street: The dedicated parking is all ImPark paid parking. Almost none of the tenants are willing to pay for that so they've clogged up the surrounding streets.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by MIPS

Friends of mine across the street from the Ironworks Development on Victoria have been complaining that ever since the new building went up the curbside parking almost entirely vanished during the day, which was weird because we both saw the inner courtyard is gated parking.

Well we finally found out why so many tenants are parking on the street: The dedicated parking is all ImPark paid parking. Almost none of the tenants are willing to pay for that so they've clogged up the surrounding streets.

I guess you have to start metered parking around the area or at the last have 2-4 hour parking on weekdays.