Pattullo Bridge Discussion: Upgrades/Replacement | U/C - Page 64

CanSpice · #**1261** Posted **Feb 11, 2017, 12:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredinno

It looked more or less like the Pautullo, and spurred development far more than its counterpart.

Pattullo.

Reecemartin · #**1262** Posted **Feb 19, 2017, 5:15 PM**

[Deleted]

aberdeen5698 · #**1263** Posted **Feb 19, 2017, 6:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

...the new Port Mann would look very interesting if LEDs were run up the towers and along the cables.

You couldn't put lights ON the cables because it would interfere with the snow removal collars. But you could certainly do something with lights directed from above and below.

Reecemartin · #**1264** Posted **Feb 19, 2017, 8:40 PM**

[Deleted]

officedweller · #**1265** Posted **Feb 21, 2017, 1:43 AM**

By Yellow Fever taken Feb 18th:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yellow Fever

20170218_081609 by Yellow Fever @ SkyscraperCity, on Flickr

20170218_081554(0) by Yellow Fever @ SkyscraperCity, on Flickr

20170218_081546 by Yellow Fever @ SkyscraperCity, on Flickr

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yellow Fever

20170218_081512 by Yellow Fever @ SkyscraperCity, on Flickr

20170218_081503 by Yellow Fever @ SkyscraperCity, on Flickr

Vantage · #**1266** Posted **Feb 21, 2017, 7:29 AM**

Orange cables would be a great homage to the iconic orange arc of the original Pattullo Bridge.

flipper316 · #**1267** Posted **Feb 25, 2017, 1:19 PM**

that is one rinky dink bridge that should've been replaced 10 years ago.

Reecemartin · #**1268** Posted **Feb 25, 2017, 3:21 PM**

[Deleted]

dpogue · #**1269** Posted **Apr 29, 2017, 2:53 AM**

From a document on TransLink's Open Bids page regarding Legal Services for upcoming major projects:

Quote:

The [Pattullo Bridge Replacement] Project would replace the existing Pattullo Bridge with a new four-lane bridge spanning the Fraser River in the general location of the existing bridge. As determined by the Mayor’s Council on Regional Transportation, the proposed new bridge will be “a new, four-lane bridge funded primarily by user pricing. The replacement bridge will be designed in a manner so as not to foreclose the consideration of a potential future expansion to six lanes, subject to an all-party agreement and Mayors’ Council approval”. The PBRep Project will also decommission and remove the existing bridge.

The new bridge will be located just north and upstream of the existing bridge and, similar to the existing bridge, its approaches will connect to McBride Boulevard in the City of New Westminster and King George Boulevard in the City of Surrey.

[...]

TransLink proposes to submit its Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate in 2017 to support a thorough and timely review, so that construction can begin in 2019 and the new bridge can be ready for use in 2023 (after which decommissioning and removal of the existing bridge would commence).

[...]

The proposed Pattullo Bridge replacement is expected to open to the public in 2023. This timeline assumes that an application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate would be submitted to BCEAO approximately in 2017. The schedule assumes that, if the Application is successful, an EAC could be granted in early 2018. Project procurement would proceed in fall 2017 and early 2018, contingent on TransLink receiving the necessary funding approvals. Following design and construction, the new bridge would open to traffic in 2023. Demolition of the existing bridge would commence after the new bridge became operational and would be completed in approximately one year.

aberdeen5698 · #**1270** Posted **Apr 29, 2017, 3:03 PM**

It states that the bridge is to be open in 2023 no less than three times in the span of six sentences. They must really mean it.

VancouverOfTheFuture · #**1271** Posted **Apr 29, 2017, 5:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

It states that the bridge is to be open in 2023 no less than three times in the span of six sentences. They must really mean it.

wasn't there a date sometime around there where it would need to be closed for safety reasons? i remember hearing about that a while back now. but cant remember the details.

aberdeen5698 · #**1272** Posted **Apr 29, 2017, 6:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

wasn't there a date sometime around there where it would need to be closed for safety reasons? i remember hearing about that a while back now. but cant remember the details.

I believe the recent work on the bridge was done to avoid that.

urbancanadian · #**1273** Posted **Apr 30, 2017, 9:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I believe the recent work on the bridge was done to avoid that.

The recent work was actually where they found out that it would have to be closed so soon (even with the repairs). They found the structural damage was worse than expected and that the bridge may not even be safe in an extreme wind event.

aberdeen5698 · #**1274** Posted **Apr 30, 2017, 4:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbancanadian

The recent work was actually where they found out that it would have to be closed so soon (even with the repairs). They found the structural damage was worse than expected and that the bridge may not even be safe in an extreme wind event.

Oh, that's interesting. Do you have a link?

dpogue · #**1275** Posted **Apr 30, 2017, 4:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Oh, that's interesting. Do you have a link?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...able-1.3783458

Bobert · #**1276** Posted **Apr 30, 2017, 6:49 PM**

So if theyre going north and upstream, does that mean they're building the option b approach on the New West side?

http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and...placement.aspx

aberdeen5698 · #**1277** Posted **Apr 30, 2017, 10:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dpogue

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...able-1.3783458

Thanks for the link. For some reason this escaped my attention.

I wholeheartedly agree the the comment in the article: why are we spending so much money on a bridge to replace the Massey Tunnel when this bridge is in so much more dire need of replacement?

Sheba · #**1278** Posted **May 1, 2017, 1:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Thanks for the link. For some reason this escaped my attention.

I wholeheartedly agree the the comment in the article: why are we spending so much money on a bridge to replace the Massey Tunnel when this bridge is in so much more dire need of replacement?

Because the Massey Tunnel / Bridge is a pet project of our Provincial gov. It doesn't look like either the NDP or the Greens are for it. Meanwhile the Pattullo is part of TransLink's responsibility.

madog222 · #**1279** Posted **May 1, 2017, 1:54 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobert

So if theyre going north and upstream, does that mean they're building the option b approach on the New West side?

Both options had the bridge in that location, I also remember that option A was more or less decided on based on feedback. No one liked that wide intersection.

aberdeen5698 · #**1280** Posted **May 1, 2017, 5:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheba

Because the Massey Tunnel / Bridge is a pet project of our Provincial gov. It doesn't look like either the NDP or the Greens are for it. Meanwhile the Pattullo is part of TransLink's responsibility.

...because that's the way the Provincial government set it up. Seriously, if this is such a safety risk then why can't the provincial government step up to the plate on funding?