Pattullo Bridge Discussion: Upgrades/Replacement | U/C

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

Well, again, I really have to ask: what are you gaining by building this route vs. the NFPR route? They are the same distance and connect to the same highway, but yours is many times more expensive.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Zassk

Well, again, I really have to ask: what are you gaining by building this route vs. the NFPR route? They are the same distance and connect to the same highway, but yours is many times more expensive.

I had the impression that the NFPR improvements only went as far west as Highway One / Brunette and the rest of the NFPR was just easier access from New West / S.Burnaby to these NFPR improvements without adding more traffic lanes in New West / S.Burnaby.

With this tunnel connecting to the new Pattullo Bridge, the King George traffic doesn't get dumped on New West and then have to use McBride / Royal / Columbia / 6th Ave / 10th Ave local streets to get to where they actually want to go. The pass-through traffic can use the bridge & tunnel to get between Surrey and New West, S. Burnaby, N. Burnaby, Highway One, Gaglardi, SFU, E. Hastings, Lougheed Mall &tc. The people who actually want to stop in New West or S. Burnaby can take the appropriate exit, but the people who just want to get between somewhere on the north side of Highway One and somewhere in Surrey can stay in the express lanes.

I think the locals in this area would welcome having 50,000+ vehicles a day go 'some where else' other than on their local streets.

[SpikePhanta]

Would TBM affect several underground streams and rivers?

[Millennium2002]

I'm probably reusing other people's elements in my design, but here goes:

Pattullo Bridge Reconstruction

[SpongeG]

the tunnel idea was floated around officialy before wasn't it? they left that south end of galargdi as it is in preparation for a future south connection

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

I had the impression that the NFPR improvements only went as far west as Highway One / Brunette and the rest of the NFPR was just easier access from New West / S.Burnaby to these NFPR improvements without adding more traffic lanes in New West / S.Burnaby.

That is the scope of the current NFPR project, but what I'm saying is that I think the NFPR route is the most practical route to build a direct connector from the new Patullo to Hwy 1 - more practical than the Stormont route. The new bridge could have flyover ramps connecting directly to the NFPR in the direction toward Hwy 1. This short connector along the river could be built to freeway standards and would impact way less neighbourhoods than Stormont, and would be affordable. Unlike the problematic Front Street, this section of the NFPR has plenty of space to be a real freeway and is located far away from residences.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

the tunnel idea was floated around officialy before wasn't it? they left that south end of galargdi as it is in preparation for a future south connection

My little niece is confused how a tunnel can float.

I told her they used "Mixed Metaphores".

[finalcoolman]

Article about residents on Mcbride and the additional noise from the new Pattullo.

http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/97084334.html

The interesting part about the article though is they say a 2015 completion date of the new bridge. That would mean construction would have to begin in two years in 2012.

[Metro-One]

It is amazing people are already complaining about noise from a bridge that does not even have pre-liminary alignments composed or any idea of funding.

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

It is amazing people are already complaining about noise from a bridge that does not even have pre-liminary alignments composed or any idea of funding.

look at all the people trying to mobilize around the kind ed station cause they want to start densifying the housing there - their argument is stupid - they are saying - look around its all single story housing they can't start putting up 6 or 8 storeys here - its doesn't fit with the single storey houses - well um at one point vancouver was a collection of shacks - things progress, areas change and develop and grow - just cause you spent $500,000 on renos and your view will be changed... (the guy they interviewed had just done renos worth $500,000 on his house) soon 6 or 8 storeys in the area will be the norm so they won't look out of place - it has to start at some point and you are living through it

[finalcoolman]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

It is amazing people are already complaining about noise from a bridge that does not even have pre-liminary alignments composed or any idea of funding.

From that article, looks like we'll finally see preliminary designs in the fall

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by finalcoolman

Article about residents on Mcbride and the additional noise from the new Pattullo.

http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/97084334.html

The interesting part about the article though is they say a 2015 completion date of the new bridge. That would mean construction would have to begin in two years in 2012.

Regarding noise buffers, high ( approx two-metre) concrete walls on the outside of the bridge - or any other major road - reduce noise considerably.
Also, what has been done in places on Canada Way, building tall, sloping planted earth noise barriers is also effective.

In Seoul, where population density is high and trafffic is dense - and very noisy - blocks of modern apartments on a busy roadway have tall, long earthen barriers to seperate them from the roadway. The degree of quiet within the apartment grounds is very noticeable.

With goodwill and ingenuity, many problems can be mitigated, if not eliminated totally.

[jsbertram]

The ultimate way to suppress traffic noise?
A tunnel.



The TBM tunnel from Gaglardi @ Trans Canada Highway (shown in red) goes directly to a portal half-way between today's Royal @ McBride and Columbia @ McBride intersections where the tunnel ends and connects to the north side of the new bridge deck (shown in green) that flies over Columbia & the Fraser River to Surrey. Having the portal there takes advantage of the large slope in the surface land, but allows the tunnel/bridge roadway to maintain its own slope to go over the river.

Two of the local area connections to the tunnel (6 Ave, 10 Ave) would have their portals east of McBride, but the old Pattullo Bridge northern causeway can be rebuilt to connect McBride, Columbia & Royal to each other, and to the new tunnel and bridge.

McBride becomes a local street again with reduced traffic and reduced traffic noise.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

The ultimate way to suppress traffic noise?
A tunnel.



The TBM tunnel from Gaglardi @ Trans Canada Highway (shown in red) goes directly to a portal half-way between today's Royal @ McBride and Columbia @ McBride intersections where the tunnel ends and connects to the north side of the new bridge deck (shown in green) that flies over Columbia & the Fraser River to Surrey. Having the portal there takes advantage of the large slope in the surface land, but allows the tunnel/bridge roadway to maintain its own slope to go over the river.

Two of the local area connections to the tunnel (6 Ave, 10 Ave) would have their portals east of McBride, but the old Pattullo Bridge northern causeway can be rebuilt to connect McBride, Columbia & Royal to each other, and to the new tunnel and bridge.

McBride becomes a local street again with reduced traffic and reduced traffic noise.

Sometimes the simpleast solutions are the most overlooked. Super idea, and this would not be a super-long tunnel costing mega-mega millions.
An excellent idea, Mr. Bertram. To your health (a toast)

[SpikePhanta]

Wouldn't underground creeks be a problem?

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by SpikePhanta

Wouldn't underground creeks be a problem?

Are there any along the route?

With the tunnel being essentially level between the McBride portal and the Gaglardi portal, with the rising a falling surface geography overhead any underground waterways would actually be above the tunnels. Just like the underground chunnel between France and England, the tunnels can be waterproofed to prevent water seeping in. Some tunnels are designed so the water trying to get in is sent around the outside of the tunnel rings & into a sump-pump type of drainage system to remove the water before it can get into the tunnels.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by SpikePhanta

Wouldn't underground creeks be a problem?

Only if you didn't make the ends the low points and allow natural drainage, which is easy since its under a hill.

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

The ultimate way to suppress traffic noise?
A tunnel.

No, the ultimate way to suppress traffic noise is to not build an arterial bridge in downtown New West.

Twinning Queensborough and connecting it to Hwy 1 via a route near SkyTrain OMC, or building Patullo closer to Brunette where it can connect easily to Hwy 1, would do far more to improve the quality of life in New West.

Get that traffic off of McBride and preferably off of Kingsway and Canada Way as well. Put as much of it as possible on Hwy 1. Link all of the bridges near New West to Hwy 1 and SFPR. Remove the through traffic completely.

That would suppress traffic noise.

I am surprised that there isn't more talk of a solution like this. I'm surprised that we want any bridge traffic on McBride or any traffic on Front Street.

[invisibleairwaves]

Originally Posted by Zassk

No, the ultimate way to suppress traffic noise is to not build an arterial bridge in downtown New West.

Twinning Queensborough and connecting it to Hwy 1 via a route near SkyTrain OMC, or building Patullo closer to Brunette where it can connect easily to Hwy 1, would do far more to improve the quality of life in New West.

Get that traffic off of McBride and preferably off of Kingsway and Canada Way as well. Put as much of it as possible on Hwy 1. Link all of the bridges near New West to Hwy 1 and SFPR. Remove the through traffic completely.

That would suppress traffic noise.

I am surprised that there isn't more talk of a solution like this. I'm surprised that we want any bridge traffic on McBride or any traffic on Front Street.

So...put that traffic through residential areas in Burnaby and Surrey instead? That's just moving the problem instead of fixing it. And you're ignoring the entire southern end of the bridge.

[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?