Port Mann/Highway 1 Improvements | Completed

[Mousey]

Two things that may help regarding the weaving issues. The example of people trying to get to EB Hwy 10 from SB 99 via 91: Traffic is moving fast on both on-ramps. It is a bit hectic, but people will let you in as long as you aren't an idiot and try and get in at 60 km/h, causing a near pile-up behind you. Very rarely will you get that one retard who does that. Infact I use it at least 3 times a week, and have never witnessed it. The problem with the Hwy 1 interchange, is that a lot more cars use it, and you will have that one person who shouldn't be driving a car, merging on at 50 km/h and WILL cause major accidents.

Second is the left exit at 72nd at SB 91. That is a very, very dangerous area. All the traffic coming off the Alex Fraser is flying down the hill. Usually 110 km/h. Unless it's rush hour where traffic is moderate and not speeding, you are forced to slam on the brakes or pass on the right. People also have a bad habit of moving over where they think they have enough room, and just cut in at below the speed limit in front of speeding cars because they think they see a gap. Slowing from 110-80 in a short period of time, is always exciting. If I work in Richmond at night I usually take this way home, and this happens very often. 80% of the time from my experience. Again though, not very many cars use this compared to Hwy 1, where it would cause issues.

Need a proper example? 72nd WB to 91 SB, try doing that one in rush hour behind a car that decides to merge on at 50 km/h into the left lane where traffic is moving between 100-120. That actually happens!

Ps. I also know that there is no way in hell they would actually build that. But I often drive by examples of why they will never be built again.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

My Google earth "Path" tool measurement of the distance between the end of the Grandview on-ramp and the start of the NEW Willingdon off-ramp shows well in excess of 800 metres. You understand, don't you, that the old exit which took you direct to the southbound lane of Willingdon is now closed?

We're both wrong unfortunately.

Here is the current design and I measured to scale. I'm off by a few hundred, you're off by about 550.

http://www.jhausner.com/Willingdon.png

If you're curious, the green left line is the start of where you can merge in, and the second line is the end. Remember 2 lanes exit Willingdon so at the merge point you are in the far right lane, by the second green line the white dotted lines changes to a solid line because you effectively would be merging onto an exit at that stage.

Not to mention while technically possible, it is quite illegal to cross a solid white line, so effectively the stretch I mark is the legal limitation of the merging portion. Measures give or take around 340 meters. My scale me be off by a slight bit but I overlayed the image with Google Maps and used the Google Maps scale.

Either way it is a lot less than 800 meters and it is more than my 125 meter original estimate which I did roughly. I stand corrected.

That said the argument is actually secondary to my point. It just defies logic to think the cross traffic won't cause issues given while there is a slight increase in merge distance, you have 2 lanes exiting now (instead of 1) and an HOV on the left side merging in. And it is still at the very least half the distance as you see on HWY 99/91 and the on HWY 99/91 both lanes meet up at 90kph already vs Willingdon where you have cars accelerating merging from 50-60kph, and decelerating on the exit to around that too.

I stand by my opinion that it will still be a gong show.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by Mousey

Two things that may help regarding the weaving issues. The example of people trying to get to EB Hwy 10 from SB 99 via 91: Traffic is moving fast on both on-ramps. It is a bit hectic, but people will let you in as long as you aren't an idiot and try and get in at 60 km/h, causing a near pile-up behind you. Very rarely will you get that one retard who does that. Infact I use it at least 3 times a week, and have never witnessed it. The problem with the Hwy 1 interchange, is that a lot more cars use it, and you will have that one person who shouldn't be driving a car, merging on at 50 km/h and WILL cause major accidents.

Second is the left exit at 72nd at SB 91. That is a very, very dangerous area. All the traffic coming off the Alex Fraser is flying down the hill. Usually 110 km/h. Unless it's rush hour where traffic is moderate and not speeding, you are forced to slam on the brakes or pass on the right. People also have a bad habit of moving over where they think they have enough room, and just cut in at below the speed limit in front of speeding cars because they think they see a gap. Slowing from 110-80 in a short period of time, is always exciting. If I work in Richmond at night I usually take this way home, and this happens very often. 80% of the time from my experience. Again though, not very many cars use this compared to Hwy 1, where it would cause issues.

Need a proper example? 72nd WB to 91 SB, try doing that one in rush hour behind a car that decides to merge on at 50 km/h into the left lane where traffic is moving between 100-120. That actually happens!

Ps. I also know that there is no way in hell they would actually build that. But I often drive by examples of why they will never be built again.

Side note, I actually quite like going SB on HW1 off of 72nd when I'm the lead car. Like to see how quickly I can get up to speed. Been able to turn and be up to 150kph before I am able to merge in. Fun times.

But you're right, most people don't. The majority of the time by the time we hit the merge point the car in front of me is doing 60-70kph merging onto a fast lane.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by jhausner

Here is the current design and I measured to scale.

OK, I see where you're coming from. The design shows two exit lanes for Willingdon (which haven't actually been implemented yet) with the rightmost having an earlier commit point. I was assuming that there was only one exit lane.

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by jhausner

Not to mention while technically possible, it is quite illegal to cross a solid white line, so effectively the stretch I mark is the legal limitation of the merging portion. Measures give or take around 340 meters. My scale me be off by a slight bit but I overlayed the image with Google Maps and used the Google Maps scale.

Either way it is a lot less than 800 meters and it is more than my 125 meter original estimate which I did roughly. I stand corrected.

That said the argument is actually secondary to my point. It just defies logic to think the cross traffic won't cause issues given while there is a slight increase in merge distance, you have 2 lanes exiting now (instead of 1) and an HOV on the left side merging in. And it is still at the very least half the distance as you see on HWY 99/91 and the on HWY 99/91 both lanes meet up at 90kph already vs Willingdon where you have cars accelerating merging from 50-60kph, and decelerating on the exit to around that too.

I stand by my opinion that it will still be a gong show.

It's actually worse than that. Because the merge is with traffic coming from around a corner, a LOT (maybe even most) people won't actually start to try to merge until well after the solid white line ends (where it is more like a straightaway), so while technically there are 350ish meters to merge legally, in practice it will be closer to 250 or 200. It will be chaos, and guaranteed there will be serious accidents.

Because they didn't go with the C/D, effectively at the widest point there you have six lanes, which people here just aren't used to. Guaranteed you're going to have people trying to cut all the way across from the right lane to the HOV.

Remember this is Vancouver, where two eagles mating caused a huge traffic snarl on the 91.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

It will be chaos, and guaranteed there will be serious accidents.

I just don't get the tone of these statements, which seem to imply that the new configuration is worse than the old one. The merge area certainly isn't any shorter than it was before, and with the two exit lanes only half of the traffic exiting at Willingdon will have to actually change lanes. Sure, it's not great - but I really don't think that it's going to cause any more trouble than we've experienced for the last few decades.

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I just don't get the tone of these statements, which seem to imply that the new configuration is worse than the old one. The merge area certainly isn't any shorter than it was before, and with the two exit lanes only half of the traffic exiting at Willingdon will have to actually change lanes. Sure, it's not great - but I really don't think that it's going to cause any more trouble than we've experienced for the last few decades.

I think the point is when you widen a highway you induce traffic so more people will be driving than before.

Also - again - people in the lower mainland haven't had to deal with 5 lane wide highways (each direction) before.

There are going to be people who casually drift across four lanes like it was going out of style.

The paradox of choice is that while people will have more lanes to travel in, and therefore more options, it can actually make traffic more chaotic, because people get confused about which lane is best to travel in, or just weave back and forth because they paid their road taxes, so why not?

I see trucks driving the entire 3-4 lane stretch from 152nd street to 200th street in the fast lane, for no reason, under the speed limit, causing people to pass on the right.

So while yes they are improving the whole area, sometimes wider does not equal better or safer, especially in the context of Vancouver drivers.

[Canadian Mind]

Originally Posted by jhausner

http://www.jhausner.com/Willingdon.png

I stand by my opinion that it will still be a gong show.

I don't know what the respective elevations are, but looking at it from the top, why couldn't they have the merge lanes snug up against the highway 300 meters sooner?

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

There are going to be people who casually drift across four lanes like it was going out of style.

I'm not sure that you're making a good argument here - if you're really saying that the problem is because of the extra lanes then wouldn't the conclusion be that in order to avoid "chaos" we shouldn't have widened the highway?

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I'm not sure that you're making a good argument here - if you're really saying that the problem is because of the extra lanes then wouldn't the conclusion be that in order to avoid "chaos" we shouldn't have widened the highway?

No the point is if the C/D system on the Port Mann bridge is justifiable, it was definitely justifiable along this stretch now (same width).

The freeway should be widened regardless, but if we all drove like Germans, no C/D wouldn't be a problem.

All you have to do is look at the three lane strech of highway 91 where 91a merges in before the Westminster Highway exit.

It constantly comes to a standstill, largely because people cut across three lanes to immediately get to the fast lane.

If that stretch was ever widened, it would crazy not to add a barrier there to separate through traffic, just like it was a bad decision not to keep through traffic separated at Willingdon.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Canadian Mind

I don't know what the respective elevations are, but looking at it from the top, why couldn't they have the merge lanes snug up against the highway 300 meters sooner?

The Grandview on-ramp is coming down an escarpment and making a fairly tight (for 80-90km/h speeds) turn to approach the freeway. And drivers' attention is distracted from the curve as they look over their left shoulder to pick a merge opportunity. My own personal opinion is that the configuration is close to as tight as they could have made it and still be reasonably safe.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

No the point is if there was a good reason for the C/D system on the Port Mann bridge, it was definitely justifiable along this stretch now, rather than in 10 years.

Well, as I said I agree that the planned design isn't the best. Speaking as a regular user of this on-ramp I'd love to have seen the original design implemented. I just don't really buy into the idea that it's going to be any worse than it was before. And in fact now that half of the traffic exiting at Willingdon won't even have to change lanes I think there's a chance for it to potentially be a little better.

[Klazu]

I drove to Langley and back today and thought of posting some views of the new Port Mann Bridge and completed sections of TCH.

Approaching Cape Horn intersection from Lougheed Highway:


On the ramp to TCH:


Cape Horn intersection:


Crossing the new Port Mann Bridge:








152nd street intersection:


160 St intersection:


Freeway, baby! Between 160 St and 176 St:


192 st / Golder Ears Bridge intersection:


Trans-Canada Interstate 1:


Widening work at 248 St:


View from 176 St bridge:


As a bonus the new and old Port Mann Bridges as seen from the South Frasier Perimeter Road below.


15 lanes above!

[trofirhen]

Fantastic set of photos! Thank you!

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Klazu

As a bonus the new and old Port Mann Bridges as seen from the South Frasier Perimeter Road below.

Very nice, I haven't seen this view before. I should get out there to get some of my own photos before the old bridge is gone. Thanks for posting!

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I should get out there to get some of my own photos before the old bridge is gone.

Don't hurry. It seems that nothing visible happens at the site in one or even two months. I am sure the old bridge will be there at least until end of the year, if not even longer - that's how slow the progress seems to be.

It also seems that the place where TCH narrows from 2+HOV lanes to just 2 lanes is prone to accidents. Today we spent time in a long queue thanks to some idiot having crashed his brand new Audi S5 to someone else's BMW X6 where the lanes merge. Most likely the Audi driver had been tailgating the BMW until the very end of the HOV lane and ended up crashing to the BMW. The Audi was completely wasted in the crash, but luckily everyone seemed to be fine.

[Metro-One]

Sorry, but some accidents are due to bad drivers and not the road, there is plenty of warning that the HOV lane is going to merge and it merges on a straight stretch far away from any interchange, cannot get much simpler than that...

Thanks for the pics though. There actually has been a lot of demolition work on the bridge, but so far they have concentrated on the north approach which is essentially gone now.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I just don't get the tone of these statements, which seem to imply that the new configuration is worse than the old one. The merge area certainly isn't any shorter than it was before, and with the two exit lanes only half of the traffic exiting at Willingdon will have to actually change lanes. Sure, it's not great - but I really don't think that it's going to cause any more trouble than we've experienced for the last few decades.

Can't speak to others but as I've stated for my opinion, I agree it has 'improved' but when you're spending billions of dollars (and I know most of that went to the new bridge but still...) and completely rebuilding an entire interchange including overpass, you'd think they could put a bit of extra money into doing it right.

This given they DID do it right with the initial designs with the CD system and simply cheapened out. It's not like they went "oops designed it wrong" they simply designed it right then said "Meh need to save some cash so let's reduce it."

Remember this configuration will probably have to be that way for the next 10-20 years. Just wish they had done it right.

I still stand to be corrected given time once everything is done. I could be completely off my rocker and the accident rate will be cut considerably. If it reduces to an accident every 3 days near the average for other intersections, then OK. I just don't have faith in Metro Vancouver drivers. For the most part people here are horrible drivers and any complication to a road network results in chaos. How many people complained about going over the new Port Mann bridge and paying a toll when they wanted to go to Coquitlam instead simply because the sign didn't read "Coquitlam ---> That WAY TURN NOW!!!!"?

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Sorry, but some accidents are due to bad drivers and not the road, there is plenty of warning that the HOV lane is going to merge and it merges on a straight stretch far away from any interchange, cannot get much simpler than that...

Thanks for the pics though. There actually has been a lot of demolition work on the bridge, but so far they have concentrated on the north approach which is essentially gone now.

Of course. You can only pad so many sidewalks before people need to take responsibility for being distracted crappy drivers that really should stick to public transit.

[GMasterAres]

Awesome pics Klaus! Thanks. Road to nowhere right now, but when it is fully opened it will be a road right past the second downtown of Metro Vancouver serving as the backbone to Metro Vancouver's major industries.

I think in 10-20 years the SFPR could arguably become as important to the region as Highway 1.