South Fraser Perimeter Road/Highway 17 Extension | Completed

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by SunCoaster

... and a question - I accidentally took the "mini" exit at 124 street off of the SFPR and ended up in an older residential part of Whalley - my question is what is the purpose of that exit as it leads to no where and there are nearby full intersections at Bridgeport and Old Yale?

There were plans to have several exits/onramps in North Delta in Annieville as well, but they were removed due to community opposition.

I would guess the right in/right out at 124th served the same purpose - community access, but because of a lack of community opposition in Bridgeview it was not deleted.

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by Mininari

I understand they were working to come on in budget and all, but would an extra 12" of center median space really killed them?

Bingo, exactly what I expected to happen. The left turn to get onto the Alex Fraser Bridge is an uncontrolled left turn bay that depends on the turning vehicle having a gap to get through. What happens when that vehicle wishing to turn left is a fully-loaded 53' truck?

Worse yet, are we going to see any immediate improvements in regard to this? A loop on the Southeast corner of the Nordel-Way / 91 interchange would work, but is there room to do that? They surely can't leave the bridge access like this.

The early plans called for a median that was 2-3 times wider throughout, it was probably just as much environmental as budgetary reasons it was narrowed.

The onramp to AFB is going to fester for 25 years at a minimum, unless there is a brutal accident and people die, which is possible.

I have seen lots of ugly close calls (trucks getting impatient and turning in front of speeding vehicles, or trucks not yielding at the merge that follows at the onramp) and the barrier at the bottom of Nordel is regularly smashed up or replaced.

[Flash604]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

There were plans to have several exits/onramps in North Delta in Annieville as well, but they were removed due to community opposition.

I would guess the right in/right out at 124th served the same purpose - community access, but because of a lack of community opposition in Bridgeview it was not deleted.

I think it also has to do with the fact that if you look at aerials along this portion, there are industrial properties along here that pre-SFPR were accessed via Industrial Road and 116 Avenue. Those roads have now become the local truck access road on the north/west side of the SFPR, but the industrial properties on the south/east side have no truck route as the SFPR has cut them off. If the 124 in/out didn't exist, traffic to those industrial properties would cut through the residential neighourhoods to get to Bridgeview.

In much less words, the in/out exists because the SFPR removed the local truck route.

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

The early plans called for a median that was 2-3 times wider throughout, it was probably just as much environmental as budgetary reasons it was narrowed.

The onramp to AFB is going to fester for 25 years at a minimum, unless there is a brutal accident and people die, which is possible.

I have seen lots of ugly close calls (trucks getting impatient and turning in front of speeding vehicles, or trucks not yielding at the merge that follows at the onramp) and the barrier at the bottom of Nordel is regularly smashed up or replaced.

Interesting. Yeah, I can see the 'Environmental concerns' combine nicely with 'budgetary cutbacks' in a joint effort to save money. Honestly, whats another metre or two of width when the real problem is the fact the roadbed is a giant berm against drainage.

Considering 72nd/91 is *still* festering (despite our most recent promise to build an interchange)... I believe you. I guess let the traffic statistics (deaths?), tell the story for the SFPR and access points, and maybe they can declare an ICBC intersection safety improvement project or something.

[Flash604]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Interesting. Yeah, I can see the 'Environmental concerns' combine nicely with 'budgetary cutbacks' in a joint effort to save money. Honestly, whats another metre or two of width when the real problem is the fact the roadbed is a giant berm against drainage.

Considering 72nd/91 is *still* festering (despite our most recent promise to build an interchange)... I believe you. I guess let the traffic statistics (deaths?), tell the story for the SFPR and access points, and maybe they can declare an ICBC intersection safety improvement project or something.

I think your on the wrong track there. There were no choices in a lot of it. My niece's husbands crew had issues when they were building some of the overpasses in that if they put the outriggers for the cranes out a foot past the road edge; the entire project would get shut down due to violations of either the environmental sensitive areas or the sacred native areas.

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by Flash604

I think your on the wrong track there. There were no choices in a lot of it. My niece's husbands crew had issues when they were building some of the overpasses in that if they put the outriggers for the cranes out a foot past the road edge; the entire project would get shut down due to violations of either the environmental sensitive areas or the sacred native areas.

Ok, fair enough. I'm an atmospheric scientist, not a road engineer

So the contractor was given a very strict set of guidelines to work within, which were a major condition of this thing going ahead in the first place. Its a shame that an extra metre of road width couldn't be spared via the planning / assessment processes, but if things were that tight, what do you do.

And I'm in no way opposed to having a balanced approach with the Environmental issues in the mix -- I can see adhering to strict Environmental regulations (which is a good thing) putting pressure on the budget of the whole project, but clearly it was more than just cost.

[GMasterAres]

Overall, I loved the road. In my previous life, I used to make deliveries to Richmond, River Road, and could have used this route on every one of those trips. Furthermore, the drive itself was actually quite scenic; yes, the section between 176 and the Port Mann Bridge is quite scenic, but really, the whole road is to some degree. Driving towards the Alex Fraser at sunset yesterday on the way to the ferry terminal was truly the highlight of my test drive.

From a scenic standpoint I agree. The thing I actually like is that the SFPR was largely built for goods movement. That was the selling point. And nearly for the entire stretch the scenery really shows off sights (and even smells) of industry in Metro Vancouver. It's nice to see a road really doing what it was meant to do.

You drive by the CN rail yards from 176th to Patullo with lovely scenery of the mountains and river. You then see great views of New Westminster with its towers and Edmonds on the hill. More industry along the river then the Surrey Fraser docks with cranes rising into the sky.

You then get near the Alex Fraser bridge and I find often the smell of the wood processing plants starts to kick in and gives you that "industry" feel. Then into the Tilbury stretch with the bog to the left and containers and more industry on the right.

Finally you're in the home stretch towards HWY99 and Delta Port which is bog and farmland, another industry in the region and big selling point of Delta itself.

I don't know, I just like the look and feel of it and can directly see the huge benefits to our industry and economy.

[Flash604]

Originally Posted by Mininari

So the contractor was given a very strict set of guidelines to work within, which were a major condition of this thing going ahead in the first place. Its a shame that an extra metre of road width couldn't be spared via the planning / assessment processes, but if things were that tight, what do you do.

I think not all of it was known ahead of time; I believe the burial grounds were either discovered as they progressed, or if already known they didn't realize the extent.

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by jhausner

From a scenic standpoint I agree. The thing I actually like is that the SFPR was largely built for goods movement. That was the selling point. And nearly for the entire stretch the scenery really shows off sights (and even smells) of industry in Metro Vancouver. It's nice to see a road really doing what it was meant to do.

You drive by the CN rail yards from 176th to Patullo with lovely scenery of the mountains and river. You then see great views of New Westminster with its towers and Edmonds on the hill. More industry along the river then the Surrey Fraser docks with cranes rising into the sky.

You then get near the Alex Fraser bridge and I find often the smell of the wood processing plants starts to kick in and gives you that "industry" feel. Then into the Tilbury stretch with the bog to the left and containers and more industry on the right.

Finally you're in the home stretch towards HWY99 and Delta Port which is bog and farmland, another industry in the region and big selling point of Delta itself.

I don't know, I just like the look and feel of it and can directly see the huge benefits to our industry and economy.

Need a "like" button for this

[CourierYVR]

Hundreds of workers/employees work along side the Elevator Road and Alaska Road area, including sawmill and marine labour.

As a courier, in order to access that neglected region, there is only one way to access it, it is via the Tannery Road interchange. Here is the problem, If you are traveling there from the Alex Fraser bridge or the old River Road or Highway 17 (west of Alex Fraser), and your destination is Elevator Road, then you will have to drive an additional 2km in order to make a turn around at the Tannery Road interchange. Then you have to drive another 2km to reach the turn off to Elevator Road.

And if you thought that was a horrific waste of fuel nuisance, then try returning from there to Guildford Mall or Whalley. The answer is you can't, unless that is, you don't mind driving all the way to the River Road and Highway 17 intersection, and in turn making a probable illegal U-turn at that intersection. Then you have drive an additional 15 minutes going back to the Tannery Road interchange.

Why? Because they removed the Elevator Road intersection, and replaced it with a drive thru, in and out one way intersection.

In summary highway 17 is a gift to truckers which they deserve, but at the expense to every one who works along Elevator Road.

[adrianroam95]

Not sure if you guys already know, but the Tannery Interchange camera is finally working again. A little too late, but better late than never, I guess. You can see the dual 50 km/h speed limit signs flanking the roadway on the eastbound side. Evidently, a vehicle was passing through that section at a speed exceeding 50 km/h right as the camera took the shot below, as you can see by the bright flashing warnings indicating to slow down. You can also see in the westward shot that it isn't until Tannery that the westbound lanes resume 80 km/h.

IMO, they really should raise the speed limit through that section to at least 60 km/h, and for westbound traffic, have the 60 km/h restriction end immediately east of the Old Yale Road intersection (instead of at the Tannery Road Interchange).

Facing east:


Facing west:

[jlenko]

Those sunken parts they fixed early last year just east of 138th Street... are sinking again. I suspect this is going to be an ongoing issue...

[go_leafs_go02]

Those flashing lights for the 50 km/h flash continuously. They aren't activated by any speeds. There are embedded speed reader boarders within it that tell your speed, to slow down, or if you're going "too fast"

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by CourierYVR

Hundreds of workers/employees work along side the Elevator Road and Alaska Road area, including sawmill and marine labour.

As a courier, in order to access that neglected region, there is only one way to access it, it is via the Tannery Road interchange. Here is the problem, If you are traveling there from the Alex Fraser bridge or the old River Road or Highway 17 (west of Alex Fraser), and your destination is Elevator Road, then you will have to drive an additional 2km in order to make a turn around at the Tannery Road interchange. Then you have to drive another 2km to reach the turn off to Elevator Road.

And if you thought that was a horrific waste of fuel nuisance, then try returning from there to Guildford Mall or Whalley. The answer is you can't, unless that is, you don't mind driving all the way to the River Road and Highway 17 intersection, and in turn making a probable illegal U-turn at that intersection. Then you have drive an additional 15 minutes going back to the Tannery Road interchange.

Why? Because they removed the Elevator Road intersection, and replaced it with a drive thru, in and out one way intersection.

In summary highway 17 is a gift to truckers which they deserve, but at the expense to every one who works along Elevator Road.

There are give and takes unfortunately. If you look at the traffic studies, the majority of traffic right in right out at elevator. There are some that left in (trucks included) and I agree they have been cut off, but rather than have an intersection there which would cause problems with the train crossings, they decided to go with the majority rules sentiment.

What would probably be a better solution is to punch through Robson Road the entire stretch and allow you to get there from Tannery. So yes for people heading eastbound you would have to go all the way to Tannery then double back, but the other direction would be fine then just along Robson then onto Tannery and the SFPR/Surrey.

Doesn't solve everything but nothings perfect. There are a lot of places in Metro Van where you have to double back due to road/crossing designs.

[bjzap]

Originally Posted by jhausner

There are give and takes unfortunately. If you look at the traffic studies, the majority of traffic right in right out at elevator. There are some that left in (trucks included) and I agree they have been cut off, but rather than have an intersection there which would cause problems with the train crossings, they decided to go with the majority rules sentiment.

What would probably be a better solution is to punch through Robson Road the entire stretch and allow you to get there from Tannery. So yes for people heading eastbound you would have to go all the way to Tannery then double back, but the other direction would be fine then just along Robson then onto Tannery and the SFPR/Surrey.

Doesn't solve everything but nothings perfect. There are a lot of places in Metro Van where you have to double back due to road/crossing designs.

robson rd was open thru to tannery several years ago, closed it off to build I.D.C. container rail yard to service surrey docks container volume, that didnt go so well and now dont know what they use it for, but it is a useable road through there, except they gated and padlocked it, gottawonder

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by bjzap

robson rd was open thru to tannery several years ago, closed it off to build I.D.C. container rail yard to service surrey docks container volume, that didnt go so well and now dont know what they use it for, but it is a useable road through there, except they gated and padlocked it, gottawonder

It is kind of insane that if you want to get back to Surrey you have to drive all the way to Nordel, exit, do a U-turn, and come back.

I have a feeling the road was closed in the name of heightened security since 9/11.

I remember when you could drive along Commissioner/Stewart/Centennial/Waterfront road in Vancouver and nobody would stop you, but that was a long time ago, and maybe it had more to do with traffic management.

[moosejaw]

Quoted from the News1130 website regarding cost overun. Article was from last week. Im surprised. Who are these specialists?

Question:
At one point the project included interchanges along the route, but that was downgraded to signalized intersections. It was billed as a way to get trucks to stop idling, yet they may end up in a cycle of stopping and starting. When can truck drivers and the public expect an upgrade to interchanges, as the provincial government has outlined will happen in the future?

Response:
Studies undertaken by traffic specialists show that interchanges are not needed at this time, and that the intersections at Sunbury and Tilbury will be able to accommodate predicted traffic volumes until 2021 and 2031.

The ministry has developed interchange concept designs, purchased property, and preloaded both locations to accommodate building future interchanges. The ministry will monitor traffic volumes to determine when interchanges are needed.

[bjzap]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

It is kind of insane that if you want to get back to Surrey you have to drive all the way to Nordel, exit, do a U-turn, and come back.

I have a feeling the road was closed in the name of heightened security since 9/11.

I remember when you could drive along Commissioner/Stewart/Centennial/Waterfront road in Vancouver and nobody would stop you, but that was a long time ago, and maybe it had more to do with traffic management.

sure that security is part of it , also surrey dock uses the west side of robson for their in/out container gate, the east bound truckers must enjoy heading west to alex fraser turn around and come back , and probably no one wants to pay for robson to be upgraded and open ,who knows , but it is a pain for sure .

[DKaz]

Does anyone have the original drawings? I tried looking through the Environmental Assessment but it doesn't appear to be there anymore.

[makr3trkr]

It's shameful they've had 10 years to figure signage out and there's NO signage telling you the road even exists from Highway 91/Alex Fraser.

I have heard complaints from people unfamiliar with the area and unsure of which exit to take/direction to go.