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

[WarrenC12]

Good thread on twitter from Bonwinn Ma on 4 lanes vs 6.

You can disagree with her, but I give her credit for a thoughtful and educated response.

https://twitter.com/BowinnMa/status/964705632124366848

[Pinion]

I don't always agree with Ma but she is super impressive (came to my condo to talk before the election) and beats the crap out of Yakamoto for community engagement already.

[makr3trkr]

https://twitter.com/BowinnMa/status/964705632124366848
"Building a six lane bridge there won't resolve congestion. In fact, it's likely to make it much worse in the areas surrounding the bridge because they're not suited to support traffic from a six lane bridge."

There are 4 lanes on McBride, 4 lanes on Brunette, 2 lanes on Front, 2 lanes on Columbia, 4 lanes on Royal.

There are 4 lanes on the SFPR, 6 lanes on Scott Road, 4 lanes on King George.

That's 30 lanes. Can we put this idea to bed once and for all that the road network "can't handle" a six lane bridge.

And besides that the issue is not solely the volume. There is also a confluence of of truck traffic + the grade on the Surrey side that makes an add/drop necessary not only for flow but for safety when merging at the bridgeheads.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by jhausner

Do you actually ever drive over the Port Mann? To think it is overbuilt tells me you don't. It is definitely not overbuilt not at all...

Whether one thinks it is overbuilt or not, it's certainly providing far more than enough service for motorists compared to the hapless sardines crunched onto the Expo line trains. When we look at it relative to our transit infrastructure, saying that it's overbuilt doesn't seem all that outrageous to me.

[Alex Mackinnon]

She's a pretty clever cookie, and probably has more organisational energy than just about anyone I know.

I'd imagine they're probably doing to do heavier structure which they can expand upon if they need to at a later date. 4 lanes now, 6 lanes if political will from New West ever happens.

They'd just need to overbuild the base structure to support the additional load. The downside is that phased construction is way more expensive that single phase construction. It's also much more difficult to plan.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by @BowinnMa

Yes, it is being built so that it has the capacity to be expanded to six lanes if deemed appropriate in the future.

Confirmed. Structure built for 6 lanes, deck built for 4.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

She's a pretty clever cookie, and probably has more organisational energy than just about anyone I know.

I'd imagine they're probably doing to do heavier structure which they can expand upon if they need to at a later date. 4 lanes now, 6 lanes if political will from New West ever happens.

They'd just need to overbuild the base structure to support the additional load. The downside is that phased construction is way more expensive that single phase construction. It's also much more difficult to plan.

Has the overall bridge design changed? The plans I saw before had it built as 6 lanes, with the outer lanes being used for bikes and pedestrians (so only 4 lanes for cars). When they need to upgrade it to 6 lanes, they build cantilevered bike and pedestrian lanes on the outside and remove the barrier to convert the outer lanes to car lanes.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Good thread on twitter from Bonwinn Ma on 4 lanes vs 6.

You can disagree with her, but I give her credit for a thoughtful and educated response.

https://twitter.com/BowinnMa/status/964705632124366848

That MikeVan guy is terrible at arguing, an easy opponent to beat.

She makes good points, but again I feel that they would be more valid if arguing against 6 through lanes.

The bridge should open with a fifth lane on the west side between the Columbia west to Patullo south on ramp to the 17 West off ramp.

This way it would streamline traffic and avoid needless merging.

[dleung]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

[img]Port Mann and Golden Ears are all over-built. What's severely under-built is RAPID TRANSIT. Why are we building road capacity for more sprawl south of the Fraser? 6 lanes for the GMB is plenty - there will never be need for skytrain provisions for such a sparse part of the metro. I don't believe in dedicated rapid bus lanes - too much infrastructure for too little ridership.[/img]

You have no statistical information to back that up
6 lanes is not plenty enough for the GMB as it sees 90k daily traffic/day. Maybe 6lanes +2HOV.

What you are advocating is for the general population to abandon their cars and take skytrain instead. How is rapid transit underfunded? The city is 2.5million people and is easily in the top ten in the continent for rapid transit use. The city is up there with Boston Chicago and DC. I'm for equal road infrastructure and rapid transit. And thats a fair compromise.

And there's a guy here citing 30 lanes worth of streets in New Westminster to argue for more lanes in the Patullo replacement, so...

Transit in Vancouver is only good by American standards - which are abysmal. Aren't we supposed to aim higher?

[dleung]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I can’t understand how anyone could argue that 6 lanes of roadway between the Port Mann and Mission Bridge in a region soon to hit 3 million is over built.

Well I'm hoping ALL of that future growth would be in existing urban centres, and not sprawled out in the Fraser valley, don't you?

[Bobert]

The Portmann is no where near over-built. It feeds an 8 lane highway, and our only freeway in the entire lower mainland. Everything else in the region is a mish-mash of light controlled intersections or 4 lane highway.

Another thought I had...Expansion to 6 lanes would previously have been difficult with Translink ownership. Translink and Mayors Council reluctance for road expansion etc. However, now that the bridge is owned by the province, a provincial election in which Surrey residents raise this as a paramount issue, it will easily expand.

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by dleung

And there's a guy here citing 30 lanes worth of streets in New Westminster to argue for more lanes in the Patullo replacement, so...

Yet you avoided my first question, why is the port mann and GMB overbuilt? Do you have traffic engineer credentials?

Originally Posted by dleung

Transit in Vancouver is only good by American standards - which are abysmal. Aren't we supposed to aim higher?

What should it be then?
Look at Surrey
Look at Broadway Expansion

What kind of standards are those?
and why would we adopt a system that hasn't been used in North America
By the sound of your argument? It sounds like you would like it to be "free" as well?

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Bobert

The Portmann is no where near over-built. It feeds an 8 lane highway, and our only freeway in the entire lower mainland. Everything else in the region is a mish-mash of light controlled intersections or 4 lane highway.

When did a 4 lane controlled access highway get demoted from being called a freeway?

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

https://twitter.com/BowinnMa/status/964705632124366848
"Building a six lane bridge there won't resolve congestion. In fact, it's likely to make it much worse in the areas surrounding the bridge because they're not suited to support traffic from a six lane bridge."

There are 4 lanes on McBride, 4 lanes on Brunette, 2 lanes on Front, 2 lanes on Columbia, 4 lanes on Royal.

There are 4 lanes on the SFPR, 6 lanes on Scott Road, 4 lanes on King George.

That's 30 lanes. Can we put this idea to bed once and for all that the road network "can't handle" a six lane bridge.

And besides that the issue is not solely the volume. There is also a confluence of of truck traffic + the grade on the Surrey side that makes an add/drop necessary not only for flow but for safety when merging at the bridgeheads.

Heading into New Westminster, I'd agree with Bowinn. McBridge, E. Columbia, and Royal Ave are all heavily congested. I'd see 6 laning being beneficial once they can get a free flowing connection to Hwy 1 via the Stormont-Gaglardi Connector that's only been proposed since before I moved to Metro Vancouver in 93.

To Surrey especially prioritizing free flowing connections to SFPR, I don't know why New Westminster doesn't want traffic to get out of their city ASAP. Perhaps it's a reciprocating agreement with City of Surrey -- it has to work both ways.

[malabrat]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

When did a 4 lane controlled access highway get demoted from being called a freeway?

Yeah pretty sure Highway 99 from the US Border to the Oak Street Bridge is a freeway in the Lower Mainland. As is highway 91 (except at 72nd Ave) and 91A and the Knight Street Bridge to Marine Dr and Highway 99 from Horseshoe Bay to Lions Bay

[libtard]

Can we talk about the fact that they haven't widened the shoulders in the new render for the Patullo. Why are we building sub standard infrastructure compared to the US?

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by dleung

Well I'm hoping ALL of that future growth would be in existing urban centres, and not sprawled out in the Fraser valley, don't you?

Houses already cost over a million on the far side of the Fraser. If we don't allow the working class to commute quickly and easily from their homes in the valley - the only place they can afford - there's going to be no economy in Vancouver at all.

[Bobert]

Originally Posted by malabrat

Yeah pretty sure Highway 99 from the US Border to the Oak Street Bridge is a freeway in the Lower Mainland. As is highway 91 (except at 72nd Ave) and 91A and the Knight Street Bridge to Marine Dr and Highway 99 from Horseshoe Bay to Lions Bay

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

When did a 4 lane controlled access highway get demoted from being called a freeway?

Sorry what I meant was non-grade separated highway, with light controlled intersections. I don't consider Highway 91 to a be a 'full' freeway, at least until that interchange is complete. Highway 99 also has strange breaks.

Anyway, Highway 1 is the only completely grade separated highway in the entire lower mainland.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by Bobert

Sorry what I meant was non-grade separated highway, with light controlled intersections. I don't consider Highway 91 to a be a 'full' freeway, at least until that interchange is complete. Highway 99 also has strange breaks.

Anyway, Highway 1 is the only completely grade separated highway in the entire lower mainland.

I agree with highway 91, as of the completion of the 72nd interchange later this year it will be a full freeway, but what about the 99 do you think disqualifies it as a freeway? The tunnel is awful but it still is technically freeflow. Many freeways have counter flow systems (especially around old tunnels and bridges).