Pattullo Bridge replacement - Construction begins in the summer of 2019
 

The new four-lane Pattullo Bridge will provide important improvements for everyone using the bridge, including people who are driving, cycling or walking, as well as communities on either side of the bridge, including:

A safer crossing for all bridge users with modern, wider lanes, separated by a centre median barrier
Dedicated walking and cycling lanes, separated from traffic by a median on both sides of the bridge
Better connections to, from and near the bridge
Construction will begin in the summer of 2019 and the new bridge will open in 2023. Once the new bridge is open, the existing bridge will be removed.

The Project will cost $1.377 billion and be delivered, funded and owned by the Province of B.C.

https://engage.gov.bc.ca/pattullobridge/

Is it 4 total lanes or 4 lanes each direction?

Hey guys, let's replace an aging 4 lane bridge with.....a $1.377 billion 4 lane bridge.

Fucking idiots running New West.

In context, it has to be 4 lanes total otherwise it would be an English fail (otherwise it would read new EIGHT lane Pattullo Bridge) .

Don't worry though. Five years after it's built, one lane will be converted to a bike lane.

So 8 years to build and then tolls.

Half lane for cars, half lane for pedestrians, 1 lane for bikes. :lawl:

You know it's gonna happen. look at the Burrard Street bridge.

Can't stand the ignorance behind these New West city planners. Don't they realize that their stupid little town is a massive crossroads for every other city around it? It's like they're trying to actively make traffic terrible so people don't want to drive through. I remember driving eastbound through there around 4-5pm, the bridge traffic would be backed up to Douglas College most days. And they really want to keep the number of lanes the same? What a joke.

so the new 4 lane bridge is going to be exactly what they have now except new and wider lanes with a centre divider...

I'm sure NW can (and will) find a way to stonewall the construction, but at the end of the day, Pattulo is a TransLink asset, and NW is only 1 out of many in the Metro Van mayor council. If Crusty can force a Massey replacement down Richmond and Delta's throat, certainly Horgan can force a Puttalo replacement down NW's throat, since Surrey is onboard for a replacement bridge?

I'm actually more surprised how people use news of the Pattulo replacement as ammo to blast Horgan / NDP for not going ahead with the Massey replacement. Both are choke points to traffic, and need remediation one way or another, esp in regards to safety concerns. So Horgan chose Pattulo over Massey -- big whoopty doo~

Let's get some shovels to the ground and get to work already.

I think one of the reason for the 4 lane bridge is that it will take a substantial upgrade to adjacent arterial roads which will be a very difficult task price and land use changes

My thought was that it should be 6 lanes... but I trust that the traffic engineers looked at the various scenarios and this makes the most sense. Due to increases in modal shift, and the future advancement of ride sharing (hopefully!) and autonomous vehicles, it could be enough capacity.

Is there any document out there that compares the costs of building a 4 lane or 6 lane bridge replacement?

AHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAH

sorry guys, we're worried about too much traffic gain from this bridge built too big, so we will just keep it the same.

:rofl:

so there's no mention of it being expandable to a 6 lane bridge...
i think a well designed 4 lane bridge is enough right now, but what about in 30 years?

Bear in mind that with the newer, wider lanes, travel speed will be faster and safer. Accidents and how traffic will be impeded will reduce, and there wouldn't be nightly lane closures either. Plus, with the dedicated walking and biking lanes, I'm sure the new bridge would already be substantially wider than the existing one.

Of course having 3 lanes each way would be nice, but the constrains and requirements might not make them feasible.

more lane does not actually equate to improving traffic flow. That was one of the mistakes witnessed in LA (just look at how much grid lock traffic gets on their 8 lane highways).

A wider and barrier separated highway will help improve the overall speed.

LOL, you are giving them way too much credit.

"Traffic engineers", have you ever met one of these so called traffic engineers? I've met two people who work for the province who do traffic planning studies, they were both graduates out of the BCIT urban planning diploma program. If your thinking to yourself, wait what the fuck, you are right, that's the same program that really only teaches you about zoning and densification, and how to plan park spaces, and houses, etc. It's a bullshit program.

These people have no idea what the fuck they are talking about, or how what they do will impact things on a larger scale. The same way a process engineer cannot tell me how changing a thickener from 300m3 tank to a 450m3 tank will affect the throughput in a mine.

It's all bullshit, and you can see it in the shitty studies they do.

Even in the rare case someone with an actual level of experience does some sort of useful work to plan something out, the final decision is always made by some fucking bean counter. So really what's the fucking point.

If you want an example on proper future planning, and proper expansion planning for growth, you should see the crazy studies that are done for YVR. Those studies are actually worth something.

:facepalm:

say they have funding in 10 years to improve all the roads and add extra lanes around the bridge but they didn't add more bridge lanes.

what then?

Majority of these traffic studies are conducted by consultants / private engineering firms. The blame is more towards higher level VPs / government officials who focus on the dollar figure for the project.

To some extent I agree with your post that certain engineers do not make the best decisions. But they are just following guidelines and standards to avoid ruining their professional accreditation.

To build an effective bridge connection requires more than just a bridge, you have to consider funding for better arterial roads, traffic signals, land use changes, etc..

The cost for this bridge is cheap, but it will cost a lot more if we want to really see improvements to the overall traffic network within a 5km radius of this project. Planning for YVR and a bridge for a municipality is comparing apples to oranges IMO... different business/planning/engineering standards.

is it a coincidence that the first thing the NDP did when they got to power was stop the massey tunnel replacement, and 6 months later announce a new puttello bridge. and all of Delta, White Rock and the highway 99 corridor voted Liberal, and almost all of Surrey and New West voted NDP?

What they need to do is turn Burnett’s/Columbia/front street into a highway 17 style ring road so you can easily drive from Vancouver/richmond/queensborough through new west to Coquitlam and highway 1. That would be way easier

That is always a possibility, and the partisianship accusation will never be laid to rest no matter what anyone says. At the same time, I will also say that the forced start on the Massey was a blantant push by Christy Clark and the Libs as part of their election bid. It was basically a "vote me and you will see a new Massey bridge" type of thing.

Personally, I maintain the view that both Massey and Puttalo are in dire need of replacement. The Massey is a glaring seismic hazard and a traffic clusterfuck during "rush hour", and the Pattulo is literally falling apart and a deadly (traffic) accident hot spot.

IIRC, Delta is supportive of a Massey tunnel replacement, but not on the terms dictated by the Libs. Richmond was against a Massey tunnel replacement, saying that the entire stretch along Hwy 99 needs upgrading to bring meaningful improvement to ease traffic flow. Richmond (and possibly other municipalities) has also accused the Libs of not consulting / inadequate consultation with the municipalities on the construction.

With the Pattulo, I seem to think only NW is against a replacement; Surrey is supportive of it. In that sense, it can easily be argued that there is more (municipal) support for the Puttalo project to go ahead, so I am not surprised to see the Pattulo getting priority over Massey.

Does it really need a bike lane/walkway.. I’ve never seen anyone use it

i drive that area almost every day for work... imo the "constraints" of building a wider bridge arent really there.. the surrey side is all industrial with plenty of room for expansion and the NW side could easilly be revamped to support a much wider bridge.. Look at what they did with the Port mann when there were essentially 2 bridges at the same time.

Infastructure should be planned for TEN TIMES the current usage, not fucking built and already behind the current usage... wtf..

Hondaracer, I'd say the biggest "constraint" is always $$ -- as in, how much the prov gov is willing to put in to get something done.

It'd sure be nice to drive a Porsche. But when I am only willing / capable of buying a Hyundai, a Hyundai is what I'm going to get.

I'd rather drive my oil-leaking rusted shit bucket and have money in savings than buy a Hyundai.