South Fraser Perimeter Road/Highway 17 Extension | Completed

[moosejaw]

Remember it was determined that overpasses were not needed on the original configuration for the SFPR and thus were valued engineered to what they are today. BCMOT made this decision. Thank them for looking out for the morning public!

[makr3trkr]

• Video Link

Aug 7, 2014
RAW: Footage from Highway 17 at South Fraser Perimeter Road
theprovince.com

(video is loud)

[dharper]

Isn't the real problem with that intersection, is that it was designed as an interchange, and then it was band-aided into an intersection, rather than being designed as an intersection?

[Metro-One]

If you just one page back you will have your answer, this essentially has been the conversation.

Actually, I do have some inside info regarding those changes. I remember being so excited to see all the interchanges, then someone close to me who works for VanPile (the pile driving contractors for the project) told me the province went into penny pinching mode, and kept asking VanPile to reduce to price of the project. The only way to do that was to cut out interchanges (bridge structures) one by one.

The highway 99 interchange luckily was improved from its first conception (originally there were two traffic light intersection on each side of the 99 along the SFPR) because it was know that this would instantly be a traffic jam if it were not an interchange.

The other two interchanges that were built actually had to be built because the province kind of painted themselves into a corner there, for those two interchanges were used in the visual marketing of the project and to have cut them would have been too obvious of a trimming.

For all those who are concerned I suggest you write the Province CONSTRUCTIVE letters urging that the traffic lights be replaced with interchanges asap!

The area around the Patullo Bridge gets a pass, because that area was left somewhat "unfinished" intentionally because by this time Translink was suppose to be in high gear with the Patullo Bridge replacement. And during this replacement a new interchange was going to be built with the SFPR and all the final alignments / adjustments were to be done, including the closure of a couple at grade intersections.

So that part of the project being stalled you can blame New Westminster for.

[makr3trkr]

http://www.news1130.com/2014/08/07/some-...-portion-of-south-fraser-perimeter-road/
Anita Bathe August 7, 2014 3:00 pm



Patrick Livolsi, the Transportation Ministry’s regional engineering manager, says they are now doing a review to see if there are any geometric issues.

“It’s not just one direction and nothing’s been flagged as a pattern occurring but we thought we should be taking a closer look at what’s been happening..."

“In the meantime we’re also installing some signs out there, basically some warning signs to alert them to the possibility of tipping...” says Livolsi.

He says there are plans for an interchange there but not until 2020.

========================

Really have to wonder the thought process behind putting it off for only five years.

It's going to twice as much as a separate project, it's going to disrupt traffic for a year during construction, and in the meantime you have to deal with the opportunity costs (pollution, accidents, congestion, etc).

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

Really have to wonder the thought process behind putting it off for only five years.

It's going to twice as much as a separate project, it's going to disrupt traffic for a year during construction, and in the meantime you have to deal with the opportunity costs (pollution, accidents, congestion, etc).

Politicians don't think beyond the next election is your answer. 5 years is FAR TOO LONG to think in the eyes of your average politician.

[cabotp]

I do think the problem is a combination of a flaw in the design of the intersection and the speed that the drivers are going.

The design flaw is that he intersection banks in the wrong direction of the turns. You want the turn to bank inwards not outwards. On that intersection the turns are banked outward. This will cause a serious problem if a corner is taken faster than a normal corner.

With the design flaw drivers are most likely taking the turns at a normal speed. Which would probably be ok if it was a normal intersection. But with the design flaw this speed ends up being too fast.

[Cypherus]

Reading the news1130 link one driver commented that many drivers are avoiding the SFPR due to that intersection. This seems unreasonable considering thousands of trucks have traveled the road without issue and there have only been 5 rollovers since it opened in December. The fact that there have been more rollovers in the Summer than the winter months suggests speed and too much confidence while turning on the dry road has been a factor.

[LeftCoaster]

In town for work right now and noticed the issue made the front page of the Province today. The graphic and ensuing article placed nearly all the blame on the road design.

[moosejaw]

More than 7000 tractor trailers pass through this intersection everyday and someone thought it would be a good idea to put a traffic light there.

[whatnext]

Yet another semi rollover on the SFPR today.

[DKaz]

On the loop ramp from Hwy 99 SB to Hwy 17 EB.

[GMasterAres]

Yah that loop is actually ok. A bit tight of a turn but the posted recommended speed and lean is perfectly acceptable. Without any details I can only assume it was a load shift. Looked to be a container truck. They can be difficult because the containers arrive on a ship that bobs around in the Ocean then gets put on the trailer. I actually think that loop is perfectly fine and it is a regular interchange. It has a long deceleration lane off of 99 and a long acceleration lane onto the 17.

Still alarming how many of these have been happening. I think there have been more semi-roll overs on HWY17 since opening than on all our other highways combined the 10 years prior.

I had no idea about it either was driving home after work and got off then saw the Police had it all blocked. Had to take the South ramp and go to Robert's Bank to make a U-turn and head back home. No big deal but I was surprised the news really didn't say much about it compared to others. Guess it wasn't causing any major traffic jams and/or they are just getting used to "roll over on the SFPR!" reports...

[jbrizzy]

So I drove part of the SFPR yesterday.. Got off the 91 after the alex fraser but then turned right on nordel accidentally.. Woops.

Then I didn't know that tannery/104 was the same exit.. How come they don't have signs for 104 given that's it's a pretty important route across surrey ? Even if it technically is tannery at that section, 104 is only a block away, and the exit is like a kilometer away from the actual interchange, making me think the "tannery" exit was before the one for 104.

Then I hit that 50 km/h section right under the interchange and wtf ? Where did that come from ? I'd been doing 100 in the 80 section and people were still flying by me so when I slowed down to 70 I felt like a snail.

Since I missed 104 I took the old yale exit and once I got on 104 realized it's pretty small going up that hill, with a 30 km/h section. With 104 going from hwy 1 > guildford > surrey central > to scott road the only interchange with the sfpr, would it be wise to widen it to 2 lanes all the way to take advantage of that possible connectivity ? Or is that steep hill the real issue that has prevented that ? I'm not from surrey (obviously), just curious from a design standpoint.

[makr3trkr]

http://globalnews.ca/news/1551207/truck-full-of-beans-loses-load-on-highway-17-in-surrey/
September 8, 2014 1:54 pm
By Peter Meiszner Global News

[MIPS]

Oh beans, not again!

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

More than 7000 tractor trailers pass through this intersection everyday and someone thought it would be a good idea to put a traffic light there.

incredible, I know. This ain't the Interstate, bud.

[Mininari]

Chalk up another one.

I wonder how many of these its going to take to build up enough "statistics" to convince the powers-that-be that this road has some issues with the curvy spots.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Chalk up another one.

I wonder how many of these its going to take to build up enough "statistics" to convince the powers-that-be that this road has some issues with the curvy spots.

Certainly not in our lifetimes.

Remember this is BC where highways are bad and if those truckers don't want to drive than they should take transit and carry their beans on the bus. This is the same government that flatly refuses to put in the overpass on 99A which backs up every morning and evening due to that one intersection. Victoria wants to cost-share the program with Delta but Delta has told Victoria where to go and how to get there. Good for Delta as it is strictly a provincial matter and Victoria is just using it as an excuse to not to build it as "we are in negotiations".

This is what happens when you build to the absolute bare minimum standards.

[Metro-One]

I am very curious how the # of rollovers on the SFPR compares to a similar 40km stretch of highway elsewhere.

While all the traffic lights should have been interchanges the allignment of the road itself is fine, and if drivers cant navigate the SFPR as is then maybe they should not be driving (they sure as hell would not pass any driving course here in Japan).

Hopefully the intersections are replaced with interchanges though in a relatively quick manner.