[thumper]

http://www.translink.ca/pattullorehab

This work is expected to extend the life of the bridge until a replacement is built. At this point, we expect a replacement bridge could take five to seven years to build.

Between April 29 and Oct. 3, drivers can expect the following:

The bridge will be closed from the evening of April 29 to the morning of May 2 to allow crews to set up for construction work. The bridge will also close from the evening of Sept. 30 (8 p.m.) to the morning of Oct. 3 (5 a.m.) for crews to remove equipment.
From May 2 to Sept. 30, the bridge will remain open with one lane in each direction.
Truck access will be maintained
The bridge will be closed to all traffic two nights a week and one weekend a month. Read our Closure Schedule for details about upcoming closures.
The Pattullo Bridge is one of the busiest crossings in the Lower Mainland and we expect increased congestion and delays in the area during construction. Drivers should expect traffic delays on feeder routes to the Pattullo Bridge at all times.

Check out the various Travel Tools to see how you can TravelSmart.



What We're Doing

Work will focus on essential deck repairs to address concrete delamination on sections of the bridge. Crews will:

mill off the asphalt surfacing from the deck;
remove all deck concrete down to the top layer of rebar;
repair concrete delamination, clean or replace rebar; and
repave the whole deck area with a concrete overlay.

... FML. 5 months. as if my work commute wasn't a living hell already :cry:

[The_AK]

tbh that bridge IS a piece of junk

[originalhypa]

Driving under the Patullo on the hwy 17 is a trip into history. The bridge is a true steel workers project. It's riveted together piece by piece, and aside from the modern structural additions over the last few years, it is a piece of history.

Rehab the bridge?

That thing needs to be replaced with a proper bridge.

[plat27265]

Metro Vancouver need to get off their butts and start building the replacement to Pattullo Bridge. I am sure frequent users of Pattullo will not be happy with bridge tolls especially if is a flat rate that does not reward frequent users. I wish the bridge authority would implement some kind of frequent user discount. If Port Mann Bridge had this kind of discount plan, I am sure users would use it more which will lessen traffic on the Pattullo. Less traffic means less wear and tear on the Pattullo, too.

[yray]

or tell New west to quit stalling

[BoostedBB6]

Build a new bridge = new toll

[unit]

if they build a proper 4 lane bridge and toll it, they wont need a 6 lane bridge, and the tolling costs could potentially be lower. new west wants a 4 lane, surrey wants a 6 lane.

[originalhypa]

or tell New west to quit stalling

New West is a shitty borough with shitty management. That's why they're in such shambles. Like the Port Moody and White Rock mayors and councillors, they're so against progress that they're allowing their asset to stagnate.

The last time I went to White Rock, you could tell where South Surrey ended. Just past that it was liquor stores, nail salons, and dusty old businesses.

Build a new bridge = new toll

They're all going to be tolled if translink has their way.

[Great68]

if they build a proper 4 lane bridge and toll it, they wont need a 6 lane bridge, and the tolling costs could potentially be lower. new west wants a 4 lane, surrey wants a 6 lane.

Where would all 6 lanes go on the new west side?
None of the arterial roads on that side there have much room for expansion without major expropriations of residential & park land. So what would an extra 2 bridge lanes accomplish?

[Gucci Mane]

Where would all 6 lanes go on the new west side?
None of the arterial roads on that side there have much room for expansion without major expropriations of residential & park land. So what would an extra 2 bridge lanes accomplish?

i was wondering the same thing lol.

[unit]

trust me i live on columbia street, i dont want a 6 lane either.
right now patullo is only congested because the port mann is tolled. if both get tolled they'd only need a 4 lane is what im saying.
its the surrey side that wants a 6 lane that is the issue

[Traum]

New West is a shitty borough with shitty management. That's why they're in such shambles. Like the Port Moody and White Rock mayors and councillors, they're so against progress that they're allowing their asset to stagnate.

For what it is worth, I actually think the Port Moody mayor (Mike Clay) is very pro-bussines and pro-development, almost to the point of ignoring the Port Moody residents' complains. The councilors, on the other hand, seem to have some better heads screwed down to their bodies.

Their OCP (official community plan) is quite new, and seem to have a good overall plan catering to a good balance between development and long term residency. However, with it being such a new plan, there are stills lots of holes and oversights. Developers know this game and are doing everything they can to exploit them while they last.

[yray]

4 lanes to mcbride? 2 dedicated to columbia?

If you don't do that, its gonna be steveston and #5 in new west lol

[thumper]

let's also not forget that front st. in new west is currently shut down until july for the parkade demolition. truck traffic has been fubar'd since february. i can't wait to see the gong show once the patullo work starts :facepalm:

[320icar]

I'd be 100% fine if they tolled every bridge in metro Vancouver maybe $0.25 a crossing. That way everyone pays in to it and people wouldn't avoid the new bridges because they don't want to pay $4.50 or whatevee

[BoostedBB6]

I'm just glad I do not use the bridges any more......living out in the country has its perks :P

[Traum]

I'd be 100% fine if they tolled every bridge in metro Vancouver maybe $0.25 a crossing. That way everyone pays in to it and people wouldn't avoid the new bridges because they don't want to pay $4.50 or whatevee
Theoretically, I would personally be supportive of tolling every damn bridge / tunnel in Metro Vancouver with a nominal toll as well. But the problem is, we have the current Liberal / Crusty government in charge. That means if this bridge tolling plan were to come through, all revenue raise through this means would all fxxking go back to the provincial general revenues again, instead of actually going into a traffic / infrastructure-related account. If somehow a miracle happens, and the bridge toll revenues end up getting spent on traffic / infrastructure, the provincial government would reduce the traffic / infrastructure budgets so that there'll be no net gains.

[fliptuner]

Where would all 6 lanes go on the new west side?


The new NFPR, that connects Port Mann, Pattullo, Queensborough and Knight Street bridges. :whistle:

[vitaminG]

I am sure frequent users of Pattullo will not be happy with bridge tolls especially if is a flat rate that does not reward frequent users. I wish the bridge authority would implement some kind of frequent user discount. If Port Mann Bridge had this kind of discount plan, I am sure users would use it more which will lessen traffic on the Pattullo.

There is a discount. $155 gives unlimited usage. I take it everyday and I'm more than happy to pay toll for the time and fuel savings

[adambomb]

Remove the Pattullo all together. Take some pics, put 'em in a museum and tear that bridge down. :grenade:

Build the new 6-8 lane bridge everyone is asking for North/South from Schoolhouse in Coquitlam to King George in Surrey, with exits to United Blvd and SFPR. Use a map for reference. I know its very close to the Port Mann but we need another bridge across the Fraser river and the Pattullo neighbouhoods on both sides are pretty much jammed.

The damage has been done in New West with the new condos and this would give Surrey the option to de-ghetto the Scott Road neighbourhood. Creating new waterfront neighbourhoods for Canadians and their foreign next door neighbours while leaving the existing, operating rail system for them to live with.

There isn't an option to remove the rail system on either side of the river in the current location of the Pattullo. The area i'm proposing is industrial land with rail on both sides. A new bridge and construction during evening hours on industrial land would hopefully see fewer complaints from Metro Vancouver NIMBY's.

[plat27265]

There is a discount. $155 gives unlimited usage. I take it everyday and I'm more than happy to pay toll for the time and fuel savings

I didn't realize there was a one time $155 unlimited usage plan. Yes, for those that use it everyday it's a no brainer. I do not use the Port Mann often. Once in a while but not everyday.

[plat27265]

Remove the Pattullo all together. Take some pics, put 'em in a museum and tear that bridge down. :grenade:

Build the new 6-8 lane bridge everyone is asking for North/South from Schoolhouse in Coquitlam to King George in Surrey, with exits to United Blvd and SFPR. Use a map for reference. I know its very close to the Port Mann but we need another bridge across the Fraser river and the Pattullo neighbouhoods on both sides are pretty much jammed.

The damage has been done in New West with the new condos and this would give Surrey the option to de-ghetto the Scott Road neighbourhood. Creating new waterfront neighbourhoods for Canadians and their foreign next door neighbours while leaving the existing, operating rail system for them to live with.

There isn't an option to remove the rail system on either side of the river in the current location of the Pattullo. The area i'm proposing is industrial land with rail on both sides. A new bridge and construction during evening hours on industrial land would hopefully see fewer complaints from Metro Vancouver NIMBY's.

Lougheed Highway and the current traffic/road design won't be able to accommodate traffic from a 6 to 8 lane bridge and the Port Mann at the same time. I live around the area and I can imagine how bad traffic will become.

Lougheed Eastbound from Colony farm piles up because of PoCo residential traffic. It extends all the way to Pinetree. Lougheed westbound between Schoolhouse and Braid St. has 4 traffic lights that back traffic up during the morning commute. Plus, traffic lights along Braid Street back traffic up all the way to Coquitlam during rush hour.

Port Mann is just close by. Actually too close for a second bridge.

[adambomb]

Change the road design, intersections and traffic lights to accommodate the new bridge. It has to be done. The Coquitlam intersections you speak of are in industrial areas with very little residential neighbourhoods in comparison to New West and the current Pattullo. Schoolhouse has a movie theater and Cactus Club, Braid as rail on one side and Hospital on the other. The condos in that area of New West are already built or have been given the green light to start.

Stand on Lougheed Hwy near Schoolhouse and tell me how far you have to throw a rock to hit a house. Do the same on Columbia St in New west. The idea is to minimize disruption to residential neighbourhoods as much as possible.


We need another bridge, no matter how close it is to the Port Mann. Has anyone driven the Port Mann/ Hwy 1 at 7:00am on a Tuesday? I thought we just built a new bridge with Highway expansion. It looks like 2003 on Hwy 1 at 7:00am.

No need to imagine how bad traffic will get. Look at in now with our "new" bridge. Pinetree/Colony farms is going to get worse no matter how we play it. We need road infrastructure before neighbourhoods. Not the other way around.

:yuno:

[fliptuner]

I didn't realize there was a one time $155 unlimited usage plan. Yes, for those that use it everyday it's a no brainer. I do not use the Port Mann often. Once in a while but not everyday.

Monthly.

[plat27265]

Change the road design, intersections and traffic lights to accommodate the new bridge. It has to be done. The Coquitlam intersections you speak of are in industrial areas with very little residential neighbourhoods in comparison to New West and the current Pattullo. Schoolhouse has a movie theater and Cactus Club, Braid as rail on one side and Hospital on the other. The condos in that area of New West are already built or have been given the green light to start.

Stand on Lougheed Hwy near Schoolhouse and tell me how far you have to throw a rock to hit a house. Do the same on Columbia St in New west. The idea is to minimize disruption to residential neighbourhoods as much as possible.


We need another bridge, no matter how close it is to the Port Mann. Has anyone driven the Port Mann/ Hwy 1 at 7:00am on a Tuesday? I thought we just built a new bridge with Highway expansion. It looks like 2003 on Hwy 1 at 7:00am.

No need to imagine how bad traffic will get. Look at in now with our "new" bridge. Pinetree/Colony farms is going to get worse no matter how we play it. We need road infrastructure before neighbourhoods. Not the other way around.

:yuno:

As a resident of Maillardville, I am sorry but I have to disagree with your proposal. For the same reason you gave about minimizing disruption to residential neighborhoods. Maillardville will be innundated with traffic. There is no way this section of Lougheed and Braid will be able to accommodate all that traffic coming off of HWY#1 and King George (where your proposed second bridge will come from). Braid Street is too narrow and there's tons of traffic lights along that street that slows down traffic coming from Lougheed Highway trying to get on HWY #1.

Lougheed eastbound experiences bad traffic during rush hour because this is the main road that residents use coming from Coquitlam East and Port Coquitlam. When the train is running, intersections from Lougheed in PoCo neighborhoods are backed up.

You have to live in this area to experience how bad traffic gets over here. Even if you widen Lougheed from Colony Farm all the way to Pinetree, the arterial roads going into various areas in Central and East Coquitlam and PoCo won't be able to deal with the volume of traffic.

[adambomb]

Bro. You can't disagree with my proposal without offering a viable alternative. c'mon man.

I live in Coquitlam as well and deal with the Pinetree/colony farms on a daily basis.

we need new road infrastructure immediately across metro Vancouver. Saying traffic is bad and my neighborhood wont handle increased volume is just plain nimbyism.

Like I said, if you think traffic in our hood is bad now. Wait until you really see the effects of a closed Pattullo. Increased traffic is coming to both our neighborhoods and we have to either deal with it or change current road configurations.

BrokeBack

[supafamous]

Remove the Pattullo all together. Take some pics, put 'em in a museum and tear that bridge down. :grenade:

Build the new 6-8 lane bridge everyone is asking for North/South from Schoolhouse in Coquitlam to King George in Surrey, with exits to United Blvd and SFPR. Use a map for reference. I know its very close to the Port Mann but we need another bridge across the Fraser river and the Pattullo neighbouhoods on both sides are pretty much jammed.

The damage has been done in New West with the new condos and this would give Surrey the option to de-ghetto the Scott Road neighbourhood. Creating new waterfront neighbourhoods for Canadians and their foreign next door neighbours while leaving the existing, operating rail system for them to live with.

There isn't an option to remove the rail system on either side of the river in the current location of the Pattullo. The area i'm proposing is industrial land with rail on both sides. A new bridge and construction during evening hours on industrial land would hopefully see fewer complaints from Metro Vancouver NIMBY's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess%27_paradox

Braess Paradox bro. More road != Less Congestion.

More roads invariably lead to the same amount of congestion over time. The only things that reduce congestion is transit and making neighbourhoods more liveable.

I love driving but making more roads doesn't solve anything, it only makes it worse. It encourages sprawl which leads to more cars which leads to more roads which leads to more cars.....

Getting cars off the roads and localizing travel is what we need to do.

[plat27265]

Bro. You can't disagree with my proposal without offering a viable alternative. c'mon man.

I live in Coquitlam as well and deal with the Pinetree/colony farms on a daily basis.

we need new road infrastructure immediately across metro Vancouver. Saying traffic is bad and my neighborhood wont handle increased volume is just plain nimbyism.

Like I said, if you think traffic in our hood is bad now. Wait until you really see the effects of a closed Pattullo.

BrokeBack

I am not in opposition with you on a new bridge across the river. I totally support another bridge. However, forcing your idea of a N-S bridge that connects SFPR (HWY #17) and Schoolhouse won't be feasible. There was a proposal that was presented not too long ago about your idea of a bridge connecting SFPR and King Edward (not Schoolhouse). That didn't fly for some reason.

As for an alternate solution, I should have shared two ideas: (1) build a twin of the Pattullo and have 2 bridges side by side each accommodating one way traffic. While the new one is being built, old Pattullo is open for traffic. Or, (2) a bridge that connects SFPR (HWY #17) cor Bridgeview Road to an bridge that spans the Fraser River and crossing over United Blvd and terminating into HWY 1 between Braid and the Coquitlam exit.

Peace and cheers, bro!

[tiger_handheld]

why can't we just charge .50 for all bridges and 1.00 for port mann and golden ears.
like seriously. why the hell is this so hard to understand? The capital outlay to build the toll structure shouldn't be super duper since technology and expertise is already available with treo --- economies of scale!

[Everymans]

If i were playing sim city i'd just demolish all of lower new west minister from highway 1 to queensburough and build a proper highway along with a shorter height bridge then restrict large boats from going further up the river. Make it some cheap 50 million trestle bridge with a proper interchange on the other side with no lights or none of that crap. Build the entire highway into the side of the mountain to send all the noise to the river and away from the city then build a properly flowing quieter city above.

Might be a bit of a stretch but it might be possible to fill in the shores of the fraser and build a highway on that to avoid the entire city...

Since both those options are never going to happen, and it's doubtful a new bridge will do much to alleviate traffic since you have so many lights on the other side, I think the best option is to give everyone free parking at every skytrain and make it a single fare for a 90 minute ride anywhere in the city then toll every bridge 1$. Would cut out so many pointless trips across the bridge that only ad to the congestion and would promote transiting instead.

[foodtruck]

More roads invariably lead to the same amount of congestion over time.

100x this. The roads are congested for a variety of reasons and number of lanes sits very low on the list.

I cringe every time I recall driving once from Seattle during afternoon rush hour. There were lanes everywhere and yet everything was still crawling. More lanes means more frustrated lane changes and more pressure to be in the right lane for the right exits, which in turn means more accidents. We have at least one or two almost every day on major arteries when everyone is heading home, and then Port Mann or Hwy1 around Boundary get clogged up even though they both have plenty of lanes. People's inability to keep their distance and zip merge is probably part of the reason.

Separate from that, there are ways to make traffic more efficient with relatively low number of lanes. However, the next problem is that doing things such as eliminating left turns (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2014/04/09/the-case-for-almost-never-turning-left-while-driving/) or introducing more traffic circles would confuse the hell out of the general driving public.

[Nlkko]

Yep leaving SEA to VAN during rush hours is a nightmare with no accident. If theres an accident, you might as well take an hour nap. God forbid if you didnt take the express lane out of downtown....

More roads or bridges is not the permanent solution for traffic congestion. Having less drivers behind the wheel is. I'm ok with making driving so much more expensive that most people need to adapt to public transport. I think that's where we're heading anyways.

[swiftshift]

Unfortunate for people whom commute west or east..
Now need a long detour or forced to pay TREO

[adambomb]

Public transportation is only useful if you have a point A to point B type job. home - office - home.

Is a plumber just supposed to load their tools and 20 ft long pieces of pipe on the sky train?

Sales and marketing. Don't worry just put your display cases and oversized samples in the disabled seating section of the train.

Did you just order a pizza? don't worry. the delivery guy is on the B-line. Should be there in hour and thirty minutes.

:pokerface:

[thumper]

just another unhappy reminder to those of us who have to deal with the patullo... closures starts this april 29th in the evening:

Change habits now in anticipation of Pattullo congestion, says New Westminster mayor - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/change-habits-anticipation-pattullo-closures-new-westminster-mayor-1.3538455)

http://i.cbc.ca/1.2451522.1460755832!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/16x9_620/pattullo-bridge-fight-heats-up-between-surrey-and-new-west.jpg

Major rehabilitation work on the Pattullo Bridge won't begin until the end of April but New Westminster's mayor is encouraging drivers to adjust their routes now.

TransLink says the bridge averages between 60,000 and 80,000 trips a day. Many drivers will be forced to take the tolled Port Mann, the Alex Fraser or commute by transit with closures expected to last for months.

"We are expecting there to be increased congestion and delays in the road network near the [span] and anyone who has the opportunity to find an alternative route or switch their travel periods to different times, we would be recommending that they do that," New Westminster Mayor Jonathan Cote said.

Cote does not believe the project will ultimately ease traffic congestion in his city.

"Even though it will be less traffic going through, there will be more queuing and waiting to get onto the bridge. We're unfortunately probably going to have just as much disruption, if not more with these lane closures," he said. "But we are hoping that traffic will start to adjust so we don't really face a negative situation."

He hopes the increased congestion doesn't start to filter over to residential neighbourhoods, keeping traffic on regional routes.

Closed from the evening of April 29 to the morning of May 2 to allow crews to set up for construction work.
Open one lane in each direction from May 2 to September 30.
Closed from the evening of September 30 to the morning of October 3 for crews to remove equipment.
Closed to all traffic two nights a week and one weekend a month until October 3.
The repairs are expected to cost $100 million and TransLink says the 78-year-old bridge, one of the oldest in the region, needs comprehensive deck rehabilitation and seismic upgrades to maintain its safety.

Up until now the bridge has been maintained with patch jobs through a series of summer closures, but TransLink says major repairs are now needed to keep the bridge safe.

Cost to businesses

Closures on a major commuter span will likely mean it takes more time to move goods around the region according to Surrey Board of Trade CEO Anita Huberman.

Although she supports the work being done, she says it's going to hurt the bottom line for many businesses.

"When they're caught in traffic, that is a cost. When they're caught in congestion that is a cost to business," she said.

She's also urging people and businesses to look now for different options to get around the region.

"That includes the Port Mann, which is a tolled option. The Alex Fraser I imagine will be completely congested because that's a free option."

[smoothie.]

Translink spending $100 million to repair the bridge.

In 2 years Translink will spend $XXX million tearing it down and building a new one.

:fulloffuck:

[godwin]

or we can have an earthquake like kumamoto and knock it down right after we had finish refurbing it.. all done in 2 minutes! ;)

Translink spending $100 million to repair the bridge.

In 2 years Translink will spend $XXX million tearing it down and building a new one.

:fulloffuck:

[melloman]

Patullo's main issues:

Bridge must be demolished and reconstructed in THE SAME SPOT.
You have the train bridge on the East and the Skytrain on the West, and if those weren't bad enough, you only have a small corridor of space on the New West side because of residential housing.

Now if you were to move the bridge, you only have 1 option: East. Go towards Braid, because downtown New West is West and there is no viable landing for a bridge anywhere there with the Quay.

Patullo is built where it is solely because the Fraser gets much thinner there, making the crossing a shorter span. As proposed, going to Schoolhouse would almost DOUBLE the span, and that's not a cheap bridge to make just afew km's down from a WAAAAAY overpriced Portmann.

GLHF, I don't see the Patullo being rebuilt until it collapses and there are casualties. :facepalm:

[DragonChi]

Is it single lane traffic in each direction the entire day, between April 29 and Sept?

[thumper]

Is it single lane traffic in each direction the entire day, between April 29 and Sept?

from my post above:

Closed from the evening of April 29 to the morning of May 2 to allow crews to set up for construction work.
Open one lane in each direction from May 2 to September 30.
Closed from the evening of September 30 to the morning of October 3 for crews to remove equipment.
Closed to all traffic two nights a week and one weekend a month until October 3.

[Liquid_o2]

Translink spending $100 million to repair the bridge.

In 2 years Translink will spend $XXX million tearing it down and building a new one.

:fulloffuck:

Translink wanted to build a new bridge. The transportation plebiscite killed that opportunity. Now they gotta do what they gotta do.

[MarkyMark]

Ah the putullo, nothing wakes you up in the morning better than the ass clenching terror of a semi pulling up next to you on one side, and the strong presence of reinforced plastic separating you from a head on collision on the other side. All in a lane fit for a vehicle the size of a Tonka truck.

[thumper]

Ah the putullo, nothing wakes you up in the morning better than the ass clenching terror of a semi pulling up next to you on one side, and the strong presence of reinforced plastic separating you from a head on collision on the other side. All in a lane fit for a vehicle the size of a Tonka truck.

what you said pretty much brackets my work day :cry:

[Traum]

Translink wanted to build a new bridge. The transportation plebiscite killed that opportunity. Now they gotta do what they gotta do.
Especially when it comes to crucial public infrastructure, I just don't understand why the government (municipal, provincial, and federal) cannot go into debt to come up with the necessary funds to fund the project. The plebiscite wasn't only just a loud and clear protest from the citizens that Metro Vancouver do not want a new transit tax, it was also every bit as much of a protest against the completely incompetent body otherwise known as TransLink.

[thumper]

https://youtu.be/NNax7dRT_XE

[yray]

are those tolls in the last part?

[thumper]

are those tolls in the last part?

see #2:

Pattullo Bridge: 5 things you may not have known - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/pattullo-bridge-5-things-you-didn-t-know-1.3564197)

[thumper]

wow. just wasting time here because my work meeting got canceled because those people who were supposed to be in attendance are stuck behind a dead semi blocking the bridge and this came up on my newsfeed:

All Pattullo Bridge lanes to open Aug. 29

All four lanes of the Pattullo Bridge will open to traffic on Aug. 29 after construction crews complete work on the deck of the Pattullo Bridge one month early. To prepare the bridge for four lanes of traffic, the Pattullo Bridge will be closed:

8 p.m. Wednesday, Aug. 24 to 5 a.m. Thursday, Aug. 25.
8 p.m. Thursday, Aug. 25 to 5 a.m. Friday, Aug. 26.
8 p.m. Friday, Aug. 26 to 5 a.m. Monday, Aug. 29 (full weekend closure)
The closure planned from Sept. 30 to Oct. 3 is no longer needed.

For safety reasons, the bridge will return to the regular schedule of overnight lane closures that were in place before rehabilitation work began, with one lane open in each direction overnight.

Crews will continue working below the bridge deck through the fall but this work does not require immediate lane or bridge closures. Any future planned closures will be communicated to the public well in advance.

We recognize the impact the Pattullo Bridge construction work has had on commuters, local residents, and businesses. We thank everyone for their patience during the construction period.

Summary of work completed

Construction on the bridge began on April 29 and was expected to continue to Oct. 3. Despite wet weather in June, crews were able to get more done in a shorter period by scheduling additional weekend and overnight closures and reducing the number of concrete pours.

In total, crews repaired 1,180m2 of bridge deck, with 67 full-depth repairs.

Repairs included:

Milling off the asphalt surfacing from the deck.
Removing all deck concrete down to the top layer of rebar.
Repairing concrete delamination and cleaning or replacing rebar.
Repaving the deck area with a concrete overlay.
Work focused on essential deck repairs to address concrete delamination on sections of the 79-year-old bridge. Repairs are designed to extend the life of the bridge deck to keep the bridge operational while a replacement bridge is designed and built, which is expected to take up to seven years.

We will continue to regularly inspect the bridge and make necessary repairs in the future to maintain safety and functionality.

Media contact:

TransLink Media Relations
778.375.7788
media@translink.ca

For more information and trip planning resources visit translink.ca/pattullorehab

[meme405]

Incredible they managed to do something in a shorter than intended time period.

This company who did this work should be bookmarked and used again. Knowing translink though they probably wont...

[DragonChi]

Those patullo newsfeed post was quite well written and communicated a lot of good info. Whoever put that out did a good job!

IMO put up a new bridge and toll it. I'm so tired of waiting in traffic at this point. TBH they should just combine the rail bridge beside it too so that the rail company can pitch in for the infrastructure.

[MG1]

For some reason, the Pattullo Bridge reminds me of this..............

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUmZp8pR1uc

[thumper]

just went over the bridge today. wow it's rough... it's rough concrete with no ashpalt on top, so it's a bumpy ride. if you are on an aftermarket suspension... enjoy.

[meme405]

TBH they should just combine the rail bridge beside it too so that the rail company can pitch in for the infrastructure.

Have you ever stopped to wonder why there are so few combined rail/road bridges?

1. Trains weigh a fuck of a lot.
2. Trains can't climb inclines and declines like cars.
3. There are MAJOR engineering and structural ramifications to building a combined bridge.
4. Incidents by either the road using portion, or train moving portion could leave the other portion unusable.
5. What about pedestrian and bicycle traffic - you have to be conscious of their safety as well.

So:

1. Because of the weight of a train, train bridges require a lot more intermediate supports than a regular car or pedestrian bridge. Which means that might restrict the size of the boats trying to get into the channel. It also means that you want to the bridge as low as possible (without interfering with boat traffic), because you don't want to build 15 supports which are 100m high instead of 15 supports which are 20m high.
2. Because train's don't deal with large slopes very well, rail bridges are often built as level to the tracks on either side as possible. I'm sure you've noticed how many rail bridges are either the dual active style (lifting) or Bi-Directional (rotating) to allow taller ships to get through. This isn't because they like fancy engineering, it's because that's a cheaper option than building a tracks at a 3 degree slope for 10 miles in each direction to make up the height to get the trains up to the height at which the Patullo operates.

There's a lot of other considerations as well, but lets just leave it at this; particular location, a long with literally 98% of other train crossings will never be mixed with general road use.

There is actually under 100 combined bridges in the entire world. You can see an entire list here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_road%E2%80%93rail_bridges

[thumper]

a bit of trivia... the burrard street bridge was designed to be a 2-level bridge with cars on top and trains down below, which is why it looks like it does... but the train part was never done :eek:

[meme405]

a bit of trivia... the burrard street bridge was supposed to be a 2-level bridge with cars on top and trains down below :eek:

The rest of the train corridors in the area have since shut down, so it would have been an incredible waste. I'm talking about the lines that used to run by arbutus, down to Granville island, and down broadway to wherever that Labatts brewery used to be.

I guess had they done that though, the lower decks today could have been converted to pedestrian and cyclists. Instead of the ongoing 20 year battle we have seen between what to do with that bridge (and the 10 years of construction it's been under while they try to decide).

[nah]

Incredible they managed to do something in a shorter than intended time period.

This company who did this work should be bookmarked and used again. Knowing translink though they probably wont...

A classic case of under promise and over deliver.

They had planned for this opening, as back to school traffic would be a shit show with the current bridge situations. If they promised this date and missed it, the lynch mob would be out of Translink's head. Now they look like rockstars for delivering a month early, which isn't really the case.

[meme405]

A classic case of under promise and over deliver.

They had planned for this opening, as back to school traffic would be a shit show with the current bridge situations. If they promised this date and missed it, the lynch mob would be out of Translink's head. Now they look like rockstars for delivering a month early, which isn't really the case.

I don't doubt it, but as someone who deals with these scenarios over and over let me take the time to tell you what happens normally which results in over budget and over schedule projects. Keep in mind I deal with private sector shit, I have done public works before, and Hydro projects, but by and large I do stuff for large companies. Not to say some variation of this doesn't happen with public works:

When a project first goes through feasibility they figure out a base schedule, and a base budget. This budget and schedule are based on the very bare metrics. AKA the plant produces 45 megawatts, other 45 megawatt facilities costed 100 mil when they were completed and took 2 years. Or the facility is 60 tons per day, other 60 TPD facilities costed 500 million and took 1.5 years to complete.

They then take that budget and schedule to the owners, and the owners ask for them to try and bring the number down, so they pull their tricks, and lower the numbers 10%. The owners then take that number and go to their financiers and present it, and over and over the financiers say no. So the owners continue to go back to the engineers and planners until they beat the number down another 20%, then the financiers finally green light the project for engineering.

Now finally detailed engineering can start. The engineers make a series of recommendations some of which the owners opt for, which may be slightly out of their budget. So eventually when the package is complete and the project goes out to tender for suppliers and contractors, the bids come back much higher than the budget and schedule allow. So the owners come back and ask for value engineering, they manage to bring the numbers down 10%, thats not enough, so the owner takes risk off the contractors, and removes the liquidated damages clause and the pulls all the money they can out of every nook and cranny to move forward on the project.

Now they have no contingency money, no backup plan, and their schedule is compressed as if it had been put through a trash compacter. Of course they fucking fail, there was no shot in hell from the beginning of the project. Then they all cry, and a bunch of people lose their jobs when the project ends up being exactly where the bare metrics told them it would be 2 years earlier.

The project is then added to all the historical data, and 2 years later when the owners go to another project they are doomed to repeat all the same mistakes, because nobody ever learns anything from the fucking lessons learned that I make for these projects.