HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > SSP: Local Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2009, 5:57 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 26,066
there was/is a sign on hwy #1 just east of 152 that says there will be 10 minute closures overnight for some period of time i forget what the dates were - how much can they get done in 10 minutes? i don't know how frequent they are either
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2009, 6:15 PM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 8,450
I was just looking over the new (February 2009) alignments of the SFPR and one thing to me does not make sense. With the conversion of the SFPR #99 intersection into an interchange (smart idea) the entire length of the SFPR from the Deltaport Interchange to the Pattullo Bridge in a full freeway except 1 intersection (the Tilbury Intersection). Now I am thinking does it not make sense at this point to convert the Tilbury Intersection into a full interchange? Therefore it would become a full freeway at least between the #17 and the Alex Fraser Bridge. If not we are just going to have another highway 91 72nd intersection problem.

Of course I wish they were building the entire length as a freeway but at the very least it makes the most sense to make this one intersection an interchange.

Also when are we going to get to see the new Highway 1 alignments!?
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my video production website at: http://www.hailstorm-media.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2009, 7:29 PM
Stingray2004's Avatar
Stingray2004 Stingray2004 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: White Rock, BC (Metro Vancouver)
Posts: 1,948
One design flaw on the Hwy 1 upgrades that I hope will be reviewed...

And that is the 1st Avenue WB off-ramp/ EB on-ramp.

Traffic tends to become backed-up right onto the freeway on occasion leading to the westbound off-ramp. And alot of traffic also enters Hwy 1 EB from the on-ramp.

Currently, both Hwy 1 acceleration/deceleration merge lanes are TOO short and that does not change in the schematics.

I would prefer the extension of these 1st Ave. on/off ramps in both directions right up to the Boundary Road on-off ramps, which are in relative close proximity. One continuous auxilary lane.

It makes for much safer merging and smoother traffic flow.

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/gateway/PMH1...ce_Concept.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2009, 10:40 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 17,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stingray2004 View Post
One design flaw on the Hwy 1 upgrades that I hope will be reviewed...

And that is the 1st Avenue WB off-ramp/ EB on-ramp.

Traffic tends to become backed-up right onto the freeway on occasion leading to the westbound off-ramp. And alot of traffic also enters Hwy 1 EB from the on-ramp.

Currently, both Hwy 1 acceleration/deceleration merge lanes are TOO short and that does not change in the schematics.

I would prefer the extension of these 1st Ave. on/off ramps in both directions right up to the Boundary Road on-off ramps, which are in relative close proximity. One continuous auxilary lane.

It makes for much safer merging and smoother traffic flow.

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/gateway/PMH1...ce_Concept.pdf
That concern is going to be addressed - an extra lane will be added for the exit and on-ramps.

See video presentation here:

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/gateway/info...%20Interchange

Other video presentations for each intrchange along the project here:

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/gateway/info...mprovs_vid.htm
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 2:03 AM
Stingray2004's Avatar
Stingray2004 Stingray2004 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: White Rock, BC (Metro Vancouver)
Posts: 1,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by officedweller View Post
That concern is going to be addressed - an extra lane will be added for the exit and on-ramps.

See video presentation here:

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/gateway/info...%20Interchange
Thanks OD for the links!

Nevertheless, west of Grandview, the "core lane" cross-section will still comprise ONLY 6 THRU lanes.

I reckon that the section between 1st Ave and Boundary Road should be 6-lanes + 2 auxilary lanes for merging (extended between both interchanges) and that concept is still not contemplated in the preliminary design.

Currently, in both directions, traffic slows down too quickly (seeing brake lights are common) due to the close proximity of the on/off ramps of the closely spaced interchanges with the concurrent weaving.

That area, west of Grandview, likely comprises the closest spaced array of interchanges/on-off ramps along the entire system. And that always spells potential trouble (ie. potential accidents) unless appropriate design modifications are implemented.

Typically that could involve some stepped-down form of c/d system albeit additional auxilary lanes will probably suffice in this instance.

Hopefully, further design modifications will be made as we've seen with the SFPR.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 2:11 AM
Canadian Mind's Avatar
Canadian Mind Canadian Mind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,853
Thought the whole system was going to have a series of expressway lanes and auxillary lanes from Port Mann to Ironworkers?
__________________
"you're eating chicken periods" - Vid
"I love eggs, especially the ones with runny yolks" - Me
"EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, you're disgusting!" - Vid
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 2:25 AM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,522
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Mind View Post
Thought the whole system was going to have a series of expressway lanes and auxillary lanes from Port Mann to Ironworkers?
Of course not. That would be like the 401.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 2:33 AM
Canadian Mind's Avatar
Canadian Mind Canadian Mind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
Of course not. That would be like the 401.
Aside from the 401s immense size at 18 lanes, how is that a bad thing for a region with less than half the population to have a freeway with less than half the lanes or the 401, but in a similar design manner?
__________________
"you're eating chicken periods" - Vid
"I love eggs, especially the ones with runny yolks" - Me
"EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, you're disgusting!" - Vid
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 2:45 AM
Whalleyboy's Avatar
Whalleyboy Whalleyboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by twoNeurons View Post
You mean like the rapid lines that will be in the middle of the new 10-lane bridge?
i thought the plans was to be under the road deck not in the middle
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 3:07 AM
GeeCee's Avatar
GeeCee GeeCee is online now
zoom zoom
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Posts: 1,939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whalleyboy View Post
i thought the plans was to be under the road deck not in the middle
Nope. There are light rail provisions under the bridge. The rapidbus lanes will be the inside lane in each direction in the middle of the bridge.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 3:13 AM
Maersk Maersk is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeeCee View Post
Nope. There are light rail provisions under the bridge. The rapidbus lanes will be the inside lane in each direction in the middle of the bridge.
*rapidbus/HOV lane
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 4:04 AM
surrey1 surrey1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 53
anyone know what the height is going to be? based on the renderings it looks like it could be around 700 feet. would that make it the tallest structure in bc?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 4:40 AM
Maersk Maersk is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 21
Was just snooping around the Fort McMurray Construction thread. Apparently an area in ALberta called Wood Buffalo is getting a 10 lane highway. Anyone else puzzled at the fact that they're getting one before Metro Vancouver is?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 5:04 AM
DKaz DKaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Fleetwood, Surrey BC
Posts: 2,975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maersk View Post
Was just snooping around the Fort McMurray Construction thread. Apparently an area in ALberta called Wood Buffalo is getting a 10 lane highway. Anyone else puzzled at the fact that they're getting one before Metro Vancouver is?
I haven't checked to confirm but Alberta's a lot cheaper to build roads through and they can afford it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 5:36 AM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SEFC, Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,245
Wood Buffalo is the name of the overall area surrounding Fort Mac. I am surprised to see a 10 lane highway. That seems totally of out whack. Most of the highway up there is just two lanes, just twinning it would make a world of difference.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 6:18 AM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,522
Alberta has sprawling cities and don't know how to plan. WE do. End of story.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 7:51 AM
Maersk Maersk is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
Alberta has sprawling cities and don't know how to plan. WE do. End of story.
Well we definitely don't have sprawl here. But I don't think we know how to plan either lol
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 7:54 AM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,522
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maersk View Post
Well we definitely don't have sprawl here. But I don't think we know how to plan either lol
Calgary? =S
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 7:55 AM
Maersk Maersk is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
Calgary? =S
???
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 7:57 AM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,522
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maersk View Post
???
Sprawl as in.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
   
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > SSP: Local Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:25 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.