The SFPR will take trucks off 104 ave.
is not a bad assumption to make. Truth spoken. However, there is no way to assess exactly how much truck traffic could be anticipate to move off 104th and 108th Aves and how much capacity will be needed to handle what's left and the growth. And, yes, there will be growth. The assumption that the opening of a bypass corridor will remove nearly all of the commercial traffic in between the highway that connects the city with the rest of the country and what is growing to become one of the largest business and regional centers in Metro Vancouver and the Fraser Valley and make a capacity reduction on that corridor acceptable is just plain silly. It would be economic and political suicide. We need to look at the important base holds on both side of the map: City Centre and... ahem.... the rest of Canada. There's a reason why in a survey of several city corridors and entrances, 104th Ave saw the largest congestion growth rate in a yearly period. I may have made many observations myself but don't look at me, look at the published statistical data that reports what I just said
Also, the direct alternative to the SFPR in case an accident or some other event were to force its closure is....
And there aren't any schools fronting 100 Ave either
And you don't know this community as well as I do. There are three schools that either do front or come within 1 block of 100th Ave, one of them being a major secondary enrolling 1400 students where you can expect hundreds of them to be interacting with the road during the morning, lunch time and after school hours. However, that's not really what I like to center my discussions on - because as I was mentioning, there are far more problems to deal with than just schools. Forcing 100th Ave (which, by the way, doesn't even connect to Fleetwood) to attain importance and become the shoulder for commercial traffic that won't disappear will destroy its already terrible (and in need of improvement) viability as an east-west cycling corridor, unless you propose the expropriation of significant parts of Kingston Gardens, T&T, and other properties in Guildford for the addition of a dedicated cycling lane while maintaining an existing road capacity that would need to grow. If there is any east-west corridor in this city that deserves a reduction in vehicular capacity in favour of a multi-modal context and to favour a viability to the local rather than regional context, it is 100th Ave.
The sad but true fact is 100th Avenue is just not an alternative - and it's never going to be one.
I'm going to have to be trusted with this assumption: the community will not tolerate such a modification on 100th Ave. An attempted re-purposing of 100th to a primary regional commuter arterial and (by need, to a) fully unrestricted commercial corridor - which essentially destroy its viability as an east-west cycling route and would need to include a widening through Green Timbers - will be met by fierce opposition from locals and school staff, MPs and MLAs, and cyclists. The political context is already difficult with the need to widen Fraser Highway through Green Timbers.