Highway 91 / 72nd Ave. Interchange | Completed

[ssiguy]

Our main north/south route HWY#15 is very poorly marked and when they widened it to 4 lanes they didn't even both properly ramping the road so when it rains the section between HWY#10 and 32 Ave floods.

[dharper]

Well I am no math whiz, but when the Alex Fraser Bridge was 90km/h with 6 lanes, wouldn't that move more vehicles than 70km/h with 7 lanes?
6*90=540
7*70=490
9.3% decrease
Or if you look at the counterflow: 3 lanes @ 90km/h, or 4 lanes at 70 km/h, is such a small fractional increase
3*90=270
4*70=280
3.7% increase
And opposite counterflow: 3 lanes @ 90km/h, or 3 lanes at 70 km/h,
3*90=270
3*70=210
22.2% decrease

Like I said, I am no math genius, or know how to calculate traffic flow properly. But logically, to me, it seems the counterflow system, with the speed decrease, will result in an over all decrease in traffic flow.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by cabotp

I use google maps and always use it even if I know the route. I've never had it off by more than 5 minutes. But the only reason it works is because it is constantly getting live traffic data from everyone else.

Originally Posted by osirisboy

What?! I find google maps even worse! Biggest thing seems to be (for me at least) underestimating traffic congestion for crossing the tunnel or iron workers as examples. Always way off

I've never really had issues with Maps navigation; in my experience, the estimates are scarily accurate even with congestion on the North Shore.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by dharper

Well I am no math whiz, but when the Alex Fraser Bridge was 90km/h with 6 lanes, wouldn't that move more vehicles than 70km/h with 7 lanes?
6*90=540
7*70=490
9.3% decrease
Or if you look at the counterflow: 3 lanes @ 90km/h, or 4 lanes at 70 km/h, is such a small fractional increase
3*90=270
4*70=280
3.7% increase
And opposite counterflow: 3 lanes @ 90km/h, or 3 lanes at 70 km/h,
3*90=270
3*70=210
22.2% decrease

Like I said, I am no math genius, or know how to calculate traffic flow properly. But logically, to me, it seems the counterflow system, with the speed decrease, will result in an over all decrease in traffic flow.

it makes no sense to decrease the speed limits except to start making money on catching people "speeding." the lanes are still wide, buses and trucks even go ~100km/h still. typical BC Government freeway ideas.

[Metro-One]

Yeah, the lane widths are still adequate for 90km (or at least 80km limit, 70 is just crazy).

Or even better yet why not give the bridge variable speed limits??

Seriously, the GMB project should have continued and this counter flow system is the project that should have been stopped (seeing how the new GMB would have likely alleviated some of the pressure on the Alex Fraser Bridge).

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

I've never really had issues with Maps navigation; in my experience, the estimates are scarily accurate even with congestion on the North Shore.

Yeah, that's my experience too. I find that Google Map's ETAs are usually accurate to within about 5% or so. It can sometimes get fooled by heavy congestion, and it can take a bit of time before changes in actual congestion are reflected in its display and its estimates, but it's just so much incredibly better than winging it that there's just no contest IMHO.

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by dharper

Well I am no math whiz, but when the Alex Fraser Bridge was 90km/h with 6 lanes, wouldn't that move more vehicles than 70km/h with 7 lanes?
6*90=540
7*70=490
9.3% decrease
Or if you look at the counterflow: 3 lanes @ 90km/h, or 4 lanes at 70 km/h, is such a small fractional increase
3*90=270
4*70=280
3.7% increase
And opposite counterflow: 3 lanes @ 90km/h, or 3 lanes at 70 km/h,
3*90=270
3*70=210
22.2% decrease

Like I said, I am no math genius, or know how to calculate traffic flow properly. But logically, to me, it seems the counterflow system, with the speed decrease, will result in an over all decrease in traffic flow.

Assuming all vehicles leave a 2 second gap between each other, it should move the same number of vehicles. At 90 km/h, the gap should be closer to 3 seconds but in a city where everyone leaves a 0.5 to 1 second gap between each other, it's a little unheard of.

At 70 km/h, it takes an average car 0.25 seconds to pass a point, then you have a 2 second gap. So each lane would move 1,600 vehicles per hour x 4 = 6,400 vehicles per hour.

At 90 km/h it takes an average car 0.19 seconds to pass a point, then you have a 2.5 second gap, so you're moving 1,338 vehicles per hour x 3 = 4,014 vehicles per hour. As I said, not everyone leaves that gap, but proper gaps are essential to preventing traffic jams due to phantom traffic jams and accidents.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by DKaz

At 70 km/h, it takes an average car 0.25 seconds to pass a point...

At 90 km/h it takes an average car 0.19 seconds to pass a point...

Speed is not linearly related to capacity because at higher speed limits drivers will tend to slow down sooner in heavy traffic.. It seems to me that I read somewhere that optimum freeway capacity in terms of vehicles/hour occurs at something like 60-70 km/h. Unfortunately, I can't find the reference right now...

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by DKaz

Assuming all vehicles leave a 2 second gap between each other, it should move the same number of vehicles. At 90 km/h, the gap should be closer to 3 seconds but in a city where everyone leaves a 0.5 to 1 second gap between each other, it's a little unheard of.

At 70 km/h, it takes an average car 0.25 seconds to pass a point, then you have a 2 second gap. So each lane would move 1,600 vehicles per hour x 4 = 6,400 vehicles per hour.

At 90 km/h it takes an average car 0.19 seconds to pass a point, then you have a 2.5 second gap, so you're moving 1,338 vehicles per hour x 3 = 4,014 vehicles per hour. As I said, not everyone leaves that gap, but proper gaps are essential to preventing traffic jams due to phantom traffic jams and accidents.

The safe follow distance increases to the of vehicle speed if I recall (it might be to the cube), so the per lane isn't likely to go down.

[AForce]

It doesn't matter what they change the speed limit to on the bridge, people will still drive the same. It definitely wont stop them from racing to the top just to slam on their brakes and come to a full stop. People have no patience and no idea how to drive. Most of the time the right lane, which turns to the middle lane on the deck is the fastest

[DKaz]

Agreed. And everyone in Vancouver drives at least 20 over the limit anyway so people will go 90. I remember going 105-110 down Hwy 1 through Coqutilam and Burnaby and everyone was passing me.

[WarrenC12]

I went over the AFB on the weekend, looked like they were in no shape to start the extra lane in time for the September rush. Any updated timeline?

The biggest delay looked like the electronic signage, which I'm curious to see in action.

[makr3trkr]

activity appears to have completely halted for the last two weeks (nothing really visible at nighttime). were supposed to have the 4th southbound lane open already in August. lanes at the south end of the bridge are already ready, timing seems odd. also no visible progress on the bike / sidewalk improvements. wouldn't be surprised though if it magically opens around the second week of october, though. northbound lane delayed until january.

[vancouverer]

AFB southbound 4 lanes open this morning, Sep 14th 2019. But the counter-flow lane need to wait

[paulsparrow]

Apparently they are putting the new lane to the test today. I drove over it the other day and my observations are this:

1. Lanes are too narrow. People driving next to middle barrier or outside barrier are driving on opposite edge of the lane sometimes crossing into the other lane.

2. People are driving way slower as speed limit dropped to 70 and they can't drive in smaller lanes.

3. This is going to be a CASH COW for Delta police on the south side because of all the speed changes and now reducing to 70 going down a hill.

4. Northbound rush hour will be just as slow if not slower now because the merge back to 3 lanes at the north end is just after Cliveden exit but before Cliveden in ramps. That extra lane has to merge right and with it going down a hill I expect lots of accidents.

5. There is zero room for the movable median to be out of alignment. Any accident (and I see this has already happened) will result in the opposing side left lane being closed.

Remember the big difference here between Massey tunnel and AFB is the tunnel is flat to slight rise where merging while the AFB is full blown downhill ramp.

Good luck tomorrow Surrey drivers.....

[WarrenC12]

haven't the repainted lanes been in place for a while now? I didn't find them that thin. The older lanes were quite wide.

[officedweller]

MoTI posted a Main Road video of the zipper truck driver in training on Sept 11th:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1171920337690333184

[Klazu]

So how was the afternoon rush hour today?

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

haven't the repainted lanes been in place for a while now? I didn't find them that thin. The older lanes were quite wide.

I agree. I don't find the new lanes too narrow. And certainly have no problem going 100 in them along with everyone else I have been on the road with

[osirisboy]

Drove south bound in the zipper lane today. I was fine doing 100 in it. although the only complaint I have is that the lane way is not smooth! Hopefully they'll repave it.