Pattullo Bridge Discussion: Upgrades/Replacement | U/C

[invisibleairwaves]

Originally Posted by Zassk

^ Ok, so where is the best location for this bridge? Is the current location best? Which arteries most need to be connected across the river?

The current location is absolutely the best. King George is a hugely important route, and the SFPR was designed with a Patullo connection in mind at the current spot.

Traffic noise simply isn't a big enough problem to warrant spending hundreds of millions, possibly billions completely reconfiguring the road system in the area on both sides of the river, only to move the problem onto other residential areas. Put up some walls or build a tunnel, problem solved.

[Mininari]

I don't know. I guess if someone has been living there for 50 years, and the problem has gotten steadily worse with growing congestion, then you can lament about the 'old days', but the fact remains that there needs to be an artery somewhere. A tunnel connection from the new bridge to the Gaglardi interchange is obviously the most-preferred choice... but the total project cost is astronomical -- I'd rather see the UBC line and Surrey Skytrain extensions before something like this.

Maybe a property-hedging scheme could help... buy out the homes along Newcombe, build a cheaper cut-n-cover tunnel, then redevelop the surplus land with condos and ground-level retail for market sales may be a good way to go about it... leave the actual covered trench-tunnel as a greenway for cyclists and park space, and to act as a pedistrian throughway for the newly created mixed-use development above. What would be needed is a good connection to transit, and it wouldn't be hard to run a shuttle bus back and forth from Production Way and/or NW station.

Who's got a few billion kicking around...

[Alex Mackinnon]

I believe burnaby already bought the properties out. Patullo is by far the best location. Anyways, scott road and kgh are built with this corriddor in mind, then Surrey and North Delta are built around both these streets. A twin queensborough bridge would simplyoverload the AFB and SFPR and all the connections in burnaby and new west. This just sounds like NIMBYism.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by Mininari

A tunnel connection from the new bridge to the Gaglardi interchange is obviously the most-preferred choice... but the total project cost is astronomical

Using the 3km option of a twin bored tunnel for the Kicking Horse Canyon project as a template, the cost figure there has been placed at $600 million or $200 million/km.

A direct twin bored tunnel connection between the PB bridgehead just shy of the Gaglardi interchange is just over 3 km by my calculation from Google Maps. Of course, these types of complicated projects do have a knack for going considerably over preliminary budget estimates.

If the project had been contemplated during Flyin' Phil Gaglardi's 'can-do' heyday we would have seen signs like this planted along the corridor:



Source: http://www.bchwys.ca

[red-paladin]

If I were Burnaby, I would do the same thing to new west that Coquitlam did.
Coquitlam built united blvd right up to the border, even though they new that new west was against it, and then threatened to sue new west when they didn't want it connected to Braid st.

I would build the Stormont connector from Gaglardi interchange as a cut and cover tunnel under Newcombe, and then end it at McBride. If new west doesn't want to improve McBride, then that's their problem, as the border is 10th avenue, and they can't stop Burnaby from building it.

[Robert in Calgary]

Hello everyone,

Getting a new Patullo Bridge is good.

My question, has a second bridge, where the main route of the King George swings back north on a 130th Street alignment in Surrey and crosses the river with King Edward Street aligned on the north side of the river and connecting to the Trans-Canada and Lougheed highways, ever been bandied about?

Wouldn't this be "simpler" than Stormont plus the benefit of gaining another river crossing ?

[invisibleairwaves]

Originally Posted by Robert in Calgary

Hello everyone,

Getting a new Patullo Bridge is good.

My question, has a second bridge, where the main route of the King George swings back north on a 130th Street alignment in Surrey and crosses the river with King Edward Street aligned on the north side of the river and connecting to the Trans-Canada and Lougheed highways, ever been bandied about?

Wouldn't this be "simpler" than Stormont plus the benefit of gaining another river crossing ?

I think the biggest problem with that route is that the bridge would have to be longer than the Patullo, or even the Port Mann, since the river is much wider at that point. There's also a lot of big box stores that would have to be bought out and demolished to build an interchange at Highway 1. It would definitely be much simpler than the Gaglardi connector, but far more expensive.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Robert in Calgary

Wouldn't this be "simpler" than Stormont plus the benefit of gaining another river crossing ?

The problem is that the main reason to build a new bridge isn't to gain more capacity, it's because the existing bridge is unsafe and is reaching end-of-life. It's going to be demolished. Locating its replacement elsewhere fails to take advantage of the existing road network that feeds it, and also requires the construction of a new one.

[Zassk]

^ Speaking as a person who never uses it, the existing road network looks appalling to me, a relic of my grandparents' era. Is the existing bridge location really that important or efficient?

[DKaz]

Oh how did our grandparents ever survive back in the substandard days?

[Robert in Calgary]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Locating its replacement elsewhere

Hmm. I thought I was fairly clear. I did say -another- crossing of the river, just moving it doesn't do that.

Replace the existing Patullo and add another bridge between the Patullo and Port Mann.

[Robert in Calgary]

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

...that the bridge would have to be longer than the Patullo, or even the Port Mann,......There's also a lot of big box stores that would have to be bought out and demolished to build an interchange at Highway 1. It would definitely be much simpler than the Gaglardi connector, but far more expensive.

Lets see. At Patullo, it's about .5km wide. At Port Mann, It's about .87km wide. At 130th Street, it's about 1km wide so the bridge would be comparable to the Port Mann.

Yes to buying out some big box stores for the Highway 1 interchange.

More expensive than Stormount? I'm inclined to say no.

Unless we toss in a Lougheed/Surrey Central Skytrain link at the same time......

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by DKaz

Oh how did our grandparents ever survive back in the substandard days?

It used to be 2 lanes and had way lower traffic volumes.

[tom_g]

Wasn't one option to build the replacement further east to allow the creation of an island in the sandbars? Selling off the new industrial land would help fund the new bridge.

[Stingray2004]

I suspect that a traffic analysis will confirm that most traffic on the New West side utilizes the McBride Blvd/Canada Way/Hwy 1 corridor. Reconstructing a new Pattullo Bridge further eastward would not only be much, much more expensive, but probably also result in longer travelling times. That does not foreclose out that potential crossing option in terms of an additional corridor decades down the road.

http://www.cbc.ca/bc/news/bc-080731-...idor-study.pdf

Again, I hope that MoT will take the lead in terms of the bridge replacement akin to the provincial government talking the lead on the Evergreen Line. It also looks like Translink doesn't even have the funds to hire technical consultants for a functional design studty:

BRIDGE & ROADWORK Proj: 9071114-6
Greater Vancouver RD, BC CONTEMPLATED
Pattullo Bridge Replacement, Hwy 99A (over Fraser Hwy)

$1,000,000,000 est

Note: A Request for Qualifications from qualified and professional technical consultants, closed in April 2009. This is presently on hold; an award has not been made. The Consultant was to perform a Functional Design Study.

Further update in Sept/Oct 2010. Direct enquiries via email: procurement@translink.bc.ca. Solicitation #: Q9-0029.
A conceptual budget was estimated at $1 billion. Delcan completed a related Corridor Study.

Project: 05830; bridge, demolition of the existing 71 year old bridge; construction of a new six-lane bridge; considering options for the replacement of a related 104 year old New Westminster Rail Bridge as well.

This report Fri Mar 26, 2010.

Source: http://www.journalofcommerce.ca/cgi-...egion=national

[BurnabyAaron]

Hey Guys, I've been following this site for quite awhile, and I must say I'm exptremely impressed with the content and ideas on here.

The map in this link from the planning department at Burnaby City Hall shows a connection from Mcbridge to Gaglardi interchange.

Interestingly this appears to be listed as a current Primary Arterial road.

http://www.city.burnaby.bc.ca/cityha...mjrrdn.html#22

[jlousa]

Article in the Province regarding the replacement

“We have a couple of open houses coming up on Sept. 14 and Sept. 21,” said TransLink spokesman Ken Hardie Wednesday. “What we will have are a couple of options to look at but one of them will be TransLink’s preferred option. It will show how the bridge will line up, what the road accesses will be and so on.”

Hardie said the preferred option is about 100 metres upstream from the current bridge.

Hardie said that while work done on the Pattullo, ending in early 2009, “is good for another 10 years,” TransLink wants the new bridge open earlier than 2020.

“We want to have it in place well before that so, I would say, 2015 to 2016 would be a good target for us to have a new one ready to go,” he said.

Source: http://www.theprovince.com/Plans+lan...913/story.html

[Spork]

So basically the equivalent distance from the rail bridge, but on the other side of it. Looks reasonable to me. Minimal expropriation costs, Ritchie Bros. has now moved, and simple integration with existing roads.

[go_leafs_go02]

Lining it up directly with McBride on the new west side seems the easiest.

Surrey involves some expropriation, but doubt there's anything in that section that would be worth saving.

[SpikePhanta]

I hope that along with a new Patullo is a new Rail Bridge.