Pattullo Bridge Rehabilitation Project

[SOSS]

Think this deserves its own thread:

METRO VANCOUVER -- Motorists travelling between Surrey and New Westminster will be forced to take the tolled Port Mann Bridge or other crossings such as the Alex Fraser during closures of the Pattullo Bridge next year for major rehabilitation work.

TransLink is also hoping that more people will opt to carpool, take SkyTrain or reduce their trips between Surrey and New Westminster during the $100-million rehabilitation project, which is slated to continue for 18 months.

A two-week closure of the bridge due to a fire in January 2009 caused traffic chaos, clogging the old untolled Port Mann and Alex Fraser bridges, as well as the George Massey Tunnel.

About 75,000 motorists use the Pattullo Bridge daily, partly because many drivers do not want to pay the $3 toll each way to cross the Port Mann Bridge.

“The Pattullo Bridge is not going to be able to handle the traffic pattern it does today,” said New Westminster Mayor Jonathan Cote. “Both the Alex Fraser and the Port Mann are going to see increases in traffic. The Port Mann will be able to handle that excess but the Alex Fraser will face a few more challenges in terms of congestion.

“I’m hoping people will start to realize the Port Mann Bridge, even with a toll, is a better alternative for some of these trips.”

TransLink announced Thursday that, starting in mid-2016, only two lanes — one in each direction — will be open on the Pattullo during weekdays, while the bridge will be closed to all traffic during nights and weekends as it works to rehabilitate and repair the aged bridge deck. The sidewalk will also be closed to pedestrians and cyclists at all times while the work is ongoing, while heavy trucks with more than three axles will be banned from using the bridge.

But even if there were funding available to build a new bridge, said Cote, this major rehabilitation work would still be needed because it would take up to eight years to design and build a new crossing. There will also likely need to be more seismic upgrading done before then.

“Really the only other alternative is to go without a bridge,” he said.

Fred Cummings, TransLink’s vice-president of engineering and infrastructure management, said the transportation authority wants to give the public time to come up with new travel arrangements. TransLink is working with the trucking association, the B.C. government, Port Metro Vancouver and city officials in New Westminster and Surrey on a traffic management plan to help motorists, pedestrians and cyclists find alternative ways to get across the river.

The lane-closure proposal, he said, is the “best balance” to the needs of safety, business impacts and the needs of emergency responders.

“It’s driver safety as well as worker safety,” Cummings said. “We know this is going to be a significant impact to people who use this bridge so we want them to plan ahead for alternative routes. There are concerns, obviously, because this is going to lead to congestion and delays. But there’s an understanding this work has to be done.”

Greg Johnson, spokesman for TI Corp., which oversees the operations and maintenance of the Port Mann Bridge, said there is enough capacity on that crossing to accept the traffic from the Pattullo Bridge.

Traffic on the Port Mann Bridge is up more than five per cent compared with the same month last year, he said, while overall traffic for 2015 has risen an average of six per cent compared with the same period a year earlier — with traffic volumes between 95,000 and 110,000 crossings per day. But while there is room to take more vehicles on the Port Mann, neither Johnson nor Cummings would say if tolls would be relaxed on that bridge during the Pattullo closure.

The B.C. government, which is responsible for the Port Mann and Alex Fraser bridges, has said there must be a toll-free alternative for people who do not want to pay to cross the Port Mann.

However, the Ministry of Transportation said in a statement to The Sun Thursday that there are no plans at this time to reduce tolls on the Port Mann.

Cote said reducing the tolls on the Port Mann Bridge would help lure motorists to that bridge, noting he’s worried that even with less traffic using the Pattullo, there will be bottlenecks on the access points, especially in his city. About 30 per cent of traffic on the Pattullo, he added, serves the local population in New Westminster and Surrey.

“Ideally that would be the traffic that remains,” he said, adding there needs to be widespread communication about the plan. “This rehabilitation project is going to have a significant impact on transportation not only in New Westminster but in Metro Vancouver.”

TransLink does not have figures for pedestrians and cyclists who regularly use the sidewalk on the aged bridge to cross the river. TransLink will urge pedestrians and cyclists to use transit during the closure, Cummings said, but will also look at offering shuttle buses for cyclists because of the bike restrictions during peak hours on SkyTrain.

The latest rehabilitation on the Pattullo Bridge will focus on seismically upgrading and repairing the bridge deck, whether by milling and replacing the concrete on some sections of the bridge or bringing in pre-cast sections. The work follows a succession of summer closures during the past decade that has seen repeated patch jobs on the deck to keep it safely maintained until a new bridge is built.

“We can’t do that anymore,” Cummings said. “The bridge needs to be rehabilitated and have repairs until a new one is built. We need to keep the bridge safe until then.”

A new four-lane crossing, with the potential to expand to six lanes, is a priority in TransLink’s transportation plan and one of the top projects listed in a batch of projects that will go ahead if the public agrees to a 0.5-per-cent sales tax increase to fund transportation across Metro Vancouver. Metro voters have until 8 p.m. Friday to vote the proposal.

TransLink and the regional mayors insist they need the sales tax increase, which would generate $250 million annually and help fund projects such as more buses, the Pattullo Bridge, better road maintenance, a new subway for Vancouver and light rail for Surrey. The results of the plebiscite are expected to be released in late June.

Source: Vancouver Sun

[SOSS]

This IMOH is completely the fault of the Provincial and New Westminster governments. This bridge should have been made a priority for replacement prior to needing a band-aid repair of $100 Million. What is that... about 10% of the cost of a new bridge. A new bridge we will likely see within the decade (fingers crossed).

[dharper]

Originally Posted by SOSS

A new bridge we will likely see within the decade (fingers crossed).

I hope so, but have my doubts. How long have they been stretching it out now? The rehabilitation won't start for almost a year, and it won't finish for 2 1/2 years. I am sure they wouldn't spend $100M if a new bridge was coming sooner rather than later.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by dharper

I am sure they wouldn't spend $100M if a new bridge was coming sooner rather than later.

i think this is one of those, they have to do it or close it down for the safety of the public. that bridge has been neglected and chunks of concrete fall off the damn thing.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by dharper

I hope so, but have my doubts. How long have they been stretching it out now? The rehabilitation won't start for almost a year, and it won't finish for 2 1/2 years. I am sure they wouldn't spend $100M if a new bridge was coming sooner rather than later.

Well, the other option is literately shut it down, throw concrete barricades on both ends and go "Sorry, it's too unsafe, and to save 100 million we're going to make everyone on both sides of the bridge lose far more than 100 million per year until the new bridge is built."

Or the other option...

Forgo maintenance and just let it fall into the river, and pay out the lawsuits.

[paulsparrow]

Originally Posted by SOSS

This IMOH is completely the fault of the Provincial and New Westminster governments. This bridge should have been made a priority for replacement prior to needing a band-aid repair of $100 Million. What is that... about 10% of the cost of a new bridge. A new bridge we will likely see within the decade (fingers crossed).

Why the New West City??? So okay go build a 6 or even 8 lane Puttello and what is that going to do when you can't expand the main arteries that attach?

The bridge proposal should have gone further east to where it is a quick hook up with the #1 and the main arteries could have been expanded to handle a higher volume of traffic.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by paulsparrow

Why the New West City??? So okay go build a 6 or even 8 lane Puttello and what is that going to do when you can't expand the main arteries that attach?

The bridge proposal should have gone further east to where it is a quick hook up with the #1 and the main arteries could have been expanded to handle a higher volume of traffic.

Why do you have to expand the main arteries? This argument is common yet lacking in any kind of logic.

In New Westminster, there are 6 lanes of traffic that directly flow to, and 6 lanes that flow away from the Pattullo.

Going to the bridge you have:

• McBride with 2 lanes that merge down to 1 lane.
• Royal with 2 lanes (3 in some spots) that merge down to 1 lane
• Columbia/Front with 2 lanes that merge down to one, then needs to yield for the lane coming off Royal. Except during rush hour when that ramp is closed so the traffic is added to Royal at 6th via Columbia, making traffic in downtown New West a nightmare until 6pm (trucks actually line up and wait at the ramp gate well before 6pm).

If you take out all the merging, and made a bridge that would freeflow lanes onto the bridge, you would need 6 lanes southbound. This would suck all the traffic out of New Westminster and make the roads there less congested with people waiting to get on the bridge. On the other side, in Surrey, you have already have 6 lanes Southbound (3 on Scott and 3 on King George (counting the merge from Scott that noone ever uses)). As it is, at the height of rush hour, once you are on the Surrey side of the bridge, traffic vanishes.

Because that is what the traffic in New Westminster is, people waiting for their turn to get on the bridge. It is not there isn't enough lanes in New Westminster. It is there are not enough lanes on the bridge.

For Northbound, as it is, there are 3 lanes down part of King George and 3 lanes on Scott. So you are again, merging 6 lanes down to 2. But in New Westminster, you also have 6 lanes heading away from the bridge.

All you really need to upgrade is Columbia near Sapperton Station. If both lanes on Columbia turned onto Brunette (and made it 2 lanes there instead of 1), most traffic problems would be solved. A lot of traffic on McBride is taking the long way through New West because it is just as fast to deal with 10th and Canada Way as it is to deal with the Columbia/Brunette turn. And I've never really had much trouble with traffic on Royal after coming off the bridge (it flows decent for a street through a city).

Which just goes to show how insane it is going to be during the repairs. It is going to be 12 lanes of traffic forced down to 2.

I'm not looking forward to it because I ride the 319 bus. It already gets stuck in heavy traffic around Scott Road Station, adding 10 minutes onto the trip. I can't imagine what it will be like next summer.

[paulsparrow]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

Why do you have to expand the main arteries? This argument is common yet lacking in any kind of logic.

In New Westminster, there are 6 lanes of traffic that directly flow to, and 6 lanes that flow away from the Pattullo.

Going to the bridge you have:

• McBride with 2 lanes that merge down to 1 lane.
• Royal with 2 lanes (3 in some spots) that merge down to 1 lane
• Columbia/Front with 2 lanes that merge down to one, then needs to yield for the lane coming off Royal. Except during rush hour when that ramp is closed so the traffic is added to Royal at 6th via Columbia, making traffic in downtown New West a nightmare until 6pm (trucks actually line up and wait at the ramp gate well before 6pm).

If you take out all the merging, and made a bridge that would freeflow lanes onto the bridge, you would need 6 lanes southbound. This would suck all the traffic out of New Westminster and make the roads there less congested with people waiting to get on the bridge. On the other side, in Surrey, you have already have 6 lanes Southbound (3 on Scott and 3 on King George (counting the merge from Scott that noone ever uses)). As it is, at the height of rush hour, once you are on the Surrey side of the bridge, traffic vanishes.

Because that is what the traffic in New Westminster is, people waiting for their turn to get on the bridge. It is not there isn't enough lanes in New Westminster. It is there are not enough lanes on the bridge.
.

Based on your argument you will now have the opposite. Congestion on the bridge. How is it going to look when you have three lanes going northbound down to 2 lanes on McBride? This is the point I'm trying to make.

Even if you reconfigured the overpass on the north side to allow three lanes each way under it you will still have too much traffic trying to go down McBride (like now) so just like the Alex Fraser north bound the traffic will back up two lanes up the new Pattullo.

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by paulsparrow

Based on your argument you will now have the opposite. Congestion on the bridge. How is it going to look when you have three lanes going northbound down to 2 lanes on McBride? This is the point I'm trying to make.

Even if you reconfigured the overpass on the north side to allow three lanes each way under it you will still have too much traffic trying to go down McBride (like now) so just like the Alex Fraser north bound the traffic will back up two lanes up the new Pattullo.

At least a third of the traffic exits onto Royal/E Columbia. The right lane continuing on McBride is virtually empty after that exit.

The Port Mann Bridge is hardly ever congested anymore. Bridges are the choke points in the region.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by paulsparrow

Based on your argument you will now have the opposite. Congestion on the bridge. How is it going to look when you have three lanes going northbound down to 2 lanes on McBride? This is the point I'm trying to make.

Even if you reconfigured the overpass on the north side to allow three lanes each way under it you will still have too much traffic trying to go down McBride (like now) so just like the Alex Fraser north bound the traffic will back up two lanes up the new Pattullo.

You wouldn't have every lane on the bridge exit onto McBride. Almost half the traffic exits at the Royal/Columbia exit. And more would exit there if it were more convenient/direct or if Brunette were widened to make it a faster alternative than McBride.

If you had 4 lanes northbound on the Pattullo, 2 lanes would exit onto the 2 lanes of Mcbride, and 2 lanes would be exit only onto Royal/Columbia. Or there are different configuration options where the primary lanes might continue onto Columbia/Front/NFPR and the must exit lanes would take you to McBride and Royal (depending on where you want to send the majority of traffic to flow). On the South side, the lanes could have dedicated exits onto the SFPR, Scott, and King George.

Think about how the Granville street bridge is. It has 4 lanes in the middle, and they split at each end: it works pretty well. Or on the AFB, it is 3 lanes, and at each end, one lane exits. The PMB is also more lanes that the freeway.

And so what if the congestion actually moves to on the bridge. If there is going to be congestion, it would be better if it were on the bridge. Then instead of everyone being stuck in traffic, only those using the bridge would be slow moving while people driving locally around the city would face much less congestion.

[Metro-One]

What an amazing waste of money, seriously.

While The province, New West, and Translink all share some of the blame here, the vast Lion's share belongs to New West.

There was a plan going forward about 5 years ago, it had all the conceptual alignments done, and it was planned to be open only two years from now. Surrey was happy, it was only New West who at the last minute pulled the plug.

[WarrenC12]

Well this will help the PMB lose less money...

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Well this will help the PMB lose less money...

Except the mayor of New West is calling for lower tolls on the PMB while this rehabilitation is happening, so it might end up being a wash.

[DKaz]

As if the BC Government would reduce tolls on the Port Mann due to Translink work.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Except the mayor of New West is calling for lower tolls on the PMB while this rehabilitation is happening, so it might end up being a wash.

I can hear the laughing all the way from Victoria.

The MOT is probably loving this. They are taking a PR beating over the money losing bridge not anywhere near their predictions.

[MIPS]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Well this will help the PMB lose less money...

I'll just bypass to the Alex Fraser, personally and the SFPR makes that way easier than it used to be. As an out-of-region driver I'm not paying to cross some cruddy bridge that is a major link in the Trans Canada of all highways.

[red-paladin]

Originally Posted by MIPS

I'll just bypass to the Alex Fraser, personally and the SFPR makes that way easier than it used to be. As an out-of-region driver I'm not paying to cross some cruddy bridge that is a major link in the Trans Canada of all highways.

I bed $100 that instead of even driving you'd be sitting in the front seat of the Mk I with your face against the glass looking out for the new sections of power rail instead.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by MIPS

I'll just bypass to the Alex Fraser, personally and the SFPR makes that way easier than it used to be. As an out-of-region driver I'm not paying to cross some cruddy bridge that is a major link in the Trans Canada of all highways.

1. The new PMB is cruddy?

2. The AFB will be uber-jammed.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

2. The AFB will be uber-jammed.

That and the Queensborough Bridge are going to be absolute nightmares.

[paulsparrow]

Originally Posted by MIPS

I'll just bypass to the Alex Fraser, personally and the SFPR makes that way easier than it used to be. As an out-of-region driver I'm not paying to cross some cruddy bridge that is a major link in the Trans Canada of all highways.

You do realize that those that are already doing that are faced with long lineups trying to get onto the Nordel connector to enter the Alex Fraser. Most are now going south onto 91 and doing illegal u-turns at 72nd or turning onto 72nd and doing illegal u-turns there.

Of course Delta police are not capitalizing on the revenue stream they could be enjoying.