stal̕əw̓asəm (Riverview) Bridge (Pattullo Bridge Replacement) | U/C

[SpongeG]

surrey to SFU would be much better

[DKaz]

Great, let's funnel more people onto Hwy 1, and leave the wide open Lougheed Hwy for me. Other than the 2 lights I hit, I was going 60-70 the entire way, 5:30pm eastbound. I got from the Vancouver border to the Coquitlam border in less time than it would take to get from Willingdon exit to Kensington exit.

[BurnabyAaron]

Originally Posted by DKaz

Great, let's funnel more people onto Hwy 1, and leave the wide open Lougheed Hwy for me. Other than the 2 lights I hit, I was going 60-70 the entire way, 5:30pm eastbound. I got from the Vancouver border to the Coquitlam border in less time than it would take to get from Willingdon exit to Kensington exit.

I'm impressed, Usually It takes 20 minutes just to get through the Brentwood area during rushhour.

[Mininari]

Yeah, the Lougheed-Willingdon intersection could really use a 6-lane cross section along Lougheed since Willingdon gets such a large priority for movements at rush hour. But, once you get past that, it is a good drive all the way to Coquitlam.

[Stingray2004]

Looks like Front Street in NW will see an expansion to 4 lanes as part of the NFPR and the new Pattullo Bridge. I'd rather see Front Street become part of a vibrant, future waterfront residential community, with all but local traffic completely banned, providing greater pedestrian connectivity to Columbia St.

And the regional traffic diverted to a SFPR/Pattullo/McBride-Stormont/Hwy 1 corridor. But these planners always seem to know best.

In a City of Traffic Jams, the Pattullo Looms Large

By Chris Bryan - New Westminster News Leader

Updated: October 21, 2010 9:31 AM


The significance of this is the fact that it appears the Downtown portion of the North Fraser Perimeter Road would be built at the same time [as the Pattullo Bridge].

That’s big. And it means this:

• the waterfront portion of Front Street would be boosted from two to four lanes.

• some, if not all, of the waterfront parkade would need to be demolished

Eugene Wat, the city’s manager of infrastructure and planning, says a TransLink consultant has been working on the details of this segment for about 18 months.

“The Front Street parkade will be impacted,” Wat told me.

It’s no wonder that Downtown merchants are nervous.

“We’re suffocating—you can’t get out, you can’t get in,” Hwang says, adding that his friends from outside New West have been telling him they’re avoiding the area.

The North Fraser Perimeter Road has loomed large over the future of New West’s Downtown for many years.

Will it be encapsulated? Or will it further cut off Columbia from the waterfront, counter to one of the key goals—connectivity—outlined in the city’s Downtown Community Plan?

http://www.bclocalnews.com/greater_vancouver/newwestminsternewsleader/opinion/105384603.html

[Phusion]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Looks like Front Street in NW will see an expansion to 4 lanes as part of the NFPR and the new Pattullo Bridge. I'd rather see Front Street become part of a vibrant, future waterfront residential community, with all but local traffic completely banned, providing greater pedestrian connectivity to Columbia St.

And the regional traffic diverted to a SFPR/Pattullo/McBride-Stormont/Hwy 1 corridor. But these planners always seem to know best.



http://www.bclocalnews.com/greater_vancouver/newwestminsternewsleader/opinion/105384603.html

Forcing people to go that route instead of cutting through NW? Thats pretty out-of-the-way. And what about all the traffic that wants to continue along through NW and onto Marine westbound? and vice versa? I think the planners got this one right. Either increase capacity through the bottleneck known as New Westminster, or provide an alternative route that is equal time and distance

[twoNeurons]

Make it four lanes and box it in... or at least wall it in with pedestrian access over top of it.

Make the stuff South of the Boxed in road a waterfront park.

I wonder how feasible this is....

[Phusion]

^^^ Never has metro Vancouver been big on digging trenches or "boxing" roads in. I don't expect them to start now.

[officedweller]

I can't see it not being boxed in - or at least having provision to allow boxing-in in future.
That said, Goods Movement routes are not typically "in tunnel" because of transport of dangerous goods concerns.

I think what's likely isn't so much "boxing in" as "decking over" - like Canada Place Way lies over top of Waterfront Road - open to the water side (i.e. so that explosive blasts are not contained so much).

[xd_1771]

I smell an Alaskan Way coming up for the New West waterfront--

[Stingray2004]

My exact sentiments:

Calls Anew for the Stormont Connector

Updated: October 26, 2010 1:44 PM

Re: In a city of traffic jams, Pattullo looms large (Column, Oct. 22)

If we are to have a new Pattullo Bridge in the location suggested (we all know its replacement is long overdue), then it should connect to Highway 1 via the Stormont Connector and McBride Boulevard.

It’s time for Burnaby to step up and partner with New Westminster to solve this traffic problem.

In doing so, while the tunnel in the Burnaby section is being constructed, let’s consider covering McBride as well. The addition of new land in our city would be fantastic. This option would also close “the great divide” McBride creates in our city.

The benefits would be both physical and financial. If need be, we could pay for our portion by offering some of that land to develop a whole new intercity—Queens Park Mews perhaps? Imagine the DCCs (Development Cost Charges) we could recover. And according to past editorials, the city is all about receiving DCCs now.

All our school routes would be safer and as a result traffic all over the city would be dramatically improved, along with air quality. Imagine no more speed bumps, bulges or roundabouts! Traffic would actually flow in and out of our city rather than jam up in gridlock.

Whether by begging provincial or federal governments or by borrowing on our future, money seems to flow easily and freely for any pet project in this city—so why not this option?

By doing this we can forgo the North Fraser Perimeter Road since the South Fraser Perimeter Road would connect Delta and Surrey Ports with a new Pattullo Bridge, Highway 1 and the new Port Mann. Once in place, we can connect the Westminster Pier Park to Columbia Street, making it viable and accessible.

No one seems prepared to explore this option. Yet they will likely spend untold billions on a bridge, roads and encapsulation, thus separating the people from the river—forever.

Those that do not live the “problem” of our traffic condition may not be close enough to the issue. There are many of us who live our traffic nightmares daily and offer solutions from the grassroots. Real solutions based on actual and historic realities that planners and politicians might not observe. When these same people make mistakes we often end up with higher taxes and a lower quality of life.

The Stormont Connector is not a new concept but rather an idea from residents that could potentially solve our traffic issues.

http://www.bclocalnews.com/opinion/letters/105808098.html

[officedweller]

Widening is probably doable - especially if the railway bridge is also re-done at the same time.


http://www.globalairphotos.com/large/BC/New_Westminster/Sapperton/2009/349/2

[BCPhil]

If they're not redoing the rail bridge, then I think you could go up and over the track to the bridge, and have just enough clearance under the existing Pattullo. They're going to have to do something like that anyway if they want Front Street to connect to the new bridge.

I don't see how you can make Front Street a main road through New West and the access point to the new bridge without some pretty crazy structures to take the road up and over the tracks to the bridge and the crossing on Front Street (near the parkade). You can't have access to the bridge close because a train is crossing Front Street, and you can't remove the tracks because that track is critically important to the industry and ports on Annacis Island.

[Metro-One]

So any November dates announced for the open houses yet?

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

I smell an Alaskan Way coming up for the New West waterfront--

Have you seen how ugly front street is now? Atleast the alaskan way viaduct moves people, the current water front is both ugly and useless.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

So any November dates announced for the open houses yet?

Nope. I understand that they have now been indefinitely postponed until the new year.

[Spork]

I want to throw out the note that the building furthest east on Columbia St. on the South side applied for a permit to expand their building into the parking lot next door and got deferred until the Patullo bridge replacement is decided, indicating that East/West of the current structure is still being considered either way.

[Stingray2004]

I've said it once and I'll say it again. Translink should stick to transit and BC MoT should handle all of the major highway projects:

According to TransLink spokesperson Ken Hardie, TransLink has taken a step back from the planning for a replacement Pattullo Bridge. Some engineers have indicated opportunities for rehabilitation to the existing structure exist and should be considered.

Read more: http://www.royalcityrecord.com/news/Mayor+Wright+donnybrook/3877336/story.html#ixzz16HIvVqAZ

[Metro-One]

I was really excited to see their proposed 1.4 billion dollar project alignments, considering the entire GEB and GEW only cost 900 million. My mind was going wild imagining a large GEB style viaduct from the south end of the new Patullo Bridge to the escarpment past Scott Road station with a full interchange with the new SFPR, involving major ramps, and / or a decent addition to the NFPR near the north end of the new bridge, possibly involving some tunnelled highway portions. You know, a proper bridge link!

And I was actually excited that Translink was in charge of this, seeing how their projects seem to involve far more elevated structures than any MoT project.

I really hope this is a bad joke, considering keeping this turd of a bridge? Refurbish, honestly???? This is like the last bridge that should ever be considered for refurbishing, especially since my sources involved in our region's road projects tell me that Translink engineers wont even drive over the Patullo themselves because it is such bad shape.

If this is true, I highly bet this is another side effect of our local mayors inability to work together on any transit / road issue, and I suspect New West is highly against the replacement of the Patullo.

I should also add this should not come as a surprise seeing how we have now recently seen the highway 1 and SFPR projects downgraded, a never ending funding dispute delaying the Evergreen Line, and just minutes ago New West refusing all options of the proposed United Boulevard completion.

[go_leafs_go02]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

I've said it once and I'll say it again. Translink should stick to transit and BC MoT should handle all of the major highway projects:



Read more: http://www.royalcityrecord.com/news/Mayor+Wright+donnybrook/3877336/story.html#ixzz16HIvVqAZ

Rehabilitate it? Are you serious? Why, because it would be cheaper, but oh wait, you'll have to rehabilitate it all over again in 10 years.

And to make that bridge safer, they'd have to install a counterflow system and reduce the lanes to 3 lanes instead of the existing four. I heard that was looked at a few years back, and deemed to be completely unfeasible. And we all know that rehabiliation will likely be a cheap half job that will simply require changes within 5-10 years. Just like those new EB Port Mann HOV lanes.