South Fraser Perimeter Road/Highway 17 Extension | Completed

[Metro-One]

Besides the bridge itself, the entire project is poorly designed.

For me, the absolute worse part is the Eastbound 91 off ramp to Northbound 91A (AKA - Driving from Richmond to New Westminster). It is beyond horribly, it is akin to a country road where someone simply laid down a thin sheet of asphalt on an uneven surface. This ramp dips and bumps, has no curbs or shoulders, uses no reflectors, is poorly lit and has no barriers. Instead the edges just sluff off. Even the lane markings are non existent where it merges onto the 91A, I would hate to be someone out of town using this ramp.

[Zassk]

^That 91A ramp is one of the early pieces of the project, and just another example of how it was rushed and shoddy and minimally repaired afterward.

The 99/91 interchange is a much better example of a properly built piece of highway. They spent an extra 1.5 years after Expo building that part, and it shows.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by Zassk

Many sections of the freeway had little or no preloading, therefore it sunk unevenly into the bog and has been that way since the year it opened.

The section through the bog between Nordel Way and Hwy 10:

1. Initial removal of bog material;

2. Subsequent placement of 10 - 20 feet of sawdust/woodchips;

3. Subsequent placement of 10 - 20 feet of pre-load sand;

AFAIK, that is standard construction practice through a bog and that section has fared relatively well with the exception of the split-level/banked curve between 64th Ave. and Hwy 10.

[Pennywise604]

Originally Posted by clooless

That is pretty much what the province proposed to do about six years ago, sans traffic light, with funding from the federal Border Infrastructure Program, but the project fell through when the City of Delta objected to the interchange design as westbound traffic on 72nd would no longer have access to southbound 91.

That's pretty brutal, but does make sense to me. I have to use that left turn from 72nd onto 91 SB at least once a day. I'll admit that not very many cars use it, but a few times during the afternoon rush you can have a good 7 or 8 cars queue for it, and it's a very fast light only 4 or 5 cars get through if they are fast enough, then if you don't make it through, you have to wait 5 more minutes. What I wouldn't mind seeing though is finding a way for cars to easily turn left onto Westview from 72nd, and having that portion of Westview maybe 2 lanes going SB all the way to 64th so that cars can turn right onto 64th and get on the highway that way. I would have no idea how to design that though, without affecting traffic on 72nd in any way, allowing residents along Westview parking space for their cars, and keeping NIMBY's in Sunshine Hills (myself included) happy. If 72nd was maybe 2 lanes all the way up the hill than maybe a light at Westview wouldn't be so bad, but if not traffic would back up accross the AFB every day.

On the topic of Surrey people not being able to merge properly. I couldn't agree more On 72nd EB it's annoying when drivers fly up ahead of traffic in the afternoon rush trying to squeeze in from the right lane, since the right lane turns right onto Westview. I'm the one who almost crashes into them, because they'll fly up the hill at 90, than slam on the breaks the second they see a possible space. They are completely oblivious to anyone behind them. What's worse is that left turn from 72nd onto 91 SB. I hate the drivers that decide to merge at 40 km/h into the fast lane on hwy 91 SB. Do they 1 not know that it's the fast lane of the highway, and 2 THE TRAFFIC IS MOVING FASTER THAN 110 KM/H, what good is merging in at 40, when traffic is flying by you at over 70 km/h faster... It's dangerous, I always refuse to merge with people at that spot. I would rather wait 5 minutes in rush hour to be the first car at the light, than risk my life merging onto a highway with retarded people. When I merge on to the 91, I slam the gas pedal and make sure I'm doing no slower than 110 by the time I merge in. People give you respect that way, and the highway doesn't become a death trap for 30 seconds while everyone merges.

[cabotp]

Well either they have to completly replace the light at 72nd Ave and 91 with some kind of on and off ramp system.

If that is not possible shut that whole intersection down, and force people either down 64th or down nordel.

Every time I've gone 91 SB at 72nd I've gone into the right lane for the very reason of idiots merging at such slow speeds from 72nd.

[Zassk]

How about a frontage road connecting 72nd with 64th, and close the 72nd intersection with 91?

[Pennywise604]

Originally Posted by cabotp

Well either they have to completly replace the light at 72nd Ave and 91 with some kind of on and off ramp system.

If that is not possible shut that whole intersection down, and force people either down 64th or down nordel.

Every time I've gone 91 SB at 72nd I've gone into the right lane for the very reason of idiots merging at such slow speeds from 72nd.

The thing about Nordel and 64th is that they get very congested in the afternoons/mornings regardless of 72nd. I live right where the 2 lanes from the off-ramp at 64th merge into 1 to go up the hill. Long story short: It's a very slow crawl up the hill everyday at rush hour. I would be happy if the hill was 2 lanes each way up and down. Than that could work. But telling people that they can't use 72nd anymore would be chaos. When the Patullo was closed for those 2 weeks, in the morning rush, the backups for the AFB were scary. Nordel jammed to King George (someone told me 152nd at one point, but I didn't believe them), 72nd jammed to King George, 64th jammed until King George, 91 backed up onto the 99. These are not related to shutting down 72nd, but forcing cars to take a different route that isn't customary is a bad idea. Lots of cars take 72nd to get onto and off the highway. It's just as congested down the hill in the morning as it is going up in the afternoon.

The more I keep thinking of a way they might solve the stupid light, the more I realize it's a very hard problem to fix. There's only one reasonable solution, but Delta will not allow it. So I'm guessing the backups will just get longer and longer.

[Dave2]

Originally Posted by Pennywise604

Are you serious! I never heard of there being lights in any other place than along 91. I remember the one for the East-West Connector, that was horrific on it's own,

In the very beginning, there was a light at 91/91A for all traffic, eventually they built a partial interchange that allowed some free-flow movement such as 91 E/B to 91A N/B, but it wasn't until they *finally* built a 2nd bridge across Annacis Channel that they got rid of the traffic light for *all* directions... and still, nearly 25 years later, we're still waiting on 72nd Ave

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by Pennywise604

The thing about Nordel and 64th is that they get very congested in the afternoons/mornings regardless of 72nd. I live right where the 2 lanes from the off-ramp at 64th merge into 1 to go up the hill. Long story short: It's a very slow crawl up the hill everyday at rush hour. I would be happy if the hill was 2 lanes each way up and down. Than that could work. But telling people that they can't use 72nd anymore would be chaos. When the Patullo was closed for those 2 weeks, in the morning rush, the backups for the AFB were scary. Nordel jammed to King George (someone told me 152nd at one point, but I didn't believe them), 72nd jammed to King George, 64th jammed until King George, 91 backed up onto the 99. These are not related to shutting down 72nd, but forcing cars to take a different route that isn't customary is a bad idea. Lots of cars take 72nd to get onto and off the highway. It's just as congested down the hill in the morning as it is going up in the afternoon.

The more I keep thinking of a way they might solve the stupid light, the more I realize it's a very hard problem to fix. There's only one reasonable solution, but Delta will not allow it. So I'm guessing the backups will just get longer and longer.

I will admit I don't want to see 72nd closed. But if safety becomes a concern at that intersection. And because of certain people they don't want to build an over pass system. The only other alternative would be to shut it down. But like you said and I do agree that would cause a major traffic problem on Nordell and 64th.

[officedweller]

FYI - the transit only bus ramp to Goverment Road from Hwy 1 is definitely ON. I saw a sign on Hwy 1 for it near North Road.

[cabotp]

So do any of you think they should set up a cameras on these truck or bus only ramps to catch and ticket those people who try and cheat and use the ramps with their personal vehicles

Assuming that is possible of course.

Because I know there are people who are going to use them.

[DKaz]

Thread topic changed to "Gateway Program Discussion: Anything except SFPR/NFPR/PRMH".

Originally Posted by cabotp

So do any of you think they should set up a cameras on these truck or bus only ramps to catch and ticket those people who try and cheat and use the ramps with their personal vehicles

Assuming that is possible of course.

Because I know there are people who are going to use them.

Replied here: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=4503600#post4503600

[Mininari]

New Pitt River Bridge opens Sunday
Seven lanes; Pedestrian and cyclist lanes also available
Dave White VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) | Saturday, October 24th, 2009 9:45 pm
Bookmark
The new Pitt River Bridge (News1130 Photo)
The new Pitt River Bridge (News1130 Photo)

VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) - It was partially opened just a few weeks ago, now the ribbon on the new Pitt River Bridge will be officially cut tomorrow. Traffic will start flowing sometime after a grand opening event, scheduled for 10 a.m.

It will also have cycling and pedestrian lanes - the old swing bridges will be removed. It will be seven lanes with three heading west into Port Coquitlam and four lanes heading east to Pitt Meadows.

The $198-million span has been in the works since 2006 and includes an interchange to replace traffic signals at the Mary Hill Bypass. Designed to reduce congestion, the province also says the new bridge will allow for future rapid transit. It's the first completed project under the province's Gateway Program.

[WarrenC12]

Great news. Any reason this wasn't a toll bridge?

[Stingray2004]

Yep, the first stand-along Gateway Project now completed. It's not a tolled facility as provincial policy dictates that another non-tolled facility must be extant as a reasonable alternative and none exists.

The PRB is also not in the same league as its other $1 billion counterparts (Golden Ears, PMB, Pattullo, etc.).

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Yep, the first stand-along Gateway Project now completed. It's not a tolled facility as provincial policy dictates that another non-tolled facility must be extant as a reasonable alternative and none exists.

The PRB is also not in the same league as its other $1 billion counterparts (Golden Ears, PMB, Pattullo, etc.).

I figured that was the answer, but it's a slippery slope. They eliminated the albion ferry after the GEB came in. And the Patullo is hardly a "reasonable alternative" for the PMB. Oh well.

It is not super expensive, so maybe a 25-50 cent toll would be appropriate, but that might cost more to administer than it brings in.

[Mininari]

Noting that there are still traffic lights on Lougheed for the MHB-to-Lougheed left turn, I wonder what the time frame is for demolishing the old bridgeheads and getting the left-turn movement of the interchange finished.

I.e. how long are we stuck with that temporary light on Lougheed?
Any clues out there?

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

They eliminated the albion ferry after the GEB came in. And the Patullo is hardly a "reasonable alternative" for the PMB. Oh well.

In that vein, they also eliminated the Ladner/No. 5 Rd. (Woodward landing) ferry when the George Massey Tunnel came on-line in 1959.

The Pattullo would not be a reasonable alternative for the tolled PMB IMHO. At Hwy 15/Hwy 1, the SFPR expressway will commence and it will be a quick trip over to the AFB and the associated highway network on the north side of the Fraser's southern arm - Hwy 91A, Hwy 91, Hwy 99, the Knight Fwy, etc.

[Metro-One]

Nice! I get to drive over this tomorrow morning on my way to school! No more swing bridges!

[officedweller]

Couple of pics from News1130: