Pattullo Bridge Discussion: Upgrades/Replacement | U/C

[tybuilding]

COLUMN: A proposal to close Surrey-New Westminter Pattullo Bridge gap
http://www.newwestnewsleader.com/opinion/158506305.html

My thoughts:

This is an interesting finding from the Delcan Report: http://www.translink.ca/~/media/docu...ssessment.ashx
Pattullo Bridge Truck Closure Analysis, Terry Partridge
Associates, (Apr. 2007)
Key Findings:
− The TransLink model was used to test the impacts of
closing the Pattullo Bridge to trucks in 2004 and 2011
scenarios. The results indicated “relatively small and
effectively unnoticeable” changes in truck volumes over
most of the network; the largest changes were at the
approaches to the Alex Fraser and Port Mann Bridges,
with two way diversions of 180 and 250 trucks per hour,
respectively.
Further down:
Significant numbers of
larger vehicles have been observed occupying a portion of the adjacent
lane as they cross the structure, likely to avert potential sideswipe
collisions.
Remove trucks from the bridge? There will be the new Gateway and SFPR to move trucks around the city along with improvements on the north side. This should be seriously considered. Trucks also add to pedestrian and cyclist discomfort much more so than passenger vehicles in my experience. Trucks push large amounts of air and that blows against pedestrians and cyclists.
Sidewalks can be expanded using a cantilevered structure like the Alex Fraser has.

Reduce the bridge to 3 lanes, add the movable barrier, ban trucks.

The Lion's Gate bridge bans trucks, why not the Patullo?

The weight saving with less live load (vehicles) will allow for a better replacement for the deck or addition of the extended sidewalk with barriers. And yes, directly fund the transit capital improvements in Surrey with the savings!

The loss of tolls (if they would even be allowed) might be lost with the rehab option and the rehab won't be as easy as the Lions Gate. You can just raise new sections of bridge like was done for the Lions Gate bridge because of the truss structure but it must be possible somehow.

[paradigm4]

Originally Posted by tybuilding

. And yes, directly fund the transit capital improvements in Surrey with the savings!

The loss of tolls (if they would even be allowed) might be lost with the rehab option and the rehab won't be as easy as the Lions Gate.

As you just noted, the loss of tolls means no money to pay for the project, let alone funding for transit.

[xd_1771]

Someone on here should do a sim of how much congestion increase (on top of what's already there) will occur on the Queensborough Bridge, on Royal Ave and on Front St if the Pattullo is simply removed or even if it's constrained in capacity.

[DKaz]

xd_1771 has risen from the dead! ;D

I'm building Metro Vancouver in Simcity 4 but have only finished a quarter of Vancouver-Burnaby-New West-Richmond so far.

[Vestry]

Originally Posted by DKaz

xd_1771 has risen from the dead! ;D

I'm building Metro Vancouver in Simcity 4 but have only finished a quarter of Vancouver-Burnaby-New West-Richmond so far.

That is incredible. Share the file if possible?

[xd_1771]

Yeah... I did that some time ago in the Streetcar thread; missed me?

I remember working with that region map in SC4 (d/l-ed it) but never had the time to fully build anything out. Looks challenging! Too bad the Pattullo and the Queensborough would be on separate city maps that'll prevent a useful sim I think.

I wrote a letter about the Pattullo/expansion that was published in today's New West News Leader if anyone is interested.

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by tybuilding

Reduce the bridge to 3 lanes, add the movable barrier, ban trucks.

How will this prevent the structure from crumbling into the river?

The Lion's Gate bridge bans trucks, why not the Patullo?

The Lion's Gate bridge is structurally sound and underwent an extensive multi-year rehabilitation.

Lion's Gate vs. Patullo are excellent examples of why cable-stayed bridges are more suitable for our geography.

[red-paladin]

No doubt -- There are all these proposals that don't take into account the fact that it would be an untenable amount of money to rehabilitate the existing bridge for any further use. Even after, it would still have riverbed scour issues, and still be more likely to collapse in a massive earthquake than a new one. The replacement of the much newer Port Mann bridge really demonstrates that a new structure is the more economical (and safer) solution.

[EastVanMark]

I would call this proposal the dumbest one yet, but that title has to go to the New West councilor who suggested they tear down the bridge and don't build anything to replace it. Questioned whether we need a bridge at all.

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by EastVanMark

I would call this proposal the dumbest one yet, but that title has to go to the New West councilor who suggested they tear down the bridge and don't build anything to replace it. Questioned whether we need a bridge at all.

I hear the old Albion Ferries may be looking for a new route...

[tybuilding]

NEW PATTULLO BRIDGE PROJECT OPEN HOUSES

In February 2012, TransLink gathered public and stakeholder feedback on bridge location (alignment) and connection options in New Westminster and Surrey for the New Pattullo Bridge Project. Members of the public are invited to attend a series of Open Houses to learn more about the proposed project, its status, and share their views.

Open Houses are scheduled for the following dates:

Thursday June 21
2:00 pm – 8:00 pm
Surrey SFU
13450 102 Avenue, Surrey

Saturday June 23
10:00 pm – 3:00 pm
Sapperton Pensioners Hall
318 Keary Street
New Westminster

Tuesday June 26
2:00 pm – 8:00 pm
Sapperton Pensioners Hall
318 Keary Street
New Westminster

Wednesday June 27
2:00 pm – 8:00 pm
Surrey SFU
13450 102 Avenue
Surrey

For further information about the New Pattullo Bridge project, please go to www.translink.ca/pattullo or contact Vincent.Gonsalves@translink.ca at 604.453.3043.

[Mousey]

I hate even thinking of the 3 lane no truck option. These people are in charge of our city that's the scariest part of it all. The idiot who did the study should also have added the extreme congestion for cars that it would cause.
Everyone should remember when the Pattulo was closed for that fire. So yes, trucks weren't severly affected, but cars definetly were. PMB WB in the mornings from 232nd and 152nd to 88th. Oh, and AFB from 99, Nordel from 144th and 72nd/64th from KGB. They people always forget about those 2 weeks...

[tybuilding]

Originally Posted by Mousey

I hate even thinking of the 3 lane no truck option. These people are in charge of our city that's the scariest part of it all. The idiot who did the study should also have added the extreme congestion for cars that it would cause.
Everyone should remember when the Pattulo was closed for that fire. So yes, trucks weren't severly affected, but cars definetly were. PMB WB in the mornings from 232nd and 152nd to 88th. Oh, and AFB from 99, Nordel from 144th and 72nd/64th from KGB. They people always forget about those 2 weeks...

Yes that wasn't a good 2 weeks but things have changed. Port Mann will have added 5 lanes of capacity. The South Fraser Perimeter road will be in place to distribute traffic including trucks quickly. Even the under used Golden Ears bridge is available to take that congestion from highway 1 now. (it wasn't finished in time for the fire incident nor was the new Pitt River bridge). Reducing one lane against the rush for the Patullo bridge won't cause the traffic hell that the full bridge closure did when the bridge was shut down. It is not comparable to what happened in 2009.

[Zassk]

I think that the SFPR will magnify the importance of the Patullo Bridge. This is going to be the focal point of the SFPR. A lot of traffic will try to move to or from that bridge along this new corridor. I foresee bad things for that area after SFPR opens.

Ideally, a 6 lane crossing would have been incorprated into the SFPR project.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Zassk

The Lion's Gate bridge is structurally sound and underwent an extensive multi-year rehabilitation.

Lion's Gate vs. Patullo are excellent examples of why cable-stayed bridges are more suitable for our geography.

The Lion's Gate is a Suspension bridge. The Alex Fraser, SkyTrain bridge and new Port Mann are all Cable-stayed bridge.

I know it sounds like I'm being nitpicky, but they do work in quite different ways.

I'm not an engineer, but as I understand it, suspension bridges transfer much of the load to anchors on each end of the span, whereas cable-stay bridges transfer loads to the pillars that they are attached to.

Suspension bridges generally are more expensive and can have longer spans than cable-stayed bridges.

[Stingray2004]

I'm beginning to sense what the final and end result will be regarding the proposed new Pattullo Bridge.

I now predict that the existing structure will be refurbished both seismically and structurally at a minimal cost of $100 - $200 million with a new simliar 3-reversible lane cross-section as the Lions Gate Bridge in order to satisfy lane-width safety concerns once and for all. Sad unfortunately.

How do I come to this conclusion?

1. Translink is financially bleeding red-ink and has no real new sources for funding $1 billion+ in a new structure inclusive of tolls;

2. Hard-pressed taxpayers are averse to new tolls;

3. New Westminster has created its own political uproar over a new 6-lane Pattullo replacement not realizing that the outside 3rd lane is just a simple auxilary lane;

4. Translink has now decided to re-open its Pattullo Bridge options;

http://www.newwestnewsleader.com/news/159634045.html

5. FWIW, a "public survey" of NW residents opposes a new 6 lane replacement;

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/a...ne-replacement

6. An NDP guvmint will likely be elected in May, 2013 and they are historically VERY sensitive to NIMBY/public outcry's/opposition as witnessed by their 1990's provincial tenure;

7. New Westminster has been historically a hard-core NDP riding;

8. The 1990's NDP guvmint had various proposals for the Lions Gate Bridge expansion during the 1990's as well as the Island Highway project in the south Van Isle region (Malahat section and McKenzie Ave. interchange in particular), but they shied away from expanding same due to strong opposition from their enviro base;

Again, we will see minimal expenditures of $100 - $200 million for seismic/structural repairs to the Pattallo Bridge, a reduction of lanes from 4 to 3 reversible lanes, and no toll. It will satisfy the NDP's political base.

As a non-gambler I'm even willing to take bets in this regard.

Years down the road, however, we will likely see a new 6-lane Pattullo Bridge structure at further additional capital cost. The Port Mann Bridge upgrades during the late 1990's. under the then NDP guvmint, and the current new Port Mann Bridge replacement provides a good case study of same. C'est la vie.

[Alex Mackinnon]

And then Vancouver's infrastructure development comes to a premature halt for the next decade until the NDP are as hated as our current Libs.

[trofirhen]

Scheiss! (oops, Enschuldigung, bitte)
It's just that the Patullo is rickety, narrow, and gives me the jitters (or, rather GAVE me the jitters) every time I went across it. Why couldn't thy just replace the freaking, creaking, old thing? (yes, yes, yes, $$$$$$, I know)

[splashflash]

Originally Posted by Zassk

I think that the SFPR will magnify the importance of the Patullo Bridge. This is going to be the focal point of the SFPR. A lot of traffic will try to move to or from that bridge along this new corridor. I foresee bad things for that area after SFPR opens.

Ideally, a 6 lane crossing would have been incorprated into the SFPR project.

Could a Tree Island option, (Queensborough Bridge alternate) coupled with a SFPR to Queensborough bridge be a better replacement compared to the Pattullo Bridge? The Alex Fraser is at capacity, as is the Queensborough. This would basically twin the Alex Fraser, but to the northeast, picking up most of the Burnaby-bound traffic. Coquitlam-bound traffic would still be an issue, but direct access to the new Port Mann from SFPR - if a link is feasible - would take care of that.

[go_leafs_go02]

SFPR to Highway 1 at the Port Mann is NOT feasible - no matter what New Westminster tries to get you to believe. There's literally 30-50 metres between the two roads, just drive over the Port Mann and look down at the SFPR to see.

And, while not representative of the whole population, i can assure you, I know a number of New West residents who depend/rely on the Pattullo Bridge for their employment in Surrey. While of course there is more Surrey/SoF traffic heading northbound, in the PM peak, traffic volumes north/south are 60/40 while in the AM, it's more 75/25.

That's why the 3 lane bridge isn't possible. The AM peak would handle it OK, but your PM peak would be a disaster.

What you'll see is a week or two of heavy congestion with the New Port Mann opening, and then people realizing it's not worth sitting in traffic to take the Pattullo Bridge. Ultimately, you'll see the Pattullo Bridge at very similar traffic volumes as today, as the Port Mann will have additional capacity available for drivers to use.

You will see a rise in off-peak traffic on Pattullo Bridge, but during the peaks, which I believe is what New West is mostly concerned with, I doubt you'll see much of a change in travel times in the ultimate.