Port Mann/Highway 1 Improvements | Completed

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Zassk

Well, if you're going to build LRT from Guildford to Coquitlam, then logically its destination will be the Evergreen line. But instead of building LRT over the Port Mann, you could just build LRT from Guildford along 104th to the Expo Line... that would be a lot shorter and cheaper, wouldn't it?

Who are these people who would prefer getting to the rest of the transit network via Port Mann? Commuters? Langley residents? Shoppers dissatisfied with Guildford and Willowbrook? I guess I just don't quite understand the need for LRT over Port Mann. Guildford isn't high density and isn't planned to become high density. It needs to be connected to Surrey City Centre first, doesn't it?

Yep, I would agree that a Skytrain extension to Guildford would be the best, if you're just building a short line I don't think a technology change is worth it, but people here have said that isn't worth the money. I don't know Surrey well enough.

I think the transit or rail over the PMB would be facilitating some kind of commuter rail downtown, that's why I suggested LRT to the WCE station.

Looking at a map it makes more sense to run LRT from KG station all the way down to White Rock, and another line out to Langley, but what do I know?

[DKaz]

I think Coquitlam to Guildford to Surrey Central LRT would be wildly popular.

[Zassk]

As Surrey grows in importance, I could see Coquitlam and NE suburbs being realigned as satellites of Surrey rather than Vancouver - in which case an LRT connecting the NE with Surrey would make a lot of sense (along with the rest of the proposed Surrey LRT lines). That would make the new Port Mann even more justified, since it would be connecting Surrey City Centre with its northern suburbs. I don't know the current demand for commuting between the NE and Surrey, but I suspect we aren't quite there yet...?

[WaxItYourself]

Originally Posted by DKaz

I think Coquitlam to Guildford to Surrey Central LRT would be wildly popular.

I completely agree. Perhaps across the new Portmann Bridge. From Surrey Central it could head towards Newton and from the a B -Line buss to White Rock as was laid out in the possibilities in some of the Surrey Based transit meetings recently.

[twoNeurons]

The Port Mann makes more sense as a Commuter Rail or High Speed Rail Corridor from Abbotsford to Vancouver... perhaps sharing tracks with a line from Seattle to Vancouver.

LRT might make sense if LRT was built to Guildford. Surrey to Coquitlam would otherwise mean: LRT to Whalley, Whalley to New West, New West to Lougheed, Lougheed to Coquitlam...3 transfers for a relatively short distance. WAY too much, even for rail transit.

[Metro-One]

I agree, commuter rail would make the most sense for using the Port Mann

[Canadian Mind]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

As for the PMB, I would have actually looked at a 2+4+4+2 configuration for the future.

Why is that?

And could the structure accommodate another 2 lanes outside the outer cables in the future for an increase in capacity?

[DKaz]

No but if they do indeed have a lower deck reserved for rapid transit, they could very well move HOV lanes down to the lower deck when demand warrants it, I heard that the lower deck is 4 lanes so they can have two for LRT and two for HOV.

I'd also like to argue that the HOV lanes should be peak hour only or 6am to 6pm only.

[LeftCoaster]

Why? Off peak demand should be low enough that it should not matter.

And I too agree the PMB would be ideally suited for a S Fraser commuter rail line.

[DKaz]

It seems that people think they can travel on the left lane during non peak hours at 10km/h below the speed limit. An extra passing lane would be nice. haha.

[CrazyCommute]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

One reason I can think of for replacing the Port Mann before the Pattullo (besides the fact that the Port Mann is used for local, regional & national travel while the Pattullo is almost entirely local) is the fact that New Westminster is so hard to deal with in any highway expansion project. Just look at the 1 lane wooden bridge at the end of Boulevard for an example!

I agree. From a motorist/commuting perspective, New West is one big speed bump. The city obviously despises cars, at least cars from anywhere outside New West. Columbia East/Brunette is just jam-packed with semis, and I don't think it's ever -- I mean ever -- been upgraded, has it? That one lane from Columbia to Brunette is an absolute joke. And just to add insult to injury, this morning, there was a street-cleaning machine/vehicle on Columbia in the middle of rush-hour, about 8:30 am.

[Whalleyboy]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

LRT could run from Guildford Mall to the WCE at Coq Ctr (for example). I'm sure there would be demand for it shortly after the bridge completion. Alternatively it could run to Lougheed Mall. Who knows what things will look like, there's still another election in 2012. If promises are made then, we could see LRT rolling by the completion date of the PMB. Or, I'm just dreaming...

Originally Posted by Zassk

Well, if you're going to build LRT from Guildford to Coquitlam, then logically its destination will be the Evergreen line. But instead of building LRT over the Port Mann, you could just build LRT from Guildford along 104th to the Expo Line... that would be a lot shorter and cheaper, wouldn't it?

Who are these people who would prefer getting to the rest of the transit network via Port Mann? Commuters? Langley residents? Shoppers dissatisfied with Guildford and Willowbrook? I guess I just don't quite understand the need for LRT over Port Mann. Guildford isn't high density and isn't planned to become high density. It needs to be connected to Surrey City Centre first, doesn't it?

they actually have plans to try and add bus lanes that can be changed into lrt lanes down the line along 104 ave between central and guidlford.
So it could be a surrey central via guildford to coquitlam lrt
and by doing so you'd connect surrey city centre to coquitlam city centre it would save people from both the need of transfers between the line.

[paradigm4]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I would agree that this is a familiar sight in US suburbs, but I'd argue that south of the Fraser is much the same as AnyTown, USA anyway. The liveable region that we are so happy with in Vancouver, is really Metro Vancouver north of the Fraser. The reason that the #1 is so jammed and the PMB is in gridlock for 23.5 hours a day is precisely because the suburbs south of the Fraser have been designed in the typical fashion that dominates North America. Unfortunately it's far too late to undue. Obviously we need more transit options for these folks, and encourage more development like Central City, but as far as the #1 highway goes, the horse has left the barn and the PMB expansion is what we need.

The South Fraser suburbs are nothing like AnyTown USA. Nothing. It's just plain false. Calgary's suburbs are much closer in design to the States than anything in our region.

2 major differences:

- SoF has a broad grid road network, approx 800 m spaced apart (perfect for a transit network)
- We also have a series of neighbourhood and town centres with retail and higher densities.

Surrey and Langley are actually quite livable cities and great for families. The framework of the suburbs are comparable to the framework of the North of Fraser. One of the only real deficiencies, other than jobs/services in comparison to Vancouver, is the lack of transport alternatives to the car.

Originally Posted by Chikinlittle

Sorry but Calgary doesn't do much right. C-Train expansion yes. Ring-road construction, no. That's 1950's planning, not 21st century planning. In case you haven't noticed, with the exception of some densification in the inner city over the last couple of years, almost all of Calgary's growth has been in creating new suburbs whilst expanding the city limits to accommodate - predominantly single family housing. Not so much 'getting it right' in my books.

Amen

Originally Posted by Zassk

Who are these people who would prefer getting to the rest of the transit network via Port Mann? Commuters? Langley residents? Shoppers dissatisfied with Guildford and Willowbrook? I guess I just don't quite understand the need for LRT over Port Mann. Guildford isn't high density and isn't planned to become high density. It needs to be connected to Surrey City Centre first, doesn't it?

You've hit it straight on the dot. The demand for commuters from Surrey to Coquitlam is quite low, compared to where most Surrey residents travel. In fact, only 3% of work travel from Surrey heads to the Tri-Cities.

In comparison,

5% goes to Langley
9% goes to Delta
9% goes to Burnaby
10% goes to Richmond
15% goes to Vancouver
38% remains in Surrey

LRT from Guildford to Coquitlam would be a waste of money. The demand for such a route could be easily filled by either an Express Highway Coach or a possible B-Line. The corridor doesn't need light rail.

The Hwy 1 corridor is primarily an express travel corridor. If transit service is introduced onto it, that service should, IMO, remain either Express Highway Coaches or commuter rail, with Park and Rides feeding the routes.

The stats also show that if we were truly serious about improving transit South of the Fraser, the majority of service would go to intracity travel - not to regional town hubs.

[punkster1982]

^ I thought something like 40% of the cars over the Port Mann were exiting for the Tri-Cities tho, hence the collector lanes being developed through there

[Metro-One]

yeah I am confused with that 3% statistic myself, especially since the westbound #7 and Brunette off ramps are always among the most clogged.

But I am guessing that the 3% statistic is for all of Surrey, and Surrey is a really big place, and almost all of those 3% will use the Port Mann, not to mention all those from Langley and even Abbotsford exiting to the tri-cities.

[Mininari]

Re: Cape Horn Interchange Renderings,

I just got home from the Arctic, so I can finally have a better look at those renderings on the weblink posted.

Wow. It is definitely easier to see how the movements work when you look at those renderings in confjuction with the pdf files (concept drawings). The changes that they are making make SO much sense with respect to safety and movement efficiency. The wide-radious ramps, the direct connections to the Mary Hill and Lougheed Westbound (with grade seperation), and you can see how the Port Mann Collector Lanes start and end too. Looks like one travelling Eastbound will have to make their choice whether they are going to Poco, Surrey or Beyond before they even cross the bridge. That is definitely going to thin out traffic, and give the merging traffic lots of room to merge at full speed. The Mary Hill basically gets its own 5th lane to Brunette, which is also good.

I am now curious to see the Brunette rendering... I am wondering how well they are going to be able to handle that interchange. Brunette is just a cluster#$@#, and its so tight for space there. On the otherhand, they seem eager to expropriate for the Cape Horn, so maybe some expropriation is in order for Brunettte?

On another note, should we move discussion about how LRT would work over the Port Mann to its own thread? There seems to be a lot of interest in that topic...

[Stingray2004]

If you look at the Brunette schematics, property expropriation is limited to the northeast quadrant and the interchange movements appear to be a vast improvement over the current design.

I still don't know if they are going to rip down the existing overpass or just add another westbound lane on the north side for enhanced TCH-1 EB -> Brunette WB movements. I'm still of the opinion that it's the former.

As for the Auto-Cad renderings, the engineering firm (one of 12 for the Hwy 1/PMB project) will complete same for the entire 37 km portion to be upgraded and they were 40% complete as of last month. I'm trying to get some for the Grandview and Willingdon interchanges, which will also be relatively massive in size with the c/d system, etc. My fingers are crossed.

BTW, here are some pics of the work currently being undertaken within the median east of the PMB:









Source: http://echo.msk.ru/blog/alexcan/619907-echo/

[DKaz]

It's too bad 232 and 264 interchanges aren't in the scope of work.

(The following comments are based on the conceptual design drawings)

A flyover from 15 South to 1 West would be nice, but maybe moot point since all the intersections on Hwy 15 are signalized.

Still awaiting the redesign of 152 to accomodate the new C/D lanes.

1 West to Brunette South will be free flow with no signals which will hopefully eliminate the nasty queue that can dangerously stretch out to Hwy 1.

They're replacing Gaglardi overpass with a narrower one, what?? The new offramps should allow for slightly higher speed though, but I think we can officially not count on the Stormont Connector ever happening.

Sprott/Kensington, Um I thought there was going to be a complete redesign of traffic movement, namely all traffic to/from Hwy 1 to the west would use Norland Ave, what happened?

Willingdon/Grandview/Boundary - All good, although I don't know about the 1 West to Willingdon movement merging onto the C/D then onto the actual offramp to Willingdon.

Approach to Ironworkers - the queue is still going to be backed up to Grandview Hwy and the extra lanes only means extra 'parking' lanes. Expanding the already 1st Ave to Hastings section from 6 to 8 lanes will truly make it feel even more big city through there.

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by DKaz

It's too bad 232 and 264 interchanges aren't in the scope of work.

(The following comments are based on the conceptual design drawings)

Willingdon/Grandview/Boundary - All good, although I don't know about the 1 West to Willingdon movement merging onto the C/D then onto the actual offramp to Willingdon.

Approach to Ironworkers - the queue is still going to be backed up to Grandview Hwy and the extra lanes only means extra 'parking' lanes. Expanding the already 1st Ave to Hastings section from 6 to 8 lanes will truly make it feel even more big city through there.

Top: Yeah, it is unfortunate because that stretch will be outdated until you hit the new Mt. Lehman Interchange... but capacity-wise, it should be fine. The highway should probably be expanded to 6-lanes all the way past Abbotsford, but thats just not in the cards right now. I'm impressed with how much of a rebuild they're doing as it is.

Middle: Yeah, this section should feel pretty "big city" too. The Grandview and First Avenue exits are going to be interesting to watch after all the improvements are complete, because after all, the CoV will not add capacity to those routes (except the HOV addition on Grandview). Hopefully the left-turn que from Hwy 1 westbound to 1st won't become a new hazard.

Bottom: Yep... how many cars actually get off at McGill? The new lanes terminate at McGill through the Cassiar Tunnel. Then again, what kind of timeline would we be sniffing at for a Second Narrows replacement? Theres been musings about that, no? But perhaps after the H99 improvements?

Someday.

And yeah, I did have a look at the earlier brunette concept diagram (I've studied every PDF)... I guess the idea is that truck traffic will be encouraged to use the future (completed, if ever) NFPR to access highway one from the south.

WHATEVER happened to that federal money to finish the United Boulevard extension with a 4-lane bridge and interchange at Brunette??? Election promise only? Or did New West bite their thumbs at the the plan again.

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by DKaz

It seems that people think they can travel on the left lane during non peak hours at 10km/h below the speed limit. An extra passing lane would be nice. haha.

Amen.
Now if you REALLY want to be frustrated by the ole left-lane-loonies, come drive on ANY road in Winnipeg. Any speed limit above 50 seems to be just a suggestion for the left lane.