Port Mann/Highway 1 Improvements | Completed

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

In all honesty, it doesn't look any worse than it is now. It's been like a "detour" for the last 30 years (or whatever).

The big difference will be an extra light and that the traffic will be mixed with United Blvd traffic.

[DKaz]

My 791 bus will be slowed down even more, but yah I agree the sharp S curve before the light has always been tricky to maneuver.

[cabotp]

The sharp s-curve wasn't so bad. The problem I found was that the lane markings were basically none existent. You never knew where the lane really was and so people tended to drift and end up all over the place at the United Boulevard light.

[Dave2]

Originally Posted by agrant

I'd like that, but what they need to do is lengthen the on-ramps. There's a couple really bad on-ramps coming from Boundary, and another one from 1st Ave, I believe, heading west. Slows all the traffic down, because the cars trying to merge onto the highway are only going about 60km or so. Willingdon is probably the only one you can easily get up to speed, although people never seem to be able to do it.

Agreed, once you get past Willingdon/Grandview the freeway really devolves into a mess of short ramped interchanges that hasn't been improved since 1964. Hopefully the work they're doing now with the overpasses will fix that.

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by cabotp

I don't believe the new Pitt river bridge will be open next weekend

Yes it will. Just not with all the lanes open.

Four lanes of new Pitt bridge open on Oct. 4

The Times

Friday, September 25, 2009

The new Pitt River Bridge will be partially opened on Sunday, Oct. 4 for two lanes of traffic in each direction while traffic will continue to flow on the old bridge spans.
Once the four lanes of the new bridge are open, there won't be any more counter-flow lanes in place during peak traffic hours.

The $198-million bridge project was partially funded by the provincial government and partially by the federal government and will eventually replace the current four-lane swing bridge.

When completed the new Pitt River Bridge will have three lanes of westbound traffic and four lanes of eastbound traffic. Traffic has increased from 27,000 cars daily in 1985 to 88,000 currently.

© Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows Times 2009

[cabotp]

^ Ahh ok. I thought it wasn't opening till the end of October or beginning of November.

[racc]

Originally Posted by cabotp

As the saying goes "No gain without the pain"

Actually, typically with highway construction, there is far more pain than gain. The construction delays typically are far greater than any travel time improvements after construction given that more people will use the highway causing more congestion. Enjoy!

[Mininari]

To that, I would say that the sprawling, suburban neighbourhoods have already been developed, and are using the highway anyway. We're upgrading the baseline capacity which any balanced transportation system in a large metro area needs.

To look at this from a different perspective, the infrastructure is merely catching up to what has already exists. Surrey, Langley and Chilliwack already have long distance commuters, who commute by car, because they live in already-developed sprawling neighbourhoods. The highway upgrades ARE catering to them, but at the same time, the tolls and extension of HOV can have a difference on how these people choose to commute.

The issue for the future, especially for ag-land reserve boosters is to prevent any more suburban development on farmland in the valley. But then
I'll refer you to the thread on "unaffordablility for families" in the GVRD. Why don't people choose to live closer to their work? Perhaps they can't afford to Live in a Vancouver dwelling big enough for a family of 4 or 5?

Its a sad state, that we're in really... many of us still value the single-family house and yard for family-rearing over high-density living... and thats why developers continue to provide single-family housing, either detached, duplexes, or townhouses.

So change that as we may over the long-term, but in the short-term, we have to continue to support a balanced approach, and that means embracing high-density developments around rapid transit, along with providing the old-fashion highways to the existing users, and commercial users.

[vansky]

none of the "projects" have any relevance to richmond and most vancouver residences from now on...sad

[Zassk]

^ Massey Tunnel and 99 are the next big upgrade projects due after Gateway... rest assured, Richmond and Vancouver will be squarely in the limelight at that point.

[Metro-One]

Well Richmond has definitely seen the lions share of freeway development in metro-Vancouver over the last 30 years.

[cabotp]

Besides Vancouver does not want to even entertain the idea of putting another freeway within it's borders.

The only thing I want to see built in Vanouver is subway lines (the idea). Starting with Broadway.

They could replace the oak street bridge with a 6 lane bridge. Without adding any lanes to Vancouver. It would just mean all 6 lanes on oak would then go onto the bridge. Instead of the current format where curb lanes go and start from Marine drive. And then turn the Massey tunnel to 6 lanes. But have the curb lane in each direction from South of Massey up oak street for a bit to be HOV.

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by Zassk

^ Massey Tunnel and 99 are the next big upgrade projects due after Gateway... rest assured, Richmond and Vancouver will be squarely in the limelight at that point.

Remember, thats a long-term vision from the liberal government. I doubt an NDP government would proceed with the H99 project.

I would love to see a "project definition report" for it though... I wonder if one exists.

[Vonny]

Originally Posted by Mininari

The issue for the future, especially for ag-land reserve boosters is to prevent any more suburban development on farmland in the valley. But then
I'll refer you to the thread on "unaffordablility for families" in the GVRD. Why don't people choose to live closer to their work? Perhaps they can't afford to Live in a Vancouver dwelling big enough for a family of 4 or 5?

Its a sad state, that we're in really... many of us still value the single-family house and yard for family-rearing over high-density living... and thats why developers continue to provide single-family housing, either detached, duplexes, or townhouses.

So change that as we may over the long-term, but in the short-term, we have to continue to support a balanced approach, and that means embracing high-density developments around rapid transit, along with providing the old-fashion highways to the existing users, and commercial users.

there is nothing wrong to value single family house, but there is something wrong to have his living style subsidized by the community.

I have concern with ALR because how long a municipality can resist to the lure of money from a devlopper? ...and the incentive for developper to devleop become gretaer with the improved road system...

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by vansky

none of the "projects" have any relevance to richmond and most vancouver residences from now on...sad

So the Canada Line is old news now? Get out of your bubble, Richmond doesn't amount to much in the grand scheme of Metro Vancouver.

And Vancouver is a part of pretty much every transit project out there.

[tybuilding]

There is a world outside of Richmond and Vancouver

Originally Posted by vansky

none of the "projects" have any relevance to richmond and most vancouver residences from now on...sad

[Millennium2002]

WarrenC12... Vancouver is not a party to this project. It might pass through their boundaries but they never supported it from day one.

Originally Posted by Mininari

To that, I would say that the sprawling, suburban neighbourhoods have already been developed, and are using the highway anyway. We're upgrading the baseline capacity which any balanced transportation system in a large metro area needs.

To look at this from a different perspective, the infrastructure is merely catching up to what has already exists. Surrey, Langley and Chilliwack already have long distance commuters, who commute by car, because they live in already-developed sprawling neighbourhoods. The highway upgrades ARE catering to them, but at the same time, the tolls and extension of HOV can have a difference on how these people choose to commute.

The tolls won't have that big of an effect traffic-wise... as much as a lot of traffic goes over the Port Mann there's probably a lot of traffic using the highway on either side of it... so it won't change travel habits for those commuters.

A better method of changing people's minds would be to toll the whole highway itself... and use it to fund transit improvements south of the Fraser (like Surrey's long-desired Skytrain extensions or LRT network).

Originally Posted by Mininari

The issue for the future, especially for ag-land reserve boosters is to prevent any more suburban development on farmland in the valley. But then I'll refer you to the thread on "unaffordablility for families" in the GVRD. Why don't people choose to live closer to their work? Perhaps they can't afford to Live in a Vancouver dwelling big enough for a family of 4 or 5?
Its a sad state, that we're in really... many of us still value the single-family house and yard for family-rearing over high-density living... and thats why developers continue to provide single-family housing, either detached, duplexes, or townhouses.

Aren't families typically smaller (e.g. one to three children?)
As for family-oriented housing and costly apartments... Would it help to revisit some form of low-cost apartment blocks for medium and low income families with plenty of floor space, outdoor space, playgrounds, amenities, soundproofing, and security? =S

Originally Posted by Mininari

So change that as we may over the long-term, but in the short-term, we have to continue to support a balanced approach, and that means embracing high-density developments around rapid transit, along with providing the old-fashion highways to the existing users, and commercial users.

That isn't a balanced approach... as expanding the highways temporarily reduces the need to expand transit and transit-oriented development around stations. We can have one thing or another but not both.

[Zassk]

We really do need a rail network of some kind from Langley-Chilliwack, ideally connecting with Surrey SkyTrain and Mission WCE. It would massively shape the growth of the valley. It'll have to be the provincial goverment's new pet project for it to happen, though.

[vansky]

Originally Posted by tybuilding

There is a world outside of Richmond and Vancouver

there's no big projects for richmond, that's for sure...

and according to some ppl's mentality, they do not see burnaby, surrey and the rest of the region as close to reality...but rather far, distant, only of memory from past travelling experience...to some even of extreme, surrey exists further than toronto...asia, or this planet...

[GeeCee]

Drove past the new United Blvd exit on Highway 1 along the old exit at about 9:30 tonight. It was not open yet, but it looks complete. It also appears to be permanent.