Port Mann/Highway 1 Improvements | Completed

[whiteshadow]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Kind of a shame that the planning didn't have the foresight to include a possible roadway.
At any rate, one day, that Grandview exit is going to expand like a balloon and choke on itself. Something's gotta give.

There were plans in the 1970s to put a free way through the cut to connect the viaducts to the grand view hwy exit. But we all know how the freeway proposals in Vancouver ended up...

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Jebby

I'm hoping that the Grandview Cut can be double tracked someday and become part of a Downtown Vancouver to SoF express line with a half-hour (quarter hour peak) frequency.

Waterfront -> Broadway-Commercial -> Brentwood -> Surrey -> Langley -> Abbotsford -> Potential expansion to Chilliwack

That's a possibility, but all of this talk of a roadway down there (with just the existing heavy rail line) is laughable. There's simply not enough room for anything close to that.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by whiteshadow

There were plans in the 1970s to put a free way through the cut to connect the viaducts to the grand view hwy exit. But we all know how the freeway proposals in Vancouver ended up...

.. could they possibly "stack" the roadway in the cut? Or elevate it, beside the Skytrain guideway there?

[East Van]

There is plenty of room in the Cut for improvement, just no money to do it yet. When the Milly Line showed up it seems vehicular traffic is shut out forever & probably is. Before it was built I thought some reversible lanes would work well in the trench.

But there really should be more track in the Cut & maybe so with new overpasses built along Powell/Stewart-Commisioner. Commuter rail needs a chance down there.

With all Hwy 1 lanes live & flowing into Vancouver's 4 exits, the city is instantly going to feel like a place of 3 million during rush hour. More time waiting at lights, busier side streets. Rupert to Clark is really going to feel it.

Forget the Cut for any new roads. What about 1st ave, a cut & cover tunnel with reversible lanes from the Hwy 1 to Clark worth the money ?? Wait there is no money.

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

That's a possibility, but all of this talk of a roadway down there (with just the existing heavy rail line) is laughable. There's simply not enough room for anything close to that.

I use to walk along the grandview cut on the way to laura secord elemenary as a kid every day.
An expressway embedded in the cut would have been a very good idea at the time. I actually support the idea. However COV has a no new lanes policy, they are proud of the fact they have no freeways within city limits, and are even boasting about this fact in their new claim that they have reduced downtown traffic congestion figures.

You cant sell this concept to the COV and its residents. Coupled with the fact that many residents are fooled into thinking this is a natural greenway and wont want to see it torn down. Then you have organizations that want to force their point of skewed view and protest with the pictures of LA traffic jams and claim how damaging a LA style freeway will be to the region. The money being spent would enrage transit users who will demand the skytrain be extended to Agassiz. All these groups are in huge numbers.

The car is going to go the way of the do-do bird in vancouver. COV likes their bike lanes, trams, walkways etc.... I'm sure the COV would rather build over the cut and sell the available space to developers and put up more condos.

[WarrenC12]

Guys, do a google satellite look at the cut. Assuming the rail line would always be there, there is/was no room for a real road. Get over it.

[trofirhen]

Whatever happens at the Grandview exit over the next few years, it's going to be interesting. There are "everything's going to be just fine!" predictions from some, and "OMG wait until the new rush hours begin!!!!" from others.

However that Grandview issue is addressed ............. time will tell ......... out of sheer necessity.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Of course. I was speaking for my own personal use - I never travel at peak times and although I have my wife in the vehicle I don't normally use the HOV lanes because traffic almost always flows very smoothly. I also like to drive at or very close to the speed limit (which is currently 80km/h on that section of the freeway) and for some strange reason it really seems to freak some people out if I do that in the HOV lane - even though the limit applies as much to that lane as much as it does all the other ones.

It's worth it to me to use the eastbound Grandview HOV on-ramp to avoid the weaving at Willingdon - and while I have to merge left two lanes to get into my preferred rightmost lane I as much time as I need to do that. But at the westbound Grandview exit there's really no reason for me not to just use the normal right-hand off-ramp.

So if there are others like me then I'm thinking that the eastbound HOV ramp may see more use than than the westbound one. Especially since using the westbound ramp makes it a lot more difficult to use the left turn at Boundary that's recently been reinstated.

Whether more people use the EB HOV at Grandview or the WB HOV at Grandview. At least people have the choice to use them. Which is far better than not having any choice at all.

I also thought about the fact that going from the WB HOV lane to the left turn lanes at Boundary would be a bit difficult. And in those cases those people would probably be better off merging over the the regular exit lane on Hwy 1 WB.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Whatever happens at the Grandview exit over the next few years, it's going to be interesting. There are "everything's going to be just fine!" predictions from some, and "OMG wait until the new rush hours begin!!!!" from others.

What the "OMG" people keep forgetting is that traffic regulates itself. If there's a consistent bottleneck somewhere, people start avoiding it. If lack of capacity causes delays that are too long, people find alternatives.

I think Vancouver's biggest "OMG" moment was when the approach to the Patullo bridge caught fire and closed the bridge for two weeks. Amazingly, we all survived and in fact the problems weren't anywhere near as bad as many people feared.

Fearmongers continually forget this fact, which proves itself over and over again whenever road capacity gets reduced deliberately or through some sort of disaster. San Francisco's Embarcadero freeway is another prime example of this - vehement protests and predictions of doom when plans were floated demolish it, but after it was knocked down by an earthquake they never bothered to rebuild the damaged sections and it's now been completely torn down.

So don't worry about the Grandview exit, folks - it'll all work itself out.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by jhausner

It's always like that. Whenever I go away for a long weekend, when I hit Chilliwack (or even before) I always get off and go through the farm lands back roads to get as close to Abbotsford as possible before either jetting back on or making my way to 200th.

In 10 years (or even less) they will definitely need to expand to 3 lanes out to Abbotsford. Given population though and given no chance for viable transit out those distances in the near future (WCE is not "transit"), the one thing I would like to borrow from the US is a healthy highway out to those populations. Should be 1 HOV + 1 extra lane (4 lanes) out to Abbotsford at some point, either Mission bridge area or before, then 3 lanes all the way to Chilliwack initially.

In 15 years it would make sense to 3 lane it all the way to Hope. From there HWY1 and 5 split so traffic tends to disperse, then on HWY5 you do eventually go back to 3 lanes for large swatches. I just find it always funny how much of HWY5 is 3 lanes and honestly handles 1/5th to 1/10th the traffic HWY1 does between Chilliwack and Vancouver yet HWY1 is 2 lanes until 200th.

Hwy 5 has only 2 through lanes. The third lane is a curb lane for slow moving vehicles in the mountain passes. Tractor-trailers, Trucks, Campers etc. Can get to be very slow going up and down hill. And that third lane is needed so that they don't impede to flow of traffic for cars and passenger trucks. The only reason there are large stretches of 3 lanes is due to there being large stretches of getting to the top of a hill.

[Smooth]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

What the "OMG" people keep forgetting is that traffic regulates itself. If there's a consistent bottleneck somewhere, people start avoiding it. If lack of capacity causes delays that are too long, people find alternatives.

I think Vancouver's biggest "OMG" moment was when the approach to the Patullo bridge caught fire and closed the bridge for two weeks. Amazingly, we all survived and in fact the problems weren't anywhere near as bad as many people feared.

Fearmongers continually forget this fact, which proves itself over and over again whenever road capacity gets reduced deliberately or through some sort of disaster. San Francisco's Embarcadero freeway is another prime example of this - vehement protests and predictions of doom when plans were floated demolish it, but after it was knocked down by an earthquake they never bothered to rebuild the damaged sections and it's now been completely torn down.

So don't worry about the Grandview exit, folks - it'll all work itself out.

Your reasoning reminds me of the Yogi Berra quote "Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded." If there is consistent gridlock somewhere then people will find the most efficient way to get to their destination; however, their overall travel time still increase as a result of that choke point.

I'm not entirely sure why San Francisco's Embarcadero Freeway removal is always used an argument for removing highways. I'm sure people's commute times there have increased as a result of the freeway coming down. Friends of mine who have moved to Vancouver from San Francisco tell me that San Francisco's rush hour is hell compared to ours.

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by Smooth

I'm not entirely sure why San Francisco's Embarcadero Freeway removal is always used an argument for removing highways. I'm sure people's commute times there have increased as a result of the freeway coming down. Friends of mine who have moved to Vancouver from San Francisco tell me that San Francisco's rush hour is hell compared to ours.

Would a Grandview expressway route induce more people to drive downtown? Probably. But look at Knight Street. It is, really, a highway route by proxy. Knight Street (and many other streets) would be a lot safer and more pleasant to live on, not to mention healthier to live along, if there were a truck route into downtown.

It's not so black and white as saying road construction and highways always induce traffic, and removing them makes traffic vanish with no unintended or negative consequences (or that every case is exactly the same).

The quality of life in San Francisco has probably improved by removing the Embarcadero, and the waterfront is more pleasant than before. No argument there.

There are always unintended consequences, though. The reality is any highway removal pushes truck traffic, and traffic in general, into other areas. This would potentially increase conflicts between cyclists and vehicles or vehicles and pedestrians, for example.

Portland, for example, is great, wonderful even. But the unintended consequence of Portland being anti-highway has meant that highway and road development has merely relocated across the river in Vancouver, Washington.

Or consider the Rochester inner loop. It has simply not induced traffic in spite of being a freeway in the downtown of a metropolitan area of over a million people. It is so underused it will probably be removed.

The South Perimeter Road will likely induce commuter traffic and more truck traffic to the area. But it will also remove 90% of traffic from River Road, and make the neighbourhood overall much more pleasant (and make cycling on River Road safer). It will also mean trucks are not noisily idling and polluting in traffic jams along River Road.

Highway construction like the Gateway program might increase traffic, but in any case the result is complex and multi faceted, nevermind the fact that mass adoption of electric vehicles will soon make arguments about noise and pollution less compelling.

[BurnabyAaron]

They've opened up the westbound Boundary overpass, and done a lot more painting so you can see the new length of the merge from Northbound Boundary to Westbound HWY1. By the looks of it it extends well beyond the Skytrain guideway.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Kind of a shame that the planning didn't have the foresight to include a possible roadway.
At any rate, one day, that Grandview exit is going to expand like a balloon and choke on itself. Something's gotta give.

Well, the 1972 plan was forward looking IMHO... a 3 x 3 expressway with a semi-elevated, tiered-in design, which would have made the rest of the current east/west routes "more livable" for residents, but I digress.

Neat schematic view of Vancouver's skyline heading westward through the Grandview Cut (a portion of the northern bank was to be excavated as well):



Edited to Add: The eastern section (tunneled & elevated) from Hwy 1 to the Grandview Cut: (I actually posted these and others about 4 years ago)

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Smooth

Your reasoning reminds me of the Yogi Berra quote "Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded." If there is consistent gridlock somewhere then people will find the most efficient way to get to their destination; however, their overall travel time still increase as a result of that choke point.

>> yes! a real "head in the sand attitude" on behalf of many here.
And as I've said, a big risk is traffic shortcutting through residential streets, endangering people, esp children.

I'm not entirely sure why San Francisco's Embarcadero Freeway removal is always used an argument for removing highways. I'm sure people's commute times there have increased as a result of the freeway coming down. Friends of mine who have moved to Vancouver from San Francisco tell me that San Francisco's rush hour is hell compared to ours.

I think that applies to many American citities, with their downtown Interstates, and their inadequate rail systems (ex: Houston, Seattle)

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Well, the 1972 plan was forward looking IMHO... a 3 x 3 expressway with a semi-elevated, tiered-in design, which would have made the rest of the current east/west routes "more livable" for residents, but I digress.

Neat schematic view of Vancouver's skyline heading westward through the Grandview Cut:



Edited to Add: The eastern section from Hwy 1 to the Grandview Cut: (I posted actually these about 4 years ago)

All in all, kind of a shame that was scrapped. People will disagree, but I think they wasted a good opportunity for the resourceful use of lanespace. (is it too late for something similar??) Ha! I must believe in Santa Claus!!

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Smooth

Your reasoning reminds me of the Yogi Berra quote "Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded." If there is consistent gridlock somewhere then people will find the most efficient way to get to their destination; however, their overall travel time still increase as a result of that choke point.

Actually quite a few people who are used to driving long distances in rush hour congestion find that their trip is actually faster when they switch to rapid transit. But that's not necessarily viable unless there's capacity on the transit system. One of the biggest problems facing our region right now is that Translink is starved of funds to provide adequate service for a growing population whose mode share is shifting more and more towards transit.

[Mousey]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

What the "OMG" people keep forgetting is that traffic regulates itself. If there's a consistent bottleneck somewhere, people start avoiding it. If lack of capacity causes delays that are too long, people find alternatives.

I think Vancouver's biggest "OMG" moment was when the approach to the Patullo bridge caught fire and closed the bridge for two weeks. Amazingly, we all survived and in fact the problems weren't anywhere near as bad as many people feared.

Fearmongers continually forget this fact, which proves itself over and over again whenever road capacity gets reduced deliberately or through some sort of disaster. San Francisco's Embarcadero freeway is another prime example of this - vehement protests and predictions of doom when plans were floated demolish it, but after it was knocked down by an earthquake they never bothered to rebuild the damaged sections and it's now been completely torn down.

So don't worry about the Grandview exit, folks - it'll all work itself out.

When the Pattulo was closed it was worse than what most people feared... Just not for transit. Let's not forget that for two weeks there every feeder onto the Alex Fraser started past King George. Or 152nd, started at 88th, or hwy 1 started before 232nd... or the best one, the Massey Tunnel started before 32nd ave... Yah, I still remember those 2 weeks, better than the worst traffic jams of this year.

But, the more I look at it, my only worry with congestion is the 1st Ave exit WB. It lines quite a way up the off-ramp, but I have never seen it on the hwy. The only fear it should cause is if it lines up onto the hwy itself. If it does it creates a very dangerous situation. Open up capacity on Hwy 1, and that will be a regular occurence. Just look at 32nd ave off-ramp on the SB 99. In the pm rush you go from 100km/h to 0 km/h in under 300 feet. It lines up on the shoulder, down the hill, and is a very dangerous interchange. You do have a good sightline of what's ahead, but you don't control an asshole trying to cut you off to make it as well, that stops in the middle of a hwy blocking speeding traffic that has no reaction time. That will probably happen to 1st ave. A lot more drivers pull things like that the closer to the city you get... From my experience at least.

[Whalleyboy]

Originally Posted by Mousey

When the Pattulo was closed it was worse than what most people feared... Just not for transit. Let's not forget that for two weeks there every feeder onto the Alex Fraser started past King George. Or 152nd, started at 88th, or hwy 1 started before 232nd... or the best one, the Massey Tunnel started before 32nd ave... Yah, I still remember those 2 weeks, better than the worst traffic jams of this year.

But, the more I look at it, my only worry with congestion is the 1st Ave exit WB. It lines quite a way up the off-ramp, but I have never seen it on the hwy. The only fear it should cause is if it lines up onto the hwy itself. If it does it creates a very dangerous situation. Open up capacity on Hwy 1, and that will be a regular occurence. Just look at 32nd ave off-ramp on the SB 99. In the pm rush you go from 100km/h to 0 km/h in under 300 feet. It lines up on the shoulder, down the hill, and is a very dangerous interchange. You do have a good sightline of what's ahead, but you don't control an asshole trying to cut you off to make it as well, that stops in the middle of a hwy blocking speeding traffic that has no reaction time. That will probably happen to 1st ave. A lot more drivers pull things like that the closer to the city you get... From my experience at least.

I try to forget when that bridge shut down. I live on 108ave and it took me like 10 mins just to just get out of my drive way. thats not even me joking around i am actually serious.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

What the "OMG" people keep forgetting is that traffic regulates itself. If there's a consistent bottleneck somewhere, people start avoiding it. If lack of capacity causes delays that are too long, people find alternatives.

I think Vancouver's biggest "OMG" moment was when the approach to the Patullo bridge caught fire and closed the bridge for two weeks. Amazingly, we all survived and in fact the problems weren't anywhere near as bad as many people feared.

Fearmongers continually forget this fact, which proves itself over and over again whenever road capacity gets reduced deliberately or through some sort of disaster. San Francisco's Embarcadero freeway is another prime example of this - vehement protests and predictions of doom when plans were floated demolish it, but after it was knocked down by an earthquake they never bothered to rebuild the damaged sections and it's now been completely torn down.

So don't worry about the Grandview exit, folks - it'll all work itself out.

That's actually a very valid point. The missing part is that it isn't just traffic that redistributes, it is people that redistribute too. You've been seeing it steady the past 10 years with industry vacating Vancouver as land prices were rising along with the traffic and difficulty in moving trucks through the city. Most industry is now out in the suburbs. In the last 5 years you're seeing that trend move towards the technology industry and medium business with migrations towards Metrotown, Brentwood, New West, Richmond, Surrey, and Langley. The people are also moving out here more than to Vancouver.

So I think the doom and gloom probably won't come to Grandview because there will be less A to B to A travel by people with B being downtown Vancouver. As I've pointed out in other threads about these topics, statistics show that just 20 years ago, 65% of all jobs in metro Vancouver were in Vancouver itself. Today that number is getting really close to 30%, and current estimates are that in another 20 years it will probably flatten out around the 20% mark making Vancouver important for certain business and industry, but only those more focused around transit and non-car transportation. You'll see more condos on the higher price range scale and in turn more and more businesses in downtown will focus in the finance, mining, and technology sectors, sectors with a lot of money and whose employees tend to also have more money than average meaning they can live in Vancouver. In turn you will see industry continue to move out towards the suburbs and that portion of the population, many of which already live out this direction, will have shorter commute times and less need to go out towards Vancouver every day further helping to balance traffic around the region.

This is also why I think expanding roads in Vancouver probably doesn't have to happen. The "negative" is that Vancouver is becoming a little less relevant in the business/industry front regionally, but overall I think it is healthy for the region to decentralize more and more and dissipate the population and traffic greater. Things like the SFPR, Golden Ears Bridge, Evergreen Line that doesn't go TO Vancouver but rather to a point in Burnaby, and even a continued expansion of Abbotsford Airport is moving car and transit demands but also helping to reduce problems at current bad spots.

A lot of this is also why I'm not completely against the notion of taking down the Patullo bridge and replacing it. I am fairly certain doing so would kill New Westminster and make it regionally irrelevant, but the flip side is it would strength Surrey, Coquitlam, and possibly Burnaby even more. And let's remember, the traffic studies for the Gateway project showed a large portion of traffic along HWY and over the PMB was from Surrey/Langley to Coquitlam, not actually to Vancouver or even Burnaby. That's why the bridge will have collector lanes specifically to get people from Surrey to Coquitlam. So the traffic trends already show that less cars are going to Vancouver itself, even if traffic continues to increase with population growth.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Actually quite a few people who are used to driving long distances in rush hour congestion find that their trip is actually faster when they switch to rapid transit. But that's not necessarily viable unless there's capacity on the transit system. One of the biggest problems facing our region right now is that Translink is starved of funds to provide adequate service for a growing population whose mode share is shifting more and more towards transit.

Firstly, I am an advocate for new Skytrain lines, lrt lines, tramcars in downtown Vancouver, etc.

With that said, I haven`t ridden transit since I was 15 years of age and had the unfortunate circumstance to ride same for the first time last week, since since I was 15, as a result of forgetting my cell phone at home and breaking my key in my vehicle ignition.

Went to sit at a bus stop bench and 2 buses passed by me and they were basically empty. One-half hour went by. Finally stood up and the next bus stopped. The guy next to me on the bus had the worst BO that I had ever encountered in my life and then I had 2 loud-mouthed skinheads sitting across from me. It was the trip from miserable hell! As an aside, it took 3 times what I am normally used to by vehicle.

I now actually feel sorry for people that have to utilize transit.

A few people that I know HAVE to utilize the same transit system because they are not able to make the payments to purchase a car, pay insurance, and pay for gas, parking, etc. And transit takes a couple of additional hours out of their day. Must suck big time.

I wouldn`t personally want to take transit ever again in my life!!! And I am very serious in that regard.

And I seem to have kinship with this somewhat similar experience with transit by this Metro Vancouver blogger:

http://lailayuile.com/2013/08/02/surrey-...onder-why-more-people-dont-take-transit/