Roads Fantasy Thread

[Mininari]

We all keep speaking of this purported future H-99 project. It is understandable that no thread exists for a project that is but a thought, but since a major rebuild of Highway 99, the Oak Street Bridge, and the George Massey Tunnel is likely, I thought a thread was warranted.

So, lets put speculative ideas together and design this massive 'gateway-esque' project!
Would you add a C/D system?
Which interchanges should be completely reconfigured, added (or removed?) Would you advocate linking H-99 to Boundary Road instead of Oak Street?
How will the George Massey Crossing expanded? (laning?)
Would you have truck lanes?
Would you factor in space to extend the Canada Line?
Or go with Rapid Bus?
When would this start / finish construction, and finally...
who pays for it? (tolls!)

Its all speculative of course, but theres enough talk about H-99 to start putting it all together.

[Stingray2004]

I''l take a stab from south to north:

1. Third GP lane add/on drop-off from 32nd Ave. to KGH;

2. 6-lane cross-section from KGH to Hwy 17/SFPR;
(does not take into account future Serpentine/Southern Freeway connections to Hwy 99 - ensure overpasses have enough clearance for at least 4 lanes per direction)

3. 8-lane cross-section from Hwy 17 NB;

4. New 6-8 lane cable stayed Bridge; Retain GMT for HOV lane + shoulder; GMT still requires considerable seismic upgrading;

5. 8-lane cross-section from GMT to WH/Hwy 91 exits;

6. New 4-lane Steveston Hwy interchange;

7. New Blundell Rd. interchange;

8. New WH interchange;

9. Short C/D system for WH/Hwy 91 S access/egress points;

10. 6 lanes from WH to Hwy 91 N egress/access points;

11. 8 lanes northward to 8 lane OSB, with drop-off lane at Marine Dr.

12. 6 - 8 lane expansion of Knight St. Bridge;

BTW, Delcan engineering did some preliminary review of the Hwy 99/Oak St. Bridge expansion at page 7 of the following link with cost estimates of ~$800 million. You can probably double or triple the cost estimates based upon their other estimates contained therein.

http://www.gvgc.org/pdf/MCTS_EconImpAnalys_appendR.pdf

[ClearDop]

HWY 99 needs to be twinned all the way to the border. Which means the Massey Tunnel needs to be twinned too. Vancouver also needs to lift its moratorium on adding more lanes into the city. Once thats done, the Oak St. bridge can be rebuilt as an 8 lane bridge, 6 of which lanes would link up the the 6 lanes on Oak Street, and 2 lanes for exit/entrance ramps. Oh and the HOV lanes need to be moved into the middle lane. Having them on the outside lane is just wrong.

[Mininari]

Hmm, last I checked Hwy 99 *is* already twinned (4-lanes) and freeway to the border.

[urbanizer405]

Here's my take:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Green: HOT/bus ramp connecting Knight St to H-99
Light red: Half-SPUI interchange at Westminster Hwy
Red: Braided ramp to/from H-91 & WH to H-99
Light blue: Braided ramp to PARCLO interchange @ Blundell Rd
Blue: 4-6 lane Blundell overpass (extra lane to on-ramp)

[Zassk]

^ All of your red ramps in the northbound direction are currently under construction as part of the HOV project.

Nothing is being built for southbound for now.

[deasine]

Is there a need for Blundell ramp? I don't think so. What needs improving is the Steveston one: a four lane replacement (with future expansion space) to better move the traffic through the area.

[ClearDop]

Hate to be a downer but I honestly don't see a complete HWY 99 over haul happening any time soon, or even in the far off future. Why spend all this money and time on piece-meal work if its inevitably going to get torn down. It just doesn't make sense. And will the SFPR overpass even leave enough room underneath for future expansion? Something tells me it'll be hugging the northbound/southbound lanes of HWY 99....

[ClearDop]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Hmm, last I checked Hwy 99 *is* already twinned (4-lanes) and freeway to the border.

Twinned again. Making it an 8 lane highway.

[Alex Mackinnon]

I doubt that will happen very soon. In that case I would be much more in favour of making a new ROW connecting up to Boundary Rd, meeting up with the 91 and then going across to the SFPR.

[mrjauk]

Originally Posted by ClearDop

Twinned again. Making it an 8 lane highway.

And what happens when it gets to Oak Street? Moreover, there won't be the need for an 8-lane H99 for a hell of a long time, if ever.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

I doubt that will happen very soon. In that case I would be much more in favour of making a new ROW connecting up to Boundary Rd, meeting up with the 91 and then going across to the SFPR.

Yes. More options is a much better idea than jamming everyone on to some mammoth highway.

But even tha t might not be necessary. Should we really be encouraging sprawl in all of that high quality farmland?

Surrey and east is one thing, but Richmond/Delta should remain farms IMHO.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Yes. More options is a much better idea than jamming everyone on to some mammoth highway.

But even tha t might not be necessary. Should we really be encouraging sprawl in all of that high quality farmland?

Surrey and east is one thing, but Richmond/Delta should remain farms IMHO.

Agreed 100%

[go_leafs_go02]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Yes. More options is a much better idea than jamming everyone on to some mammoth highway.

But even tha t might not be necessary. Should we really be encouraging sprawl in all of that high quality farmland?

Surrey and east is one thing, but Richmond/Delta should remain farms IMHO.

I think the highway has decent capacity from the GM Tunnel southbound, it's just North of that to Bridgeview where the major issues are. Actually, I really wonder if the highway would work just fine if the Tunnel had the actual capacity one day.

Richmond/Delta all that area is ALR if I recall, this is to create a more efficient connection from Twaassen (sp?) and South Surrey.

[Zassk]

^ Yep, Hwy 99 mainly serves South-of-Fraser, not Richmond residents. The residential section of Richmond is further to the west and has other bridges serving it more directly, and residential Richmond is not likely to sprawl any further due to the ALR.

The congestion issue on Hwy 99 is not as bad as it was for the Port Mann; but that's sort of like saying that the congestion on 2nd Narrows is not as bad as the Port Mann, and therefore, why should we ever expand 2nd Narrows? After the new Port Mann opens, Hwy 99 will probably take the crown for worst congestion in the province.

The fact is that the Hwy 99 infrastructure is quite old (built 1957-1959) and some of it is near end-of-life. There are some safety constraints since the crossings have narrower lanes than the bridges from the 1960's and later. Overall capacity in the corridor is unchanged since 1974.

There is plenty of right-of-way for a freeway upgrade, but the overpasses generally need replacing for this to happen. Some of them have only 2 lanes' width between pylons. And there is the issue of where the traffic goes at the Vancouver end; which is why Boundary Road keeps coming up in this discussion.

Realistically, the new Port Mann is just the beginning. It may take a decade to pay for each megaproject, but there has to be a major investment in Hwy 99, and another at 2nd Narrows, sometime in the coming decades.

[ClearDop]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Yes. More options is a much better idea than jamming everyone on to some mammoth highway.

But even tha t might not be necessary. Should we really be encouraging sprawl in all of that high quality farmland?

Surrey and east is one thing, but Richmond/Delta should remain farms IMHO.

More options is good, but a connection to HWY 91 from Boundary would be pointless. If there was any type of demand for it, it would have been done already. But we already have crossings at the Knight Street Bridge and Queensborough which are more than sufficient. I know I wouldn't use the Boundary crossing and I travel HWY99/91 every day.

There also shouldn't be any worry about sprawling. Especially when talking about south of the tunnel. To be honest theres not much available land left. The new HWY 99 would just be servicing the demand thats already there. Tswassen and Ladner are pretty much done growing since they're pushed to their limits and are surrounded by ALR. The only area that has room to grow is South Surrey (and damn is that place growing fast. its like a boom town).

[DKaz]

I'd much rather see White Rock and South Surrey linked to Vancouver with commuter rail (with a station in Ladner, Steveston, and somewhere in central Richmond). That'll be a busy line right there.

[Zassk]

^ Commuter rail is a neat idea, but the places you mentioned are not laid out linearly. 1) There is no existing rail crossing of the South Arm to serve Ladner or to loop past Steveston, 2) it is a massive detour to send Surrey/White Rock people over to Ladner when their trains could go straight north to New West instead.

The best hope for Ladner is probably to shoehorn an ALRT line into one of the tubes of the George Massey Tunnel after a replacement bridge is built for car traffic.

[wrenegade]

Does everyone here forget that the Oak Street Bridge cannot be expanded? The CoV will not let anyone (province included) build more lanes into the city. That is going to be a major impediment to any H99 upgrade, at least from the 91 interchange northbound. I suppose technically they could add more lanes exiting the city but I doubt that would be very cost efficient. That being said the infrastructure south of the 91 interchange definitely needs improvements, but I don't see them happening until after the Pattullo bridge replacement.

[DKaz]

South Surrey, not regular Surrey. Have it parallel along 99 with new tracks, follow 10 a bit into Ladner then cross the Fraser and join onto tracks on Shell Rd. Cross the Fraser at the rail bridge parallel to the Oak St. Bridge, then go up Arbutus corridor into Vancouver.