Highway 17 (SFPR) Upgrades

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

Metro youre absolutely right
this is ridiculous
I dont see how this is an imporvement at all

It substantiates my theory that BC has something against freeways
The thing is why was it even changed? the money was already allocated for it by the three parties Feds/Indians/Province.....Who made the decision to downgrade it?

At this point I feel just axe the Nordel / 91 interchange portion of the project and simply proceed with everything to the west of it (heck, that saved money could then be used to upgrade 80th street to a diamond interchange. That would have a far far far larger benefit IMO).

What’s the point of doing such a major upgrade on the Nordel / 91 interchange if it is simply going to be no better with two lights. It doesn’t exactly look cheap to build, it’s just strange. It should be free flowing. Again, all that is needed is a couple flyovers.

[libtard]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Now that is an exaggeration and you know it

I do think that realistically some weaving was inevitable due to how close everything is without some serious over engineering that would have thrown the cost benefit out of whack.

The design in general is fine regarding everything west of highway 91, the problem is with the 91 / Nordel Interchange.

That just feels bizarre. The original concept did have a flyover but I think it still had at least one set of traffic lights.

What sucks is with the current design and a quick glance it seems that both lights could be removed with doing nothing more than adding two flyovers.

Yes the lack of fly overs is disappointing

[officedweller]

I wonder if flyovers aren't desirable long term or cost-effective because of the boggy conditions?

[libtard]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I wonder if flyovers aren't desirable long term or cost-effective because of the boggy conditions?

No matter where road infrastructure gets built in BC, there is always an excuse about terrain

[waves]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

At this point I feel just axe the Nordel / 91 interchange portion of the project and simply proceed with everything to the west of it (heck, that saved money could then be used to upgrade 80th street to a diamond interchange. That would have a far far far larger benefit IMO).

What’s the point of doing such a major upgrade on the Nordel / 91 interchange if it is simply going to be no better with two lights. It doesn’t exactly look cheap to build, it’s just strange. It should be free flowing. Again, all that is needed is a couple flyovers.

On the topic on the Nordel/91 interchange, the design honestly hasn't changed that much in terms of the "how" it works. The only real big difference is that the old design did not have a WB Nordel to SB Hwy 91 direction whereas the new one does. The unique thing about this design is that the light for NB Hwy 91 to WB Nordel retains the benefit of only stopping EB Nordel traffic and not also stopping SB Hwy 91 to EB Nordel traffic. (This light was in the old design). The new light in the design is for WB Nordel to SB Hwy 91 traffic and it interrupts that same EB Nordel traffic as the other light and also the EB Nordel to NB Hwy 91. The lights will almost certainly be timed with each other, acting as a "single" traffic light so to speak.

If you take away that WB Nordel to SB Hwy 91 in the new design, you basically end up with exactly the same functionality as the previous design.

[Cypherus]

The merge lane onto 91C West that becomes the offramp to 17 East is going to be a huge bottleneck with trucks and cars, resulting in high collision rates. This is poorly thought out design, and for no other reason other than negligence.

[Dengler Avenue]

“ What sucks is with the current design and a quick glance it seems that both lights could be removed with doing nothing more than adding two flyovers.”
I’m glad we think alike.

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

“ What sucks is with the current design and a quick glance it seems that both lights could be removed with doing nothing more than adding two flyovers.”
I’m glad we think alike.

Agreed
I have to wonder even wtih the change in government
Why did do they always cheap out even with the federal govt and the tribe both pitching in 33% each? Who makes these decisions to add another stoplight.

I swear its a conspiracy to keep BC from being free flowing. I recall this was Malcolm Brodies logic that was quoted by the media in downscaling the GMB. He didnt want a Los Angeles style interchange in his backyard? Is this common in BC ? The PMB was allowed these type of interchanges but the Pattulo was not.

I also agree the onramp from the weight scales on 91C Westbound is going to be a clusterf*ck. That on ramp can easily be moved to the other side of the underpass. Who comes up with these designs? Are they part of some lower mainland elementary school competition?

[Metro-One]

I give them a pass on the weaving between the weight scale and the 17 east on-ramp.

Again the close proximity made it essentially unavoidable.

It would arguably be even worse if they move it to the other side of the underpass with even more weaving in an even shorter distance between the scale access ramp and the Nordel / 91 interchange.

It’s not perfect, that’s for sure, but will still be nice having 17 that much closer to being a free flowing route.

If they simply went ahead with a interchange at 80th 17 would become free flowing between Tsawwassen and the intersection east of the Patulllo Bridge.

Also, when this is all done one will be able to drive from New West to White Rock without hitting a traffic light! Sadly same can’t be said on the way back, haha!

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by flipper316

Where did you get those pics? Great job as always. Still not clear as to whether there's an overpass on the 91 C and Nordel Way. And not even surprised that the 91 and Nordel Way interchange added another light, what a joke.
If there is an overpass at 91 C and Nordel Way I wouldn't be surprised if the government scales it back and leaves it as a light as it currently sits. Their reasoning probably will be since you're gonna hit a new light at Nordel and 91 might as well keep the original light. Watch, some bs like that might happen.

I think everyone is freaking out about the 2 traffic lights on each side of HWY 91 on Nordel to much. If you look at the lane markings they are clearly going to be used for those who need to make a left turn off of one of the off ramps. So chances are the lights will be staying green for a good portion of their time. for those going straight. Think of it like the light on the 72nd off ramp.

[moosejaw]

You could actually get rid of the first traffic light by allowing the onramp to Nordel Westbound to continue underneath Nordel into a parclo to the other side and it would make it free flowing leaving the remaing light to be the left turn lane going onto 91SB.

[waves]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

You could actually get rid of the first traffic light by allowing the onramp to Nordel Westbound to continue underneath Nordel into a parclo to the other side and it would make it free flowing leaving the remaing light to be the left turn lane going onto 91SB.

The problem with such a solution is that you would create a crossing conflict point on the Highway between those getting onto the bridge and those getting off before the bridge. If the truck volumes are high for either then its very possible that crossing conflict point could cause worse traffic congestion than the light they propose.

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

I swear its a conspiracy to keep BC from being free flowing. I recall this was Malcolm Brodies logic that was quoted by the media in downscaling the GMB. He didnt want a Los Angeles style interchange in his backyard? Is this common in BC ? The PMB was allowed these type of interchanges but the Pattulo was not

Sadly its all too common. For some reason, any change seems to bring about fears of the extreme in local politicians.

One taller building in the downtown core=turning Vancouver into Dubai

One redesigned proper interchange that will enhance lifestyles, promotes transit use, and is better for the environment= all of a sudden you're Los Angeles.

Frustrating to say the very least.

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by Cypherus

The merge lane onto 91C West that becomes the offramp to 17 East is going to be a huge bottleneck with trucks and cars, resulting in high collision rates. This is poorly thought out design, and for no other reason other than negligence.

This design overall reminds me of the old Cape Horn Interchange...

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by waves

The problem with such a solution is that you would create a crossing conflict point on the Highway between those getting onto the bridge and those getting off before the bridge. If the truck volumes are high for either then its very possible that crossing conflict point could cause worse traffic congestion than the light they propose.

you bring up a good point but you could meter the AFB NB on ramp. Do you have that in BC yet?

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

you bring up a good point but you could meter the AFB NB on ramp. Do you have that in BC yet?

The Hwy 1 onramp from Mary Hill Bypass used to be metered.

I'm not a fan of cloverleafs other than the kitty corner parclos, dangerous relics from the 50s that just aren't suitable for high traffic volumes.

[ilikeredheads]

Originally Posted by EastVanMark

Sadly its all too common. For some reason, any change seems to bring about fears of the extreme in local politicians.

One taller building in the downtown core=turning Vancouver into Dubai

One redesigned proper interchange that will enhance lifestyles, promotes transit use, and is better for the environment= all of a sudden you're Los Angeles.

Frustrating to say the very least.

Boomers still think they live in the 50s. Sadly their scope of thinking is very narrow and tends to think like a small town instead of a metropolitan area. It's like a frog trapped under a well thinking the sky is a very small place because that's all they see.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

Boomers still think they live in the 50s. Sadly their scope of thinking is very narrow and tends to think like a small town instead of a metropolitan area. It's like a frog trapped under a well thinking the sky is a very small place because that's all they see.

i dont think they are the age group protesting these things. you have the GreeNDP and their millennial/hippie support

[s211]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

Boomers still think they live in the 50s. Sadly their scope of thinking is very narrow and tends to think like a small town instead of a metropolitan area. It's like a frog trapped under a well thinking the sky is a very small place because that's all they see.

Generalize much?

[AForce]

Are they any plans for a third lane between 72nd and nordel? absolute clusterfuck at rush hour with people merging on then back off the highway