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

[red-paladin]

Either that or the Province should do it and just ram a replacement down their throats. No one is more impressed about the renaissance in downtown New West than me, but they remain as obstructionist when it comes to the regional road needs as ever.

[DKaz]

I was looking at the alignment on the SFPR webcam page (similar to PMH1's webcam page) and thought that perhaps a Patullo Bridge replacement with something upstream that would pretty much be aligned with Blue Mountain Road would be the most ideal solution. You avoid New Westminster and all their moaning and whining altogether, and get a direct connection to Hwy 1 from the SFPR which I think is needed. This would also be an 90% freeflow route from White Rock/South Surrey/the U.S. to east Vancouver, North Shore, and Sea to Sky Highway, the only signalized intersections being 72nd Ave (ugh), Nordel Way, and Sunbury.

[officedweller]

That would be the Sapperton Bar allignment - discussion way back (before the Blue Mtn upgrade came about):

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=151877&page=3

[Metro-One]

I would actually support the Sapperton Bar allignment if it were built with a complete free flow connection from highway #1 to SFPR.

The problem with this scenario is it would involve the organization and cooperation of both Translink and MoT, since MoT would have to construct the Blue Mountain interchange at the same time for it to be done right.

Which means this is not going to happen!

[Mininari]

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/artic...ge-could-close-within-the-next-two-years

Pattullo Bridge could close within the next two years
TransLink says it depends on seismic upgrades
Dave White Nov 07, 2012 10:44:04 AM

...
The key link between Surrey and New Westminster could need up to $150 million in seismic upgrades over the next 10 years but if that isn't possible, the bridge can't continue safely operating in the long-term unless the whole thing is replaced. The replacement, however, is still in the study phase.
...

Uhm, free alternative to the tolled Port Mann?

[nname]

According to TransLink's 2013 base plan, the work would be done at around 2016-2017. I'm surprised that no one brought it up until now as this is already in the plan for so long...

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I would actually support the Sapperton Bar allignment if it were built with a complete free flow connection from highway #1 to SFPR.

The problem with this scenario is it would involve the organization and cooperation of both Translink and MoT, since MoT would have to construct the Blue Mountain interchange at the same time for it to be done right.

Which means this is not going to happen!

Yeah, when you really think about it, the Patullo bridge isn't essential to the region. Although access to New West would be more challenging, they have a mass transit link. A Sapperton alignment could have an off-ramp for Brunette.

From Surrey to New West could go via Sapperton or the Queensborough (Alex Fraser). Or, if you really want to keep the Patullo, you could take the Patullo back to a two-lane bridge and ban heavy trucks from it.

[xd_1771]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Yeah, when you really think about it, the Patullo bridge isn't essential to the region. Although access to New West would be more challenging, they have a mass transit link. A Sapperton alignment could have an off-ramp for Brunette.

From Surrey to New West could go via Sapperton or the Queensborough (Alex Fraser). Or, if you really want to keep the Patullo, you could take the Patullo back to a two-lane bridge and ban heavy trucks from it.

70,000 daily vehicles in a region with less lane-crossings than most any other river-bound metropolitan area is not essential?

[nname]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

From Surrey to New West could go via Sapperton or the Queensborough (Alex Fraser). Or, if you really want to keep the Patullo, you could take the Patullo back to a two-lane bridge and ban heavy trucks from it.

From downtown Surrey to downtown New West:

via Patullo: 7km
via Sapperton: 10-11km
via Alex Fraser: 23km

Whoever choose the Alex Fraser route must be crazy...

[paradigm4]

Originally Posted by nname

From downtown Surrey to downtown New West:

via Patullo: 7km
via Sapperton: 10-11km
via Alex Fraser: 23km

Whoever choose the Alex Fraser route must be crazy...

6 mins on the SkyTrain

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by paradigm4

6 mins on the SkyTrain

And then another 30min to actually get to where your trying to go, times 2 for both end of your trip.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by Mininari

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/artic...ge-could-close-within-the-next-two-years

Pattullo Bridge could close within the next two years
TransLink says it depends on seismic upgrades
Dave White Nov 07, 2012 10:44:04 AM

...
The key link between Surrey and New Westminster could need up to $150 million in seismic upgrades over the next 10 years but if that isn't possible, the bridge can't continue safely operating in the long-term unless the whole thing is replaced. The replacement, however, is still in the study phase.
...

Uhm, free alternative to the tolled Port Mann?

I have a feeling this stems from those experts in Italy that got convicted of manslaughter for giving false assurances of a earthquakes risks and not taking proper measures to mitigate them. Tranlink's legal department probably did a assessment of liability because of that, and after the recent earthquake in BC decided to put out this release to show that they tried in case the worst happens...because they haven't been trying. Their probably just covering their asses because they realized that if a earthquake strikes and that bridge collapses and kills a few hundred people they will be liable, even in Canada...because they know dam well that the bridge is a death trap in a earthquake....Lets see if the province and the cities get the same hint regarding schools and hospitals, and anything else they know is a death trap and can make safe but procrastinate on.

Just a wild guess...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/22/italian-scientists-jailed-earthquake-aquila

[WaxItYourself]

Originally Posted by cornholio

I have a feeling this stems from those experts in Italy that got convicted of manslaughter for giving false assurances of a earthquakes risks and not taking proper measures to mitigate them. Tranlink's legal department probably did a assessment of liability because of that, and after the recent earthquake in BC decided to put out this release to show that they tried in case the worst happens...because they haven't been trying. Their probably just covering their asses because they realized that if a earthquake strikes and that bridge collapses and kills a few hundred people they will be liable, even in Canada...because they know dam well that the bridge is a death trap in a earthquake....Lets see if the province and the cities get the same hint regarding schools and hospitals, and anything else they know is a death trap and can make safe but procrastinate on.

Just a wild guess...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/22/italian-scientists-jailed-earthquake-aquila

I think it has more to do with the number of earthquakes that have occurred around here recently. Many areas of the city are being looked at for how large of an earthquake they can withstand because of that. And the Pattullo bridge is known to be old and decrepit. They just began repairing many of the schools and other areas around the region for this.

http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/capitalplanning/seismic/progress_report.html

Seismic upgrades have been in the planning process for awhile. The press release was most likely because of people's responses to the recent earthquakes and what it means to various structures around the province. that makes a whole lot more sense than going into conspiracy mode. Here is just the latest.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/11/07/bc-earthquake-vancouver-island.html

[s211]

Originally Posted by paradigm4

6 mins on the SkyTrain

And only 17 minutes for a preachy "everyone should take transit" response.

[Mininari]

Gee, I would love to except I have to take my child to daycare every morning.
Given the variety of tasks I have to complete in the morning, and my chronic 'late for work' as a result, I cannot even begin to imagine using transit anymore.
Don't get me wrong; I dearly miss walking 15 minutes and getting on an express bus. I just can't do it anymore.

Sorry, car with car-seat for me.
Fortunately I have a coworker who lives nearby I can offer rides to, but otherwise, I'm a locked-in SOV.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by s211

And only 17 minutes for a preachy "everyone should take transit" response.

Can't forget that there's no other nearby bike crossings.

[Zassk]

A new Patullo could very well bankrupt Translink, and if New Westminster is staunchly opposed to having a crossing in this location, then I see absolutely no point in building one. Instead, Translink should begin planning the decommissioning of the old bridge right now.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by Mininari

The key link between Surrey and New Westminster could need up to $150 million in seismic upgrades over the next 10 years...

Last week, TransLink said it will be doing a new assessment to determine if it’s possible to extend the Pattullo’s life by a couple more decades with safety and seismic upgrades. If that was done, the bridge would be reduced to three lanes.

http://www.newwestnewsleader.com/news/178230431.html

I'm starting to get a feel how this will now all unfold.

New Westminster is a bastion of nimbyism (by the usual cast of characters) and it's rearing it's ugly head again with the new proposed Pattullo crossing. It seems that Translink is sensitive to these parochial instincts based upon the previous UBE experience.

Since it appears possible that an NDP government will be elected next May and New Westminster is a bedrock NDP riding, instead of a new crossing we will see the cheap, untolled, $150 million safety/seismic upgrade scheme with a 3-lane, reversible-lane cross-section by ~2018.

And then the whole new crossing issue will again be revisted within 15 years thereafter.

[Metro-One]

If they honestly piss away 150 million on putting lipstick on this pig just have another horrid counter flow system (that in the end never worked for the Pitt River) I will be disgusted with Translink's lack of balls.

[The_Henry_Man]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

If they honestly piss away 150 million on putting lipstick on this pig just have another horrid counter flow system (that in the end never worked for the Pitt River) I will be disgusted with Translink's lack of balls.

Is there even room for an additional counter-flow lane on the Patullo?
If New West isn't so village-minded, we would've already seen a low-speed freeway (at 70km/h speed limit) built from Marine Way all the way to United Blvd, and making that freeway seamless all the way from Boundary Rd to Lougheed Hwy and Mary Hill, which is REALLY needed for Richmond residents and airport travellers traveling to the tri-cities and Pitt Meadows/Maple Ridge and vice versa.

(BTW, low-speed freeways do exist, an example is the I-35E in St. Paul- is actually posted at 45mph speed limit)