Gateway Discussion: Fraser Perimeter Roads/Pitt River/Mary Hill - Page 111

BCPhil · #**2201** Posted: **Feb 9, 2012, 10:02 PM**

They have done quite a bit of work along that stretch in the last week or two. They have already flattened out a lot of the pre-loading along S Fraser Way and crews are doing a lot of work to the rail bridge structures. Crews seem to be replacing the last remaining wooden structures with steel supports, and I don't really know what they are doing along the Interurban tracks, but it's big (maybe making room for the road lanes to go under it?).

Metro-One · #**2202** Posted: **Feb 9, 2012, 10:10 PM**

Would love to see some pics of this work.

Still wish this was being built fully with interchanges.....instead of the randomly placed token 3 that are being built.

go_leafs_go02 · #**2203** Posted: **Feb 9, 2012, 10:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Would love to see some pics of this work.

Still wish this was being built fully with interchanges.....instead of the randomly placed token 3 that are being built.

Oh don't worry, they'll be built when traffic volumes meet a warrant for an interchange, which of course we all know will be Day 1.

MOT missed the ball on that, that's for sure.

Pics would be appreciated as well, haven't been in Metro Vancouver since early September 2011, so I'd love to see some updates from some locations that DON'T have a webcam.

DKaz · #**2204** Posted: **Feb 9, 2012, 11:09 PM**

Edmonton built the SW portion of Anthony Henday with intersections originally, been paying for it for awhile now lol. The traffic gong show should be over soon when the last of the intersections are upgraded to interchanges.

They did SE right the first time, with interchanges.

Mousey · #**2205** Posted: **Feb 10, 2012, 8:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02

Oh don't worry, they'll be built when traffic volumes meet a warrant for an interchange, which of course we all know will be Day 1.

MOT missed the ball on that, that's for sure.

Pics would be appreciated as well, haven't been in Metro Vancouver since early September 2011, so I'd love to see some updates from some locations that DON'T have a webcam.

Yesterday I had to get to New West for 5pm from Surrey. I always have 2 options AFB or Pattulo. The 91a was a mess so I had to take Pattulo. I went Nordel/112th/92a/114/96. That wasn't so bad, but I did have to wait 2 lights to turn onto Scott Rd. Scott Rd. actually moved great the whole way, but Grace Rd,

It was backed up onto to Scott SB passed Tannery, about half way to Old Yale, and Grace to turn onto Scott NB, I couldn't even see the end of the line.
There is no way around it, and trucks are really paying for it. I'm hoping some of them realize that Nordel/Scott is much quicker then River Rd now.

c041v · #**2206** Posted: **Feb 10, 2012, 7:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlenko

No, they "could" have done one intersection first... added the left turns bays at Old Yale, for example... then waited a bit... then done the light poles at Tannery... got things in place... then do the closure on Tannery in the end.

Instead, it was three f'd intersections on the same day = 45 minute wait to move two blocks. I gave up, turned around, went all the way back to 96th and made it to the Patullo via King George in 15 minutes.

The detour seems to be functional now that people have had some time to adjust.

Part of the reason all three intersections had issues on the first day was due to the power not being restored immediately after the electrical subcontractor reconfigured the traffic signals. Additionally, the accident on Old Yale Rd. caused problems, I'm told it was a drunk driver.

Believe it or not, the decision to close Tannery Rd. and the adjoining sections of South Fraser Way solves more problems than it causes. Keep in mind that the majority of truck traffic that uses South Fraser way is travelling to and from the port, not the Patullo.

TransitFreak · #**2207** Posted: **Mar 5, 2012, 6:37 AM**

From the Surrey Leader Feb 28/12, copy pasted link and story from the website

http://www.surreyleader.com/news/140803723.html

By Jeff Nagel - Surrey North Delta Leader
Published: February 28, 2012 4:00 PM
Updated: February 28, 2012 5:12 PM
Traffic congestion in north Surrey should ease considerably by the end of this year, when a big section of the South Fraser Perimeter Road opens.

About a third of the route – from 136 Street to 176 Street – is now slated to open by December and Gateway program executive director Geoff Freer predicts lots of trucks will shift onto it, unclogging other major arteries in Surrey.

(see the rest via the link)

Don't know if this was posted yet, but that would be cool to have this part of the SFPR opened in conjunction with the new Port Mann...hopefully it will alleviate truck traffic in Surrey, as they hoped.

Metro-One · #**2208** Posted: **Mar 6, 2012, 3:41 AM**

Thanks.

A forum member on here a few weeks ago said that the Sunbury intersection is now being built as an interchange (going back to original plans here I guess), is their any confirmation regarding this or more information in general?

Still waiting for the final alignments to be released, haha!

VanCvl · #**2209** Posted: **Mar 6, 2012, 4:49 AM**

Sunbury and Tilbury are both at-grade intersections. In Surrey, 138th street and Bridgeview will be intersections as well.

Metro-One · #**2210** Posted: **Mar 6, 2012, 5:00 AM**

Yes, i know that is the plan, but some forum member the other week posted that their has been a recent reversal of that decision regarding Sunbury. Given that they have been putting the pre-loading in place for "future: conversions to interchanges this does seem possible. I am not sure what thread it was posted on.

Mininari · #**2211** Posted: **Mar 6, 2012, 5:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Still waiting for the final alignments to be released, haha!

At this rate, they'll be released in two phases; Release one will be December 2012, and release two will be December 2013... coinciding with the actual opening dates of the two segments.

VanCvl · #**2212** Posted: **Mar 7, 2012, 1:13 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Yes, i know that is the plan, but some forum member the other week posted that their has been a recent reversal of that decision regarding Sunbury. Given that they have been putting the pre-loading in place for "future: conversions to interchanges this does seem possible. I am not sure what thread it was posted on.

I'm on the project and can confirm there is no reversal to make it an interchange and there is no preloading for future interchanges. I'm looking forward to coming back in 10 years to rebuild it along with 72nd at Highway 91! I think people saw piles going in for the BNSF bridge adjacent to the interchange and thought the whole thing was grade separated.

Metro-One · #**2213** Posted: **Mar 7, 2012, 1:49 AM**

Such a huge mistake, especially the Sunbury intersection, there is no logical reason for it to not be built as an interchange.

But even on their website it says sections have been pre-loaded for future interchange upgrades.

This highway should have been built as a full freeway start to end for the get go, did MoT learn nothing from the 91 / 99 incident in the 80s?

Also, if you are on the project, do you have access to the final alignments???

Zassk · #**2214** Posted: **Mar 7, 2012, 5:46 AM**

Just to put this discussion about preloading future interchanges into context...

Hwy 91 at 72nd was preloaded too, back in 1985. The preloading is still vaguely visible.

VanCvl · #**2215** Posted: **Mar 7, 2012, 10:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Such a huge mistake, especially the Sunbury intersection, there is no logical reason for it to not be built as an interchange.

But even on their website it says sections have been pre-loaded for future interchange upgrades.

This highway should have been built as a full freeway start to end for the get go, did MoT learn nothing from the 91 / 99 incident in the 80s?

Also, if you are on the project, do you have access to the final alignments???

Ya, I have the final alignments. I can describe any section you'd like but I wouldn't want to post drawings it until it is made public.

logicbomb · #**2216** Posted: **Mar 7, 2012, 11:22 PM**

Disappointing to hear.

I was initially against this project because of the ecological and environmental repercussions, however I acknowledged that we simply needed to reduce truck traffic to reduce congestion and make the roads safer within the densely inhabited areas. If you're going to build a highway, at least build it properly with flyovers and interchanges to reduce choke points. Anything to stay on budget I guess...

jhausner · #**2217** Posted: **Mar 8, 2012, 4:47 AM**

Final alignments as of when?

osirisboy · #**2218** Posted: **Mar 8, 2012, 3:08 PM**

Lol why haven't they been made public yet? Aren't these things released before construction starts

VanCvl · #**2219** Posted: **Mar 8, 2012, 3:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by osirisboy

Lol why haven't they been made public yet? Aren't these things released before construction starts

Detailed engineering drawings are rarely made public. Everyone knows the alignment, people may just want to know intersection configurations, laning configuations, etc...

go_leafs_go02 · #**2220** Posted: **Apr 3, 2012, 10:38 PM**

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/a...ne?cid=dlvr.it

SFPR between 176 Street and Pattullo Bridge to be opened by December.

Remainder to be opened likely by late 2013.