Not the most interesting province in Canada to post about. But BC regularly engages in highway construction and they're not afraid of large projects. So what the hey, let's have a BC thread.
Mod note: maybe we could sticky all these provincial threads? Other than BC: Ontario, Quebec, and Alberta all have identically-named threads.
Some interesting projects ongoing in BC include:
* Lower Lynn Interchange reconstruction in North Vancouver: see here (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/transportation-infrastructure/projects/highway-1-lower-lynn-improvements);
* Rebuild of Hwy 91/SFPR interchange: see here (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation-projects/highway-91-17-deltaport);
* Haney Bypass reconstruction (Hwy 7 bypass around Maple Ridge): see here (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/transportation-infrastructure/projects/haney-bypass);
* Pattullo Bridge Replacement: see here (https://www.pattullobridgereplacement.ca/)
To start, the Lower Lynn Improvements are ongoing in North Vancouver. Many things have already been completed.
Some of the changes include:
* rebuilt interchange at Mountain Hwy
* new bridges over Lynn Creek
* collector/distributer system
* ramp meter entering the southbound Ironworkers
You can see the new Mountain Hwy overpass/interchange (https://goo.gl/maps/7a9JwsfSKLgwUCE58) on street view already.
Here is a map of all the different improvements:
(https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/transportation-infrastructure/projects/hwy1-lower-lynn/hwy-1_lower-lynn-improvement.jpg)
The MOTI's Flickr album for the project (https://flic.kr/s/aHsm8BxeMB) has quite a few photos as well:
This flyover is pretty excellent too:
https://youtu.be/thctoPnrLXA
Another project was recently completed: Hwy 1 at McKenzie/Admirals (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/transportation-infrastructure/projects/highway-1-mckenzie-interchange) on Vancouver Island.
This interchange was previously a busy traffic signal, and completed a section of the Hwy 1 Freeway another interchange further, bringing the total length to about 11 km.
The freeway's eastern end is Tillicum Road, and is much more urban than where this interchange was built. It's unlikely that a proper freeway interchange would ever be built there. Maybe a RIRO one day.
Images are hard to come by, but this one was posted by the MOT on their website:
(https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/transportation-infrastructure/projects/hwy1-mckenzie-interchange/2020-photo_mckenzie_interchange.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50245787886_5ff697c379_o.jpg)
For those interested in traffic signals:
BC recently changed their rule and now requires 300mm traffic signal heads rather than a variety of 200mm or 300mm as was previously the case.
I believe this intersection between Mountain Hwy & Keith Road (https://goo.gl/maps/NZm8Ur1gtEQVGnpNA), which was rebuilt by the province as part of the aforementioned Lower Lynn Improvements, may be the first provincial intersection to include all 300mm signal heads. An intersection like this would have definitely included some 200mm traffic signals a few years ago, likely the right-side through signals.
Are you getting to visit BC at all? I thought travel was limited to essential traffic only. Or are you working just from web sites?
Quote from: kkt on January 08, 2021, 02:29:39 PM
Are you getting to visit BC at all? I thought travel was limited to essential traffic only. Or are you working just from web sites?
I have connections through UBC that might allow me to get in, but I have not been on the other side of the border since February. Unfortunately. Quite a large back-log for me now.
Was wondering why there hadn't been any BC news lately. I actually just got back from there (dual citizenship comes in handy).
The biggest news in the Lower Mainland outside of Van is that the expansion of Hwy 1 to 216th St in Langley is complete. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/transportation-infrastructure/projects/highway1-216th
Further expansion to 3x3 from Langley to Fraser Hwy in Abbotsford was part of the NDP's platform for the recent election, so we should see that soon (it is promised by 2026). This will alleviate likely the biggest traffic chokepoint on the entire BC highway system.
Quote from: jakeroot on January 08, 2021, 01:16:21 PM
* Rebuild of Hwy 91/SFPR interchange: see here (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation-projects/highway-91-17-deltaport);
Interesting... I wonder if the SFPR will be a proper freeway some day. Looks like that interchange still won't be freeway/freeway, though, at least at the BC 91 end.
There also some upgrades planned for BC-7. I wonder if there was once some plans to convert BC-7 into a full freeway between BC-7B and BC-11?
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on January 08, 2021, 08:53:10 PM
There also some upgrades planned for BC-7. I wonder if there was once some plans to convert BC-7 into a full freeway between BC-7B and BC-11?
I'm pretty sure the Lougheed was never intended to be a freeway - always a local/relief route for Highway 1. BC seems to follow more the UK model of freeways for clear trunk routes, and expressways for intercity connectors.
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 09, 2021, 12:53:39 AM
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on January 08, 2021, 08:53:10 PM
There also some upgrades planned for BC-7. I wonder if there was once some plans to convert BC-7 into a full freeway between BC-7B and BC-11?
I'm pretty sure the Lougheed was never intended to be a freeway - always a local/relief route for Highway 1. BC seems to follow more the UK model of freeways for clear trunk routes, and expressways for intercity connectors.
The Lougheed between Mission and Maple Ridge has seen widening in the past twenty years, bit by bit. For Mission it was a local but direct route to Vancouver, but the Mission Bridge connection to the Trans-Canada was for years faster, up until bad congestion occurred on the Port Mann Bridge from the mid-1990s until the replacement Port Mann was completed. The Haney bypass quickened travelling for years but itself became congested and had traffic signals added. The improved Pitt River Bridge replaced the old twin Bridges in the early 2000's. The Ministry of Highways may have had high level plans in the 1960s for it to become a freeway, but surely won't become a freeway east of Pitt Meadows.
The section east of Mission through Dewdney is rather quaint, having changed little in the past fifty to sixty years.
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2021, 06:59:22 PM
The biggest news in the Lower Mainland outside of Van is that the expansion of Hwy 1 to 216th St in Langley is complete. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/transportation-infrastructure/projects/highway1-216th
Further expansion to 3x3 from Langley to Fraser Hwy in Abbotsford was part of the NDP's platform for the recent election, so we should see that soon (it is promised by 2026). This will alleviate likely the biggest traffic chokepoint on the entire BC highway system.
I had totally forgot about that interchange. Last I checked it was still under construction, so I'm glad to see it opened.
The drive from Abbotsford to Vancouver can be a real slog, so I'm glad to see that they are widening it. Last time I was in that area, I was going from Chilliwack to Vancouver but I went via Lougheed instead, simply to avoid Hwy 1.
Quote from: vdeane on January 08, 2021, 07:49:51 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 08, 2021, 01:16:21 PM
* Rebuild of Hwy 91/SFPR interchange: see here (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation-projects/highway-91-17-deltaport);
Interesting... I wonder if the SFPR will be a proper freeway some day. Looks like that interchange still won't be freeway/freeway, though, at least at the BC 91 end.
It's damn close to being freeway-to-freeway but indeed not quite. The next spot to focus should be the Tillbury Connector; upgrading that to an interchange would create a 25km freeway from Delta to Surrey. There would still be work to do in Surrey (Old Yale, Bridgeview, 116 Ave) but it would allow for maybe some speed limit increases south/west of Old Yale.
Quote from: splashflash on January 09, 2021, 05:49:06 AM
The Haney bypass quickened travelling for years but itself became congested and had traffic signals added.
I was wondering when that was built and was a bit astonished that it was at least the late 70s, maybe 1980. To go that long without some lane improvements seems pretty crazy.
Some photos of the Trans-Canada Highway in BC through the Cape Horn interchange.
Two views looking westerly from just west of the Port Mann Bridge:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.asphaltplanet.ca%2FBC%2F1%2FBC1_cl_DSC03641_west_Jul20_forum.jpg&hash=69cc81b062a766b251abc6fc646d4eb32fa31fcc)
http://www.asphaltplanet.ca/BC/1/BC1_cl_DSC03641_west_Jul20_24x16.jpg
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.asphaltplanet.ca%2FBC%2F1%2FBC1_cl_DSC03648_west_Jul20_forum.jpg&hash=1f833b6463dcee85a02e5c4f6bcd59edf5c660cd)
http://www.asphaltplanet.ca/BC/1/BC1_cl_DSC03648_west_Jul20_24x16.jpg
Two views looking easterly towards the Port Mann Bridge from the King Edward Drive overpass:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.asphaltplanet.ca%2FBC%2F1%2FBC1_cl_DSC03683_west_c_Jul20_forum.jpg&hash=7a88c98ce8dd0e77825ac2a5065f38adc98f4946)
http://www.asphaltplanet.ca/BC/1/BC1_cl_DSC03683_west_c_Jul20_24x16.jpg
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.asphaltplanet.ca%2FBC%2F1%2FBC1_cl_DSC03688_west_EB_Jul20_forum.jpg&hash=57c58cdcc58a35880b633920c763007bbcf2f515)
http://www.asphaltplanet.ca/BC/1/BC1_cl_DSC03688_east_WB_Jul20_24x16.jpg
Two views looking easterly towards Vancouver:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.asphaltplanet.ca%2FBC%2F1%2FBC1_cl_DSC03673_west_c_Jul20_forum.jpg&hash=e985a6d6356adf4616ced8a56faf2f2c0963179f)
http://www.asphaltplanet.ca/BC/1/BC1_cl_DSC03673_west_c_Jul20_24x16.jpg
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.asphaltplanet.ca%2FBC%2F1%2FBC1_cl_DSC03672_west_WB_Jul20_forum.jpg&hash=ef0291447578e9363e206c0041ae315a7dfccaa5)
http://www.asphaltplanet.ca/BC/1/BC1_cl_DSC03672_west_WB_Jul20_24x16.jpg
The Big Orange Bridge in Nelson, BC:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.asphaltplanet.ca%2FBC%2F3A%2FBC3A_DSC01024_Jul20_forum.jpg&hash=7e4cbae25c3fef11a8d5f1d314f4d000ace8fb37)
http://www.asphaltplanet.ca/BC/3A/BC3A_DSC01024_Jul20_24x16.jpg
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.asphaltplanet.ca%2FBC%2F3A%2FBC3A_DSC01050_Jul20_forum.jpg&hash=dc0c4d4d83a26dcbed4032cc01e009d955069a6e)
http://www.asphaltplanet.ca/BC/3A/BC3A_DSC01050_Jul20_24x16.jpg
Anyone know why BC bothered to build partial/full cloverleafs at some seemingly-rural junctions on BC 1 in the Fraser Valley? BC 15, BC 10, and BC 13 don't seem like they would really warrant this kind of treatment.
Quote from: Bruce on July 10, 2021, 03:02:12 AM
Anyone know why BC bothered to build partial/full cloverleafs at some seemingly-rural junctions on BC 1 in the Fraser Valley? BC 15, BC 10, and BC 13 don't seem like they would really warrant this kind of treatment.
The BC-15 interchange definitely warrants something high capacity, as it's the terminus of the South Fraser Perimeter Road (BC-17) with regular traffic flowing into it from the north. If you notice in the interchange layout (Parclo A4), the left turn onto southbound BC-15 is a merge rather than a full signal; this design allows all movements onto Hwy 1 to be free-flow for BC-17. No other "regular" design would have permitted this.
As to BC-10 and BC-13, I think they're just relics from a different era. The province may have expected major growth in the Fraser Valley and Metro Vancouver once the freeway was finished, so cloverleafs were chosen to manage traffic. Growth patterns changed over the ensuing decades and now they're just overbuilt. This is likely why new and modified interchanges, apart from BC-15/BC-17, have been diamonds or SPUIs, since those are sufficient.
Perhaps some may think the cloverleafs were designed to handle a future freeway terminus. I may disagree as none of the cloverleafs, including the extinct one at 200 St, had any sort of traits of interchanges designed to handle a freeway terminus. There's no grading to indicate a future overpass, the loops are all designed to meet the exiting overpasses perfectly, no cleared nearby right-of-way, etc.
Quote from: jakeroot on July 10, 2021, 01:06:45 PM
Quote from: Bruce on July 10, 2021, 03:02:12 AM
Anyone know why BC bothered to build partial/full cloverleafs at some seemingly-rural junctions on BC 1 in the Fraser Valley? BC 15, BC 10, and BC 13 don't seem like they would really warrant this kind of treatment.
The BC-15 interchange definitely warrants something high capacity, as it's the terminus of the South Fraser Perimeter Road (BC-17) with regular traffic flowing into it from the north. If you notice in the interchange layout (Parclo A4), the left turn onto southbound BC-15 is a merge rather than a full signal; this design allows all movements onto Hwy 1 to be free-flow for BC-17. No other "regular" design would have permitted this.
As to BC-10 and BC-13, I think they're just relics from a different era. The province may have expected major growth in the Fraser Valley and Metro Vancouver once the freeway was finished, so cloverleafs were chosen to manage traffic. Growth patterns changed over the ensuing decades and now they're just overbuilt. This is likely why new and modified interchanges, apart from BC-15/BC-17, have been diamonds or SPUIs, since those are sufficient.
Perhaps some may think the cloverleafs were designed to handle a future freeway terminus. I may disagree as none of the cloverleafs, including the extinct one at 200 St, had any sort of traits of interchanges designed to handle a freeway terminus. There's no grading to indicate a future overpass, the loops are all designed to meet the exiting overpasses perfectly, no cleared nearby right-of-way, etc.
Yes, I'm inclined to think that the answer is essentially "because that's how it was done on the 401 in Ontario".
Quote from: TXtoNJ on July 11, 2021, 11:03:36 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 10, 2021, 01:06:45 PM
Quote from: Bruce on July 10, 2021, 03:02:12 AM
Anyone know why BC bothered to build partial/full cloverleafs at some seemingly-rural junctions on BC 1 in the Fraser Valley? BC 15, BC 10, and BC 13 don't seem like they would really warrant this kind of treatment.
The BC-15 interchange definitely warrants something high capacity, as it's the terminus of the South Fraser Perimeter Road (BC-17) with regular traffic flowing into it from the north. If you notice in the interchange layout (Parclo A4), the left turn onto southbound BC-15 is a merge rather than a full signal; this design allows all movements onto Hwy 1 to be free-flow for BC-17. No other "regular" design would have permitted this.
As to BC-10 and BC-13, I think they're just relics from a different era. The province may have expected major growth in the Fraser Valley and Metro Vancouver once the freeway was finished, so cloverleafs were chosen to manage traffic. Growth patterns changed over the ensuing decades and now they're just overbuilt. This is likely why new and modified interchanges, apart from BC-15/BC-17, have been diamonds or SPUIs, since those are sufficient.
Perhaps some may think the cloverleafs were designed to handle a future freeway terminus. I may disagree as none of the cloverleafs, including the extinct one at 200 St, had any sort of traits of interchanges designed to handle a freeway terminus. There's no grading to indicate a future overpass, the loops are all designed to meet the exiting overpasses perfectly, no cleared nearby right-of-way, etc.
Yes, I'm inclined to think that the answer is essentially "because that's how it was done on the 401 in Ontario".
The interchanges at Vedder Road in Chilliwack and McCallum Road, Mount Lehman Road, and Clearbrook Road in Abbotsford were cloverleafs too, but all replaced and widened in the past twenty years. The overpass guard rails do look similar to the 401 Ontario ones don't they?
Quote from: splashflash on July 14, 2021, 05:29:22 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on July 11, 2021, 11:03:36 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 10, 2021, 01:06:45 PM
Quote from: Bruce on July 10, 2021, 03:02:12 AM
Anyone know why BC bothered to build partial/full cloverleafs at some seemingly-rural junctions on BC 1 in the Fraser Valley? BC 15, BC 10, and BC 13 don't seem like they would really warrant this kind of treatment.
The BC-15 interchange definitely warrants something high capacity, as it's the terminus of the South Fraser Perimeter Road (BC-17) with regular traffic flowing into it from the north. If you notice in the interchange layout (Parclo A4), the left turn onto southbound BC-15 is a merge rather than a full signal; this design allows all movements onto Hwy 1 to be free-flow for BC-17. No other "regular" design would have permitted this.
As to BC-10 and BC-13, I think they're just relics from a different era. The province may have expected major growth in the Fraser Valley and Metro Vancouver once the freeway was finished, so cloverleafs were chosen to manage traffic. Growth patterns changed over the ensuing decades and now they're just overbuilt. This is likely why new and modified interchanges, apart from BC-15/BC-17, have been diamonds or SPUIs, since those are sufficient.
Perhaps some may think the cloverleafs were designed to handle a future freeway terminus. I may disagree as none of the cloverleafs, including the extinct one at 200 St, had any sort of traits of interchanges designed to handle a freeway terminus. There's no grading to indicate a future overpass, the loops are all designed to meet the exiting overpasses perfectly, no cleared nearby right-of-way, etc.
Yes, I'm inclined to think that the answer is essentially "because that's how it was done on the 401 in Ontario".
The interchanges at Vedder Road in Chilliwack and McCallum Road, Mount Lehman Road, and Clearbrook Road in Abbotsford were cloverleafs too, but all replaced and widened in the past twenty years. The overpass guard rails do look similar to the 401 Ontario ones don't they?
I don't think I realized Vedder Road was a cloverleaf. The apparent right-of-way is so small, I would have assumed maybe a wide-ish diamond at most.
Here's a shot of it from 1999, looking northeast:
(https://globalairphotos.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/canada-bc-chilliwack-1991-04-30-0127.jpg)
Quote from: splashflash on July 14, 2021, 05:29:22 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on July 11, 2021, 11:03:36 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 10, 2021, 01:06:45 PM
Quote from: Bruce on July 10, 2021, 03:02:12 AM
Anyone know why BC bothered to build partial/full cloverleafs at some seemingly-rural junctions on BC 1 in the Fraser Valley? BC 15, BC 10, and BC 13 don't seem like they would really warrant this kind of treatment.
The BC-15 interchange definitely warrants something high capacity, as it's the terminus of the South Fraser Perimeter Road (BC-17) with regular traffic flowing into it from the north. If you notice in the interchange layout (Parclo A4), the left turn onto southbound BC-15 is a merge rather than a full signal; this design allows all movements onto Hwy 1 to be free-flow for BC-17. No other "regular" design would have permitted this.
As to BC-10 and BC-13, I think they're just relics from a different era. The province may have expected major growth in the Fraser Valley and Metro Vancouver once the freeway was finished, so cloverleafs were chosen to manage traffic. Growth patterns changed over the ensuing decades and now they're just overbuilt. This is likely why new and modified interchanges, apart from BC-15/BC-17, have been diamonds or SPUIs, since those are sufficient.
Perhaps some may think the cloverleafs were designed to handle a future freeway terminus. I may disagree as none of the cloverleafs, including the extinct one at 200 St, had any sort of traits of interchanges designed to handle a freeway terminus. There's no grading to indicate a future overpass, the loops are all designed to meet the exiting overpasses perfectly, no cleared nearby right-of-way, etc.
Yes, I'm inclined to think that the answer is essentially "because that's how it was done on the 401 in Ontario".
The interchanges at Vedder Road in Chilliwack and McCallum Road, Mount Lehman Road, and Clearbrook Road in Abbotsford were cloverleafs too, but all replaced and widened in the past twenty years. The overpass guard rails do look similar to the 401 Ontario ones don't they?
I've been taking the Mt Lehman exit a bunch lately, and let me tell you - that old configuration looks like an absolute nightmare
BC government chooses the tunnel option for the George Massey Tunnel replacement. 6 GP lanes, 2 bus lanes, to open by 2030.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/george-massey-tunnel-immersed-business-case
Quote from: Bruce on August 18, 2021, 05:19:52 PM
BC government chooses the tunnel option for the George Massey Tunnel replacement. 6 GP lanes, 2 bus lanes, to open by 2030.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/george-massey-tunnel-immersed-business-case
I've never seen a ped/bicycle access part of a tunnel. That is pretty freakin' cool.
Quote from: SectorZ on August 18, 2021, 06:22:12 PM
Quote from: Bruce on August 18, 2021, 05:19:52 PM
BC government chooses the tunnel option for the George Massey Tunnel replacement. 6 GP lanes, 2 bus lanes, to open by 2030.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/george-massey-tunnel-immersed-business-case
I've never seen a ped/bicycle access part of a tunnel. That is pretty freakin' cool.
The Mount Baker Tunnel on I-90 in Seattle also has a separate tunnel bore for the pedestrian/bike trail. It's a fun ride.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/7377/11113134665_31f38cedca_b.jpg)
Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/fchemotti/11113134665
Quote from: Bruce on August 18, 2021, 05:19:52 PM
BC government chooses the tunnel option for the George Massey Tunnel replacement. 6 GP lanes, 2 bus lanes, to open by 2030.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/george-massey-tunnel-immersed-business-case
If they decided to stick with with the 10 lane bridge plan the previous government had, we could have had a better crossing for less money that probably would have been completed by now (or in a year or two). Plus we would have a vastly improved freeway on either side, complete with a stack interchange at Steveston Hwy, instead of keeping the far too narrow and shitty 1950s-60s "freeway" that exists currently (the only "upgrade" is wider shoulders / bus lanes).
Near / inside the Massey Tunnel, with the counter flow lanes that have been active since the 1980s (meaning the off-peak direction has ONE lane, undivided from oncoming traffic, on a fucking major FREEWAY (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.127314,-123.08245,3a,49y,123.53h,89.16t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suS9PkoO-piUSGj6Js_Thng!2e0!5s20201201T000000!7i16384!8i8192) in a major city by Canadian standards in the year TWENTY FUCKING ONE), if you're driving in the peak direction, you still have three lanes. There will be a new bus lane, but who the fuck is taking a bus from DELTA, the super-burbs.
The newish BC NDP government seems to be pretty popular, partially due to the BC Liberals that governed from 2001-2017 (despite the name, they are centre-right) being corrupt af, but every news website / Reddit comment section I have ever seen about the Massey Tunnel Replacement is overwhelmingly critical towards the NDP's decision on this crossing, and their decision on the Patullo Bridge, where they decided to replace a 4 lane bridge with a 4 lane bridge and not build proper connections to Highway 17 which it passes over.
This is yet another example of BC underbuilding highway infrastructure that they will shortly be regretted.
Highway 17 (the SFPR) opened not very long ago (2012 I believe). Not even 10 years later, we're upgrading numerous signalized intersections to interchanges and dealing with the fallout of numerous trucks tipping over due to building the road to an 80 km/h "signalized divided rural arterial standard" with numerous sharp curves (sharp for trucks, totally ok for a passenger car to take at 110 km/h) instead of building the road to a proper freeway standard (this is the BC Liberals' fault) for far more money that it would have cost to do it right the first time.
Highway 91, which is a complete freeway now (FINALLY), had signalized intersections until about 2-3 years ago when the 72nd Street interchange was completed. When the road opened in ~1986, the Alex Fraser Bridge had four lanes (with the capacity for six). It was expanded to six lanes a year later (and expanded to 7 lanes 2ish years ago through narrowing shoulders, lane widths, and the lowering the speed limit). It also had signalized intersections on either side of the bridge, but that was such a disaster that they build interchanges a few years later.
Even Highway 1 through the Vancouver area wasn't even a full freeway until the mid-1990s.
BC's highway system is pretty sad honestly.
Quote from: bcroadguy on August 20, 2021, 09:05:35 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 18, 2021, 05:19:52 PM
BC government chooses the tunnel option for the George Massey Tunnel replacement. 6 GP lanes, 2 bus lanes, to open by 2030.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/george-massey-tunnel-immersed-business-case
If they decided to stick with with the 10 lane bridge plan the previous government had, we could have had a better crossing for less money that probably would have been completed by now (or in a year or two). Plus we would have a vastly improved freeway on either side, complete with a stack interchange at Steveston Hwy, instead of keeping the far too narrow and shitty 1950s-60s "freeway" that exists currently (the only "upgrade" is wider shoulders / bus lanes).
Near / inside the Massey Tunnel, with the counter flow lanes that have been active since the 1980s (meaning the off-peak direction has ONE lane, undivided from oncoming traffic, on a fucking major FREEWAY (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.127314,-123.08245,3a,49y,123.53h,89.16t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suS9PkoO-piUSGj6Js_Thng!2e0!5s20201201T000000!7i16384!8i8192) in a major city by Canadian standards in the year TWENTY FUCKING ONE), if you're driving in the peak direction, you still have three lanes. There will be a new bus lane, but who the fuck is taking a bus from DELTA, the super-burbs.
The newish BC NDP government seems to be pretty popular, partially due to the BC Liberals that governed from 2001-2017 (despite the name, they are centre-right) being corrupt af, but every news website / Reddit comment section I have ever seen about the Massey Tunnel Replacement is overwhelmingly critical towards the NDP's decision on this crossing, and their decision on the Patullo Bridge, where they decided to replace a 4 lane bridge with a 4 lane bridge and not build proper connections to Highway 17 which it passes over.
This is yet another example of BC underbuilding highway infrastructure that they will shortly be regretted.
Highway 17 (the SFPR) opened not very long ago (2012 I believe). Not even 10 years later, we're upgrading numerous signalized intersections to interchanges and dealing with the fallout of numerous trucks tipping over due to building the road to an 80 km/h "signalized divided rural arterial standard" with numerous sharp curves (sharp for trucks, totally ok for a passenger car to take at 110 km/h) instead of building the road to a proper freeway standard (this is the BC Liberals' fault) for far more money that it would have cost to do it right the first time.
Highway 91, which is a complete freeway now (FINALLY), had signalized intersections until about 2-3 years ago when the 72nd Street interchange was completed. When the road opened in ~1986, the Alex Fraser Bridge had four lanes (with the capacity for six). It was expanded to six lanes a year later (and expanded to 7 lanes 2ish years ago through narrowing shoulders, lane widths, and the lowering the speed limit). It also had signalized intersections on either side of the bridge, but that was such a disaster that they build interchanges a few years later.
Even Highway 1 through the Vancouver area wasn't even a full freeway until the mid-1990s.
BC's highway system is pretty sad honestly.
I don't know if I would take as critical of a stance, but I think I understand where you are coming from.
British Columbia, in some ways, is actually quite impressive. Their ability to go from concept to full production for public transportation is mighty impressive. Road projects such as Golden Ears Bridge, new Pitt River, Pattullo, and Port Mann bridges, and indeed the SFPR is a pretty good indication that BC hasn't exactly given up on building new infrastructure, and in some ways can get it done pretty fast.
But then, as you point out, there are more than a few examples of things taking forever. The 72 St interchange was completed almost 40 years after the Kittson and Nordel interchanges, which is just insane. The massive interchange gap in White Rock/South Surrey took way too long to fill as well (trying to get onto southbound 99 was very nearly an exercise in futility until the 16 Ave interchange finally opened). And the SFPR was both poorly built and underbuilt for the traffic that everyone knew it would handle. I knew right away when it opened in 2012 that it would not take long for it to be upgraded.
I am still not totally sure why the George Massey "bridge" was canned; it would have been consistent with other crossings of the Fraser and certainly would have been tall enough for even the largest boats to pass beneath. It would have provided spectacular views as well. It had excellent capacity and involved significant upgrades of nearby interchanges. Plus, the environmental work was already complete. It was literally shovel-ready. Like every major project, it had its detractors, but overall it seemed that most people supported the project. Particularly some Americans who normally use it to reach Vancouver. I have a feeling it was largely political, which is a shame.
Still, credit where credit's due: the new tunnel doubles the capacity of the current crossing, and more closely resembles the existing design of Hwy 99 north and south of the river (requiring less money spent on interchange upgrades and the like). But then that does seem to the be the apparent issue with Hwy 99: a bit underbuilt. More lanes may encourage more people to defer to the new tunnel rather than the Alex Fraser, but then that opens additional capacity on
that bridge and would allow for growth along both corridors. Truly a win-win. No doubt traffic will eventually settle back into stop-and-go after a few decades, but eight lanes of stop-and-go is still moving more cars than four lanes of stop-and-go.
The big problems with the bridge are the neighborhoods and farms next to the river crossings. A large structure like a bridge casts large shadows, which can severely impact yields and quality of life.
Since the sun in BC is low in the sky to the south, and the growing season so short, the effect of bridge shadows are exaggerated compared to more equatorial locations.
Quote from: TXtoNJ on August 20, 2021, 07:33:42 PM
The big problems with the bridge are the neighborhoods and farms next to the river crossings. A large structure like a bridge casts large shadows, which can severely impact yields and quality of life.
Since the sun in BC is low in the sky to the south, and the growing season so short, the effect of bridge shadows are exaggerated compared to more equatorial locations.
Wouldn't the benefits of having riverfront farmland more than compensate for the detriments of having bridge shadows moving across the field?
Quote from: kphoger on August 20, 2021, 07:39:22 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on August 20, 2021, 07:33:42 PM
The big problems with the bridge are the neighborhoods and farms next to the river crossings. A large structure like a bridge casts large shadows, which can severely impact yields and quality of life.
Since the sun in BC is low in the sky to the south, and the growing season so short, the effect of bridge shadows are exaggerated compared to more equatorial locations.
Wouldn't the benefits of having riverfront farmland more than compensate for the detriments of having bridge shadows moving across the field?
Not if there isn't a bridge right now, and they can get the province to rebuild the tunnel instead.
Shadows and light would have been part of the environmental review. Not sure it would have actually been a big problem for at least a couple reasons: (1) long shadows are not a significant issue during the primary growing seasons (spring, summer, early fall); as well, (2) the bridge would have cast most of its shadows on Deas Island and the river, not farmland (I suspect the affected farmland would have been small portions south of the River Rd/60 Ave junction in Delta, and small portions of property north of Rice Mill Rd east of Hwy 99 in Richmond).
Quote from: jakeroot on August 20, 2021, 08:16:52 PM
Shadows and light would have been part of the environmental review. Not sure it would have actually been a big problem for at least a couple reasons: (1) long shadows are not a significant issue during the primary growing seasons (spring, summer, early fall); as well, (2) the bridge would have cast most of its shadows on Deas Island and the river, not farmland (I suspect the affected farmland would have been small portions south of the River Rd/60 Ave junction in Delta, and small portions of property north of Rice Mill Rd east of Hwy 99 in Richmond).
Not a big problem for the public, sure. For the property holder, though? From my understanding, the cities of Delta and Richmond were the primary block on the bridge plan. That suggests property owners (specifically, the Country Vines Winery that would have been impacted by an extended elevated structure) didn't agree with the environmental review.
I recently drove between Calgary and Victoria. The need for the Trans-Canada Highway to be twinned through the Interior has been well documented, so I was wanted to talk distance signage. Overall, it's pretty good but I think some improvements that can be made east of Kamloops, especially when compared with other highways in through the province.
Westbound TCH 1
Generally, BC does a pretty good job of signing westbound communities. Kamloops is the control city west of Golden and there are 2-3 towns listed. The only (minor) improvement is that between Revelstoke and Sicamous, there's inconsistency between Sicamous/Vernon/Kamloops and Salmon Arm/Vernon/Kamloops. There's room for an argument that Vernon doesn't need to be listed, but it's also signed on Hwy 23 south of Revelstoke (the alternate route), so maybe four locations should be listed — Sicamous/Salmon Arm/Vernon/Kamloops. Alberta only lists Canmore/Banff west of Calgary, and there might be a case to have a second sign that lists some major BC destinations, such as at the Hwy 22 junction.
Eastbound TCH 1
I think this could use some work. According to BCMoT's Manual of Standard Traffic Signs & Pavement Markings (http://"https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/transportation-infrastructure/engineering-standards-and-guidelines/traffic-engineering-and-safety/traffic-engineering/traffic-signs-and-pavement-markings/manual_signs_pavement_marking.pdf") (2000), Calgary should be a control city along the Trans Canada Highway east of Kamloops (see page 141 of the pdf); however, it's not listed at all except for east of Field which is under Parks Canada jurisdiction. Banff is used sporadically east of Kamloops, despite being used as the control city at the Hwy 5 north jct. (http://"https://goo.gl/maps/4ELLcj1p84JoQPav8"), and consistently east of Revelstoke. Further to that, there's usually only two locations listed, and the control city is simply the next location. Field, which is used as a control city for westbound traffic within the national parks, is never mentioned — at best it should be listed east of Golden. BC should consider having a minimum of three locations listed on its eastbound signage, with Calgary being the control city. East of Monte Creek, there could even be two signs — Chase/Salmon Arm/Revelstoke and Banff/Calgary. BC uses out of province control cities on other routes, such as Whitehorse on the Alaska Highway and Jasper on the Yellowhead Highways (both 5 & 16), and even uses two Alberta locations where appropriate, such as Grande Prairie/Edmonton on Hwy 2 east of Pouce Coupe (http://"https://goo.gl/maps/BjAk1qbuYX1wUZ879") and Jasper/Edmonton TCH 16 east of Tete Jaune Cache (http://"https://goo.gl/maps/kAuDnjfXNySUJkYq7").
Banff/Yoho (both directions)
This needs its own category. Parks Canada does not sign the locations beyond the national parks well in either direction, especially when compared to TCH 16 in Jasper National Park. They replaced the signage in Banff a few years ago and went with two locations — the next two locations, which is great for tourists but not so great for travelers heading beyond the parks. For example, beyond Banff, it's Lake Louise/Field, Field/Golden past Lake Louise, and only Golden past Field. Compare that the TCH 16 west of Jasper, which uses Kamloops and Prince George. Parks Canada installed a three-location sign for eastbound traffic at Field, and that standard should be adopted in both directions through the park, with Kamloops and Calgary being the respective control cities. While we're at it, they could also continue the exit numbers in Banff National Park. Once the Kicking Horse Canyon is completed, that would be a good time to upgrade the signage.
Hey there, I'm new to this forum, I was just curious if we could post traffic signals from BC here, or do we have to create a new section/topic?
Quote from: traffic.lights.vancouver on September 27, 2021, 03:14:14 AM
Hey there, I'm new to this forum, I was just curious if we could post traffic signals from BC here, or do we have to create a new section/topic?
I'm not a mod, but my own 2 cents is that seems like a large enough topic to warrant its own thread. BC has some interesting signal treatments so that would be cool to see them together like that.
I would have quite a few contributions to a "BC Traffic Signals" thread.
Quote from: cbeach40 on September 27, 2021, 10:48:34 AM
BC has some interesting signal treatments so that would be cool to see them together like that.
I agree with this. There are so many unusual things in BC that it almost certainly warrants its own discussion.
How much of the TCH is left to be twinned between Vancouver and Calgary?
Quote from: hurricanehink on October 04, 2021, 01:30:30 PM
How much of the TCH is left to be twinned between Vancouver and Calgary?
Here's a good update on BC, with lots of pics:
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation-projects/highway1-kamloops-alberta
The current storm pelting B.C. has caused countless road closures. Potentially the most serious is BC 7 near Agassiz, where some motorists are trapped and others may be buried.
(Update: Police say 80 to 100 vehicles are trapped on BC 7 between two landslides, and air rescue might be necessary.)
https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/significant-atmospheric-river-causing-rainfall-warnings-across-southern-b-c
TCH 1 east of Chilliwack between Popkum and Hope:
(https://smartcdn.prod.postmedia.digital/vancouversun/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/265764849-20211114_png_bc_transpo_highway_1_-jpeg-w.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=564&h=423&type=webp)
The Lower Mainland is effectively cut off from the rest of the continent in terms of road and rail links.
BC 1 and BC 5 to the east are closed (with some washed out sections), BC 99 is closed due to a slide, I-5 is closed due to a slide, WA 11 and WA 9 have flooded sections.
Portions of BC 5 could take "weeks to months" to reopen: https://globalnews.ca/news/8377257/coquihalla-highway-reopening-timeline-bc-storm-flooding/
BC 1 is still under water near Abbotsford and BC 7 is still covered in slide debris.
Highway 5 / Coquihalla. Location: https://www.google.com/maps/@49.4760488,-121.2534756,123m/data=!3m1!1e3
(https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/basudelon/87172011/25069/25069_original.jpg)
Highway 5 / Coquihalla. Likely location: https://www.google.com/maps/@49.4477581,-121.2701152,151m/data=!3m1!1e3
(https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/basudelon/87172011/26094/26094_original.jpg)
Highway 5 / Coquihalla. Location: https://www.google.com/maps/@49.3779019,-121.346915,523m/data=!3m1!1e3
(https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/basudelon/87172011/26626/26626_original.jpg)
Derailed train in the Fraser Valley. Approximate location: https://www.google.com/maps/@49.3179641,-121.6273728,1018m/data=!3m1!1e3
(https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/basudelon/87172011/24431/24431_800.jpg)
Source: https://basudelon.livejournal.com/20022.html
What do we think the impact of repairs on the long-term planning will be? I don't think the schedule for the Massey Tunnel replacement will be delayed much, but I do think there will be significant delays to the addition of the BC 1 HOV lane from 232 to Whatcom. The Whatcom-to-Yale Road expansion might have to go back to the design phase, since I'd imagine there will be much agitation for converting it to a causeway.
Quote from: TXtoNJ on November 19, 2021, 12:18:53 PM
What do we think the impact of repairs on the long-term planning will be? I don't think the schedule for the Massey Tunnel replacement will be delayed much, but I do think there will be significant delays to the addition of the BC 1 HOV lane from 232 to Whatcom. The Whatcom-to-Yale Road expansion might have to go back to the design phase, since I'd imagine there will be much agitation for converting it to a causeway.
In terms of immediate impacts, when infrastructure takes a big hit the construction program will be reconfigured. Things scheduled in the near term may get deferred in order to free up cash for sudden, more immediate concerns.
As far as long term, it depends on what the scientists and engineers determine how much these sort of conditions need to be accounted for. For example, Ontario's hydrology and structural engineering documentation still makes reference to Hurricane Hazel as that's the sort of worst-case scenario that's taken into account. More robust structural designs like that may be in the cards for BC going forward.
Based on the images released so far, Highway 8 is probably the most severely damaged highway. It's a less important route so it gets less coverage, but significant stretches have been washed away along the Nicola River between Merritt and Spences Bridge. There is some serious geotechnical engineering required to get this road back online.
Emergency repairs are likely quicker to be in place for Highway 1 & 5, Infrastructure Minister Fleming said that even emergency repairs are 'many weeks' away, so it seems unlikely that the Coquihalla Highway & Fraser Canyon will reopen before New Year's.
Some Highway 8 photos by the B.C. Ministry of Transportation
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51687462069_4fc315ae57_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2mKrKH8)
Highway 8 washout (https://flic.kr/p/2mKrKH8) by B.C. Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tranbc/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51687683990_576f8747a3_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2mKsTFm)
Highway 8 washout (https://flic.kr/p/2mKsTFm) by B.C. Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tranbc/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51687530158_95de75fa08_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2mKs6X5)
BC Highway 8 washout (https://flic.kr/p/2mKs6X5) by B.C. Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tranbc/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51688124707_a8715f4876_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2mKv9FV)
Highway 8 - Damage from the Storm (https://flic.kr/p/2mKv9FV) by B.C. Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tranbc/), on Flickr
Replying to @jakeroot about the traffic signals: perfect! I have plenty of photos of traffic signals from the lower mainland!
So not to overdo it with photos I'll just start off with this
/storage/emulated/0/DCIM/Camera/ PXL_20211105_222548056.jpg
Fortran and McCain 12-8-8 traffic signals on boundary
I hope you're able to view the photo because all of my traffic signal photos are on my phone so I cannot really send them from my laptop
Quote from: traffic.lights.vancouver on November 26, 2021, 12:31:25 AM
Replying to @jakeroot about the traffic signals: perfect! I have plenty of photos of traffic signals from the lower mainland!
Quote from: traffic.lights.vancouver on November 26, 2021, 12:46:20 AM
So not to overdo it with photos I'll just start off with this
/storage/emulated/0/DCIM/Camera/ PXL_20211105_222548056.jpg
Fortran and McCain 12-8-8 traffic signals on boundary
Quote from: traffic.lights.vancouver on November 26, 2021, 12:47:38 AM
I hope you're able to view the photo because all of my traffic signal photos are on my phone so I cannot really send them from my laptop
You'll need to upload those photos to the internet first.
Check out Imgur or Flickr.
Some news from the recent flooding in B.C.:
* Highway 1 through Sumas Prairie (Abbotsford to Chilliwack). Reopened to traffic yesterday.
* Highway 1 (Chilliwack to Hope). Open, but partially with only a single lane in each direction.
* Highway 1 through the Fraser Canyon / Thompson Canyon (Hope to Kamloops). 7 large washouts. Might reopen by mid-January 2022 (single lane alternating traffic).
* Highway 3 (Hope to Princeton). Open for essential traffic. Only truck route available. Closed this morning after several large incidents, including a truck fire.
* Highway 5 Coquihalla Highway (Hope to Merrit). Catastrophic damage. 20 washouts, 5 collapsed bridges. Might open by late January 2022 after temporary bridges and repairs are done, likely only for commercial vehicles.
* Highway 8 (Merritt to Spences Bridge). 6 kilometers of this road is entirely wiped out, 20 kilometers severely damaged. 4 bridges collapsed. Nicola River changed its riverbed to the previous highway. Seems like it could be a multi-year repair.
* Highway 99 (Pemberton to Lillooet). Open only for light vehicles.
This means that Highway 3 (Hope to Princeton) is the only way in and out of the Lower Mainland by truck. This road is not designed for heavy, high-speed traffic. It goes over two high passes and has difficult winter driving conditions. More severe weather is forecast over the next few days.
The federal government has worked with the U.S. government to ease permits for trucks to travel into Washington state to bypass the damaged area (trucks with both an origin and destination in Canada). Apparently this type of transport is normally uncommon. This means that trucks could travel along I-90 from Vancouver to say Calgary or points east.
They're closing 99 and the Crowsnest again tonight in anticipation of more heavy rain.
Quote from: Chris on November 26, 2021, 04:43:33 PM
Some news from the recent flooding in B.C.:
This means that Highway 3 (Hope to Princeton) is the only way in and out of the Lower Mainland by truck. This road is not designed for heavy, high-speed traffic. It goes over two high passes and has difficult winter driving conditions. More severe weather is forecast over the next few days.
The Hope-Princeton was rebuilt together on the west end together with construction of the Coquihalla for Expo 86. The approx 35km from Hope to Manning Park entrance is good 4 lane but un-divided highway. I believe the straightening and addition of passing lanes near Sunday Summit completed a few years ago was the only significant work since 1986. The highway receives less snow than the Coquihalla or even Stevens Pass on US 2 to the south.
Before the Coquihalla opened I can remember huge platoons of vehicles, but that largely disappeared after the Coq opened. For a long time this was the fastest route from the Coast to Okanagan cities from Vernon south.
There are some steep grades near Sunshine Valley and west of Princeton. The rest of the Crowsnest should see an uptick of traffic volume but also some steep grades at Anarchist Mountain, the Salmo-Creston, and Bonanza Pass.
From what I am reading, the timeline for reopening BC 5 (Coquihalla Highway) to traffic will be sometime in January, even though there will be reduced capacity while they continue to make repairs.
https://www.kelownanow.com/watercooler/news/news/BC_Interior/Daunting_task_20_sites_5_bridges_on_the_Coquihalla_heavily_damaged_or_washed_away/#fs_105587
Updated aerial photography of Highway 8 between Spences Bridge and Merritt.
This highway was pretty much completely destroyed by the flooding:
The Coq (Highway 5) will reopen to commercial traffic on December 20, about a month ahead of schedule. Not a full freeway like before and with reduced speed limits.
https://globalnews.ca/news/8453299/coquihalla-highway-reopening-timeline-update/
Highway 3 will be opened for limited non-essential travel as well, thanks to this.
Wow, the deserve some congratulations!
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on December 16, 2021, 10:16:49 PM
Updated aerial photography of Highway 8 between Spences Bridge and Merritt.
This highway was pretty much completely destroyed by the flooding:
Thanks for this. The northwestern section was the windiest and incurred the bulk of the damage. Perhaps a new route along a logging road through to the Nicoamen Peninsula would be better.
There is a guy who has been chronicling the reconstruction of the Coq:
The Coq is open (to commercial traffic):
:clap:
The Coquihalla Highway has now reopened to all traffic, but is still not a full freeway.
https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/coquihalla-highway-reopens-to-regular-traffic-b-c-state-of-emergency-ends
The CBC has a long report, with lots of photos and video, showing how the Coquihalla Highway (BC 5) was reopened after November's storm.
https://www.cbc.ca/newsinteractives/features/coquihalla-repaired-35-days
QuoteB.C.'s transportation minister Rob Fleming described the Dec. 20, 2021, reopening of the highway to commercial traffic and buses as "one of the most remarkable engineering feats in recent memory in the province of British Columbia."
... The cost of the temporary repairs required to reopen the Coquihalla, also known as Highway 5, was between about $45 million and $55 million, according to the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure.
It took more than 300 workers and 200 pieces of equipment 35 days to reopen the highway.
(https://www.cbc.ca/newsinteractives/content/images/EDITED_othello_peers_creek_bridge_MOT_flickr_.jpeg)
Quote from: Kniwt on February 05, 2022, 07:24:46 PM
The CBC has a long report, with lots of photos and video, showing how the Coquihalla Highway (BC 5) was reopened after November's storm.
https://www.cbc.ca/newsinteractives/features/coquihalla-repaired-35-days
QuoteB.C.'s transportation minister Rob Fleming described the Dec. 20, 2021, reopening of the highway to commercial traffic and buses as "one of the most remarkable engineering feats in recent memory in the province of British Columbia."
... The cost of the temporary repairs required to reopen the Coquihalla, also known as Highway 5, was between about $45 million and $55 million, according to the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure.
It took more than 300 workers and 200 pieces of equipment 35 days to reopen the highway.
(https://www.cbc.ca/newsinteractives/content/images/EDITED_othello_peers_creek_bridge_MOT_flickr_.jpeg)
https://goo.gl/maps/23r79yFU8UT8e6wYA
North end of the Granville Bridge will look a bit different by next year: the northern loops will be demolished to make way for development.
https://twitter.com/iamkennethchan/status/1507422762834399233
Quote from: Bruce on March 25, 2022, 06:36:12 PM
North end of the Granville Bridge will look a bit different by next year: the northern loops will be demolished to make way for development.
[clipped]
Definitely a bit overdue. I don't think it's imperative to improve Drake St for traffic coming off the bridge, but I would imagine it may be worth installing an advanced left turn from Drake onto the bridge, as I think that will be the main access route for traffic from Pacific; going around via Hornby and Drake may clog up quick with the change to protected right turn phasing due to improvements to the cycle path along Hornby.
Edit: never mind, looks like Drake is being converted to one-way. Didn't know that. Perhaps they can add the advanced left turn at Davie and Granville instead. Traffic travelling beyond Davie likely isn't trying to access the Granville Bridge, so no reason to make large-scale changes besides that.
I just visited the Vancouver Area + Southern Vancouver Island for a week.
Man, as someone from Ontario, I find that BC roads are so... strange.
For routing:
Going up and down Highway 99 to Whistler, why isn't this at least RIRO? It seems like this corridor is busy enough/unsafe enough to at least warrant that. Same for Highway 1 on Vancouver Island between Victoria and Nanaimo, and Highway 17 between the ferry and Victoria.
Lions Gate Bridge - why is there no direct connection to Hwy 1? On the other end, it becomes West Georgia Street, which was so slow. Perhaps it might be better if this end was routed onto a one-way pair?? The Howe/Seymour combination that Highway 99 later becomes, I found to be a lot quicker in the same distance.
Highway 99 in Richmond - why isn't there an exit at Blundell Road?
Following Highway 99 in Vancouver during rush hour on Granville Street was so slow. Jesus. And the part of 99 that goes on West 70th Street to get to the bridge took me 20 minutes. For a distance of 700m. Insane.
For road design:
The turn arrows to me look weird, like they were drawn by kids...
Some signs are also strange (such as a "MERGE" sign as opposed to just, using the pictoral sign of a lane ending)
And don't get me started on the traffic signals!! Why do the signals on the side look rather neglected (with no backplates), and why are they 8-8-8-12???? Ahhhhhh
Some things I did find interesting though:
The "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights that turn on before a light turns yellow, people seem to start braking when they go on, and they seem to act as an extension of a yellow light. I found that to be quite interesting, and maybe beneficial for Ontario to consider those as well, as it clearly could reduce rear-end crashes.
The extensive use of pedestrian crossovers (flashing green lights). I guess it's good for the thru traffic to flow more efficiently, as in Ontario those same intersections would just be a regular light config, and therefore a lot of time wasted to stop thru traffic for 1 car.
Highway 4 to Tofino had "slow vehicle pullouts" which seems to be a good idea for areas where the ROW would be too narrow to get passing lanes. Not to mention the signs directing slow vehicles to pull out were black-on-white regulatory signs, and not suggestions. Ontario should take note.
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
The "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights that turn on before a light turns yellow, people seem to start braking when they go on, and they seem to act as an extension of a yellow light. I found that to be quite interesting, and maybe beneficial for Ontario to consider those as well, as it clearly could reduce rear-end crashes.
Becoming increasingly common down south as well, mostly in cases where the traffic signal may be obstructed by a hill or curve.
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
Highway 4 to Tofino had "slow vehicle pullouts" which seems to be a good idea for areas where the ROW would be too narrow to get passing lanes. Not to mention the signs directing slow vehicles to pull out were black-on-white regulatory signs, and not suggestions. Ontario should take note.
Common all over the Northwest, with Washington mandating any vehicle holding up 5 others to use them, on top of normal courtesy. It generally does work, but all it takes are idiots in U-Hauls on mountain roads to gum it up.
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
The "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights that turn on before a light turns yellow, people seem to start braking when they go on, and they seem to act as an extension of a yellow light. I found that to be quite interesting, and maybe beneficial for Ontario to consider those as well, as it clearly could reduce rear-end crashes.
Quebec also use a variant for some railroad crossings.
(https://media.istockphoto.com/photos/prepare-to-stop-level-crossing-in-french-canada-picture-id484296724?s=612x612)
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
Some things I did find interesting though:
The "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights that turn on before a light turns yellow, people seem to start braking when they go on, and they seem to act as an extension of a yellow light. I found that to be quite interesting, and maybe beneficial for Ontario to consider those as well, as it clearly could reduce rear-end crashes.
We've had them for decades:
https://goo.gl/maps/p9gvQ72UU78DF3qZ7
https://goo.gl/maps/BTfNj5ANQvfJ33hp7
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
The extensive use of pedestrian crossovers (flashing green lights). I guess it's good for the thru traffic to flow more efficiently, as in Ontario those same intersections would just be a regular light config, and therefore a lot of time wasted to stop thru traffic for 1 car.
That's just false. Traffic signal justification are based on volume warrants, which is necessary to prioritize them as signals are surprisingly expensive. Pedestrian signals (https://goo.gl/maps/6Y2EWdw2eD4qraZy7) and pedestrian crossovers (https://goo.gl/maps/iwgioUc7qcgkpkMr7) (ie, crosswalks) are what we use here in those situations.
Quote from: cbeach40 on June 07, 2022, 10:28:07 AM
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
The extensive use of pedestrian crossovers (flashing green lights). I guess it's good for the thru traffic to flow more efficiently, as in Ontario those same intersections would just be a regular light config, and therefore a lot of time wasted to stop thru traffic for 1 car.
That's just false. Traffic signal justification are based on volume warrants, which is necessary to prioritize them as signals are surprisingly expensive. Pedestrian signals (https://goo.gl/maps/6Y2EWdw2eD4qraZy7) and pedestrian crossovers (https://goo.gl/maps/iwgioUc7qcgkpkMr7) (ie, crosswalks) are what we use here in those situations.
I don't think you understood what he was saying. The flashing green pedestrian signals in British Columbia respond only to pedestrian activation. Cars approaching from the side only have a stop sign, so they can go the moment it is clear. With a regular traffic light, they would have to wait for a green light. Which is annoying for only one car. Typically they are used at intersections where there is more foot traffic than car traffic, a common situation in many parts of Metro Vancouver.
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
For road design:
The turn arrows to me look weird, like they were drawn by kids...
Some signs are also strange (such as a "MERGE" sign as opposed to just, using the pictoral sign of a lane ending)
And don't get me started on the traffic signals!! Why do the signals on the side look rather neglected (with no backplates), and why are they 8-8-8-12???? Ahhhhhh
The arrows in British Columbia are not completely unique to BC. They are also used in WA, by a few cities. I've always preferred them simply because I find them easier to comprehend.
I do not understand the MERGE sign either. So many symbols and yet they write that one out. Weird.
Some cities in BC use backplates on all signals. Richmond comes to mind. I wouldn't call the overall design neglected. Backplates are not really needed on post-mounted signals, especially the height they are used in British Columbia, which is lower than most places (equal to pedestrian signal heads rather than above them) so they are not in the sun for the most part. The use of 200mm signals is officially history, as the MOTI changed their manual to require all signals to be 300mm. I quite like the smaller heads, as they had a sort of "boutique" feeling to them (I guess, less imposing?), but no doubt that they should all be 300mm these days.
As a side-note: at least British Columbia uses post-mounted signals, unlike a certain other province (*cough* Ontario).
Quote from: cbeach40 on June 07, 2022, 10:28:07 AM
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
Some things I did find interesting though:
The "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights that turn on before a light turns yellow, people seem to start braking when they go on, and they seem to act as an extension of a yellow light. I found that to be quite interesting, and maybe beneficial for Ontario to consider those as well, as it clearly could reduce rear-end crashes.
We've had them for decades:
https://goo.gl/maps/p9gvQ72UU78DF3qZ7
https://goo.gl/maps/BTfNj5ANQvfJ33hp7
True, but they're tiny as opposed to the gantries used in BC
Quote from: jakeroot on June 07, 2022, 12:01:52 PM
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
For road design:
The turn arrows to me look weird, like they were drawn by kids...
Some signs are also strange (such as a "MERGE" sign as opposed to just, using the pictoral sign of a lane ending)
And don't get me started on the traffic signals!! Why do the signals on the side look rather neglected (with no backplates), and why are they 8-8-8-12???? Ahhhhhh
The arrows in British Columbia are not completely unique to BC. They are also used in WA, by a few cities. I've always preferred them simply because I find them easier to comprehend.
I do not understand the MERGE sign either. So many symbols and yet they write that one out. Weird.
Some cities in BC use backplates on all signals. Richmond comes to mind. I wouldn't call the overall design neglected. Backplates are not really needed on post-mounted signals, especially the height they are used in British Columbia, which is lower than most places (equal to pedestrian signal heads rather than above them) so they are not in the sun for the most part. The use of 200mm signals is officially history, as the MOTI changed their manual to require all signals to be 300mm. I quite like the smaller heads, as they had a sort of "boutique" feeling to them (I guess, less imposing?), but no doubt that they should all be 300mm these days.
As a side-note: at least British Columbia uses post-mounted signals, unlike a certain other province (*cough* Ontario).
Fair enough. I guess that as an Ontarian, where pretty much every signal has backplates, seeing no backplates is just weird in itself. And 8-8-8 signals are all but gone.
Also: How do they determine which side the side signal is on? Sometimes they're on the left, sometimes on the right, sometimes both?? In the same vein, how do they determine the # of signals on the top as well? Sometimes there's 1, sometimes there's 2...
Ontario does have post-mounted signals in certain situations, but yeah personally I still prefer how Ontario does them. I think it's just more aesthetically pleasing than one gigantic thick post.
(https://i.imgur.com/N8BVUCh.png)
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 07, 2022, 01:00:54 PM
Quote from: cbeach40 on June 07, 2022, 10:28:07 AM
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
Some things I did find interesting though:
The "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights that turn on before a light turns yellow, people seem to start braking when they go on, and they seem to act as an extension of a yellow light. I found that to be quite interesting, and maybe beneficial for Ontario to consider those as well, as it clearly could reduce rear-end crashes.
We've had them for decades:
https://goo.gl/maps/p9gvQ72UU78DF3qZ7
https://goo.gl/maps/BTfNj5ANQvfJ33hp7
True, but they're tiny as opposed to the gantries used in BC
They are also used at every signalized intersection in BC with an approach speed of 70 km/h or greater. I'm not aware of any other agency in North America with such requirements.
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 07, 2022, 01:07:58 PM
Fair enough. I guess that as an Ontarian, where pretty much every signal has backplates, seeing no backplates is just weird in itself. And 8-8-8 signals are all but gone.
Ontario does have post-mounted signals in certain situations, but yeah personally I still prefer how Ontario does them. I think it's just more aesthetically pleasing than one gigantic thick post.
(https://i.imgur.com/N8BVUCh.png)
BC does deserve credit for consistency, though. Primary signals (overhead signals and
post-mounted left turn signals (https://goo.gl/maps/ExVhwVe53aZaUWkV8)) always have backplates, just like in Ontario, whereas post-mounted signals (secondary and tertiary/auxiliary signals) almost never do. And that's the case at probably 95% of intersections in BC.
But that gets back to my point a little bit: overhead signals in BC look pretty much like those in Ontario: all yellow backplate and often all-yellow signals (sometimes), the only difference is that the typical BC intersection will also have a secondary signal mounted on the far left corner, and usually another on the far right corner. And yes, the mast arm is a bit longer, but BC also opts to use a separate mast arm or no mast arm at all for left turn signals, so the mast arm is often shorter. The requirement for secondary and tertiary signals also helps for redundancy, in the event that one of the signals is blocked by a tall vehicle. In Ontario, the signals in your picture could easily be blocked by a tall vehicle, but the post-mounted signals like those in my picture below would likely still be visible.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52129599571_843f26d3cf_o.png)
Signalized intersection, BC (https://flic.kr/p/2nqvPMv) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr
I see yeah, that's true.
Quote from: jakeroot on June 07, 2022, 12:01:52 PM
Quote from: cbeach40 on June 07, 2022, 10:28:07 AM
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
The extensive use of pedestrian crossovers (flashing green lights). I guess it's good for the thru traffic to flow more efficiently, as in Ontario those same intersections would just be a regular light config, and therefore a lot of time wasted to stop thru traffic for 1 car.
That's just false. Traffic signal justification are based on volume warrants, which is necessary to prioritize them as signals are surprisingly expensive. Pedestrian signals (https://goo.gl/maps/6Y2EWdw2eD4qraZy7) and pedestrian crossovers (https://goo.gl/maps/iwgioUc7qcgkpkMr7) (ie, crosswalks) are what we use here in those situations.
I don't think you understood what he was saying. The flashing green pedestrian signals in British Columbia respond only to pedestrian activation. Cars approaching from the side only have a stop sign, so they can go the moment it is clear. With a regular traffic light, they would have to wait for a green light. Which is annoying for only one car. Typically they are used at intersections where there is more foot traffic than car traffic, a common situation in many parts of Metro Vancouver.
No, I understood perfectly what was being described there. And included links to two Ontario examples of precisely that, where an IPS or PXO are located at a side street under stop control.
I'll just pop them out here for clarity. Actually going to change the Streetview angle so it's a little clearer. :)
https://goo.gl/maps/PWL8HJCDeWLbgrYW8
https://goo.gl/maps/K3b1B32cmstS6cxF6
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 07, 2022, 01:00:54 PM
Quote from: cbeach40 on June 07, 2022, 10:28:07 AM
We've had them for decades:
https://goo.gl/maps/p9gvQ72UU78DF3qZ7
https://goo.gl/maps/BTfNj5ANQvfJ33hp7
True, but they're tiny as opposed to the gantries used in BC
Are you referring to these (https://goo.gl/maps/UhBA2gkuYzwhvAYt6)? As those are actually slightly smaller than those examples I provided. I will grant though that overhead placement does make them more conspicuous. There's these examples that are, believe it or not, about 50% larger than that BC one:
https://goo.gl/maps/MVj1e31nWr516em78
https://goo.gl/maps/jmru7Fvg1NJcDn5R7
I actually really like the Waterloo Region one, as it's big and overhead but retains the distinctive diamond shape rather than just printed on a rectangular background.
Not trying to be insulting or anything with this. I've done traffic engineering work all around the province so I have to know the OTM like the back of my hand and knew offhand where all of these were.
I think the main point though, that this sort of sign could be applied, or at least applied
more in Ontario. Definitely agree on that.
Interesting. I had never been to Thunder Bay, and the Kitchener one I just never noticed.
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
Some things I did find interesting though:
The "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights that turn on before a light turns yellow, people seem to start braking when they go on, and they seem to act as an extension of a yellow light. I found that to be quite interesting, and maybe beneficial for Ontario to consider those as well, as it clearly could reduce rear-end crashes.
The flashing "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights are pretty common throughout Western Canada, though it feels like they aren't as common in other jurisdictions.
Quote from: dmuzika on June 10, 2022, 02:30:43 AM
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
Some things I did find interesting though:
The "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights that turn on before a light turns yellow, people seem to start braking when they go on, and they seem to act as an extension of a yellow light. I found that to be quite interesting, and maybe beneficial for Ontario to consider those as well, as it clearly could reduce rear-end crashes.
The flashing "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights are pretty common throughout Western Canada, though it feels like they aren't as common in other jurisdictions.
It's not rare to see them in Québec in low visibility or high speed situations.
Quote from: LilianaUwU on June 10, 2022, 02:29:34 PM
Quote from: dmuzika on June 10, 2022, 02:30:43 AM
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
Some things I did find interesting though:
The "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights that turn on before a light turns yellow, people seem to start braking when they go on, and they seem to act as an extension of a yellow light. I found that to be quite interesting, and maybe beneficial for Ontario to consider those as well, as it clearly could reduce rear-end crashes.
The flashing "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights are pretty common throughout Western Canada, though it feels like they aren't as common in other jurisdictions.
It's not rare to see them in Québec in low visibility or high speed situations.
They're not as common elsewhere in Canada likely because no other agency requires them. British Columbia literally requires them at every signalized intersection with an approach speed or speed limit 70 km/h or greater. Like, every single one. Period. So yeah, they're extremely common because that sort of situation is really common.
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2022, 02:53:01 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on June 10, 2022, 02:29:34 PM
Quote from: dmuzika on June 10, 2022, 02:30:43 AM
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
Some things I did find interesting though:
The "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights that turn on before a light turns yellow, people seem to start braking when they go on, and they seem to act as an extension of a yellow light. I found that to be quite interesting, and maybe beneficial for Ontario to consider those as well, as it clearly could reduce rear-end crashes.
The flashing "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights are pretty common throughout Western Canada, though it feels like they aren't as common in other jurisdictions.
It's not rare to see them in Québec in low visibility or high speed situations.
They're not as common elsewhere in Canada likely because no other agency requires them. British Columbia literally requires them at every signalized intersection with an approach speed or speed limit 70 km/h or greater. Like, every single one. Period. So yeah, they're extremely common because that sort of situation is really common.
That's overkill. I think 60 mph or higher is what should be needed to trigger them without other circumstances (such as poor visibility, rogue signal on an expressway that would otherwise be a freeway, or first signal in a long time). Higher-speed highways should have them for both road and rail crossings, but to have them at speeds of many lower-frontage suburban arterials is seriously overkill.
Quote from: RoadMaster09 on June 11, 2022, 03:31:26 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2022, 02:53:01 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on June 10, 2022, 02:29:34 PM
Quote from: dmuzika on June 10, 2022, 02:30:43 AM
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
Some things I did find interesting though:
The "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights that turn on before a light turns yellow, people seem to start braking when they go on, and they seem to act as an extension of a yellow light. I found that to be quite interesting, and maybe beneficial for Ontario to consider those as well, as it clearly could reduce rear-end crashes.
The flashing "Prepare to Stop" signs/lights are pretty common throughout Western Canada, though it feels like they aren't as common in other jurisdictions.
It's not rare to see them in Québec in low visibility or high speed situations.
They're not as common elsewhere in Canada likely because no other agency requires them. British Columbia literally requires them at every signalized intersection with an approach speed or speed limit 70 km/h or greater. Like, every single one. Period. So yeah, they're extremely common because that sort of situation is really common.
That's overkill. I think 60 mph or higher is what should be needed to trigger them without other circumstances (such as poor visibility, rogue signal on an expressway that would otherwise be a freeway, or first signal in a long time). Higher-speed highways should have them for both road and rail crossings, but to have them at speeds of many lower-frontage suburban arterials is seriously overkill.
BC speed limits are a lot slower than you think.
Quote from: jakeroot on June 07, 2022, 12:01:52 PM
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 06, 2022, 05:30:42 PM
For road design:
The turn arrows to me look weird, like they were drawn by kids...
Some signs are also strange (such as a "MERGE" sign as opposed to just, using the pictoral sign of a lane ending)
And don't get me started on the traffic signals!! Why do the signals on the side look rather neglected (with no backplates), and why are they 8-8-8-12???? Ahhhhhh
The arrows in British Columbia are not completely unique to BC. They are also used in WA, by a few cities. I've always preferred them simply because I find them easier to comprehend.
I do not understand the MERGE sign either. So many symbols and yet they write that one out. Weird.
The arrows used in WA aren't quite the same, though, and I prefer the look. I don't like how the BC arrows have such a long straight tail and then a tiny little curve, and I think that might be part of the reason why andrepoiy said they look "drawn by kids".
Here's a comparison, with BC on the left and WA (from Bellevue) on the right.
(https://i.imgur.com/rzYvHMu.png)
The more interesting thing (from my perspective) about BC turn arrows is that darn near every intersection in the province uses that same exact style! In the cities around Seattle, it seems like every other city (not to mention WSDOT) has its own unique style :spin:
Also on that merge sign, I really don't get why they use that, given the whole bilingual situation and a very well established symbol that can take the place of it. You'd think that with a whole host of symbolized signs you can see throughout the province that aren't used in the US, that there wouldn't be an example of the opposite case, but here we are! I will say BC isn't the only place I've seen a spelled out "MERGE" sign though, I have seen quite a few in Minnesota when I've been there a couple times, which struck me as odd then too, though the ones there do also feature a sideways arrow at least. (Example (https://goo.gl/maps/sTCJo63LhENjs1WGA))
Quote from: stevashe on June 13, 2022, 05:44:58 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 07, 2022, 12:01:52 PM
The arrows in British Columbia are not completely unique to BC. They are also used in WA, by a few cities. I've always preferred them simply because I find them easier to comprehend.
I do not understand the MERGE sign either. So many symbols and yet they write that one out. Weird.
The arrows used in WA aren't quite the same, though, and I prefer the look. I don't like how the BC arrows have such a long straight tail and then a tiny little curve, and I think that might be part of the reason why andrepoiy said they look "drawn by kids".
Here's a comparison, with BC on the left and WA (from Bellevue) on the right.
(https://i.imgur.com/rzYvHMu.png)
The more interesting thing (from my perspective) about BC turn arrows is that darn near every intersection in the province uses that same exact style! In the cities around Seattle, it seems like every other city (not to mention WSDOT) has its own unique style :spin:
British Columbia's arrows do have a pretty distinct advantage over most other designs: they are narrow enough that most cars can pass on either side of them, but they are still long enough to be imposing. With the angle of approach, there is a distinct advantage to "longer" designs rather than wider designs, and I think most Washington State (and US) arrows miss that mark.
Most of Washington (outside of Bothell, Bellevue, and the few other places that use the BC-esque design) use really small arrows, both width-wise and length-wise. I don't find them particularly useful compared to the much larger arrows used in British Columbia (on left, WA on right):
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52148029369_ab093a5015_o.png)(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52148029339_1fd3879d04_o.png)
Quote from: stevashe on June 13, 2022, 05:44:58 PM
Also on that merge sign, I really don't get why they use that, given the whole bilingual situation and a very well established symbol that can take the place of it. You'd think that with a whole host of symbolized signs you can see throughout the province that aren't used in the US, that there wouldn't be an example of the opposite case, but here we are! I will say BC isn't the only place I've seen a spelled out "MERGE" sign though, I have seen quite a few in Minnesota when I've been there a couple times, which struck me as odd then too, though the ones there do also feature a sideways arrow at least. (Example (https://goo.gl/maps/sTCJo63LhENjs1WGA))
There is a MERGE sign on I-705 in Tacoma, although it's rectangular: https://goo.gl/maps/De19idFxSJmTdvqEA
The idea of unnecessarily writing things out reminded me today of the HOV lanes in British Columbia, which use text in addition to the diamond, as opposed to a diamond with accompanying signage (as is the norm elsewhere). I would think the diamond would be enough in addition to the black-on-white signage also indicating who/what can use the lane...here's a picture I took today:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52147790103_768021aa89_o.jpg)
HOV LANE, Hwy 1, Surrey, BC (https://flic.kr/p/2ns84cn) by Jacob Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr
2 more years of reconstruction before long term repairs of the Coq Highway 1 through Fraser Canyon are expected to be completed:
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/flood-damaged-sections-of-trans-canada-highway-in-fraser-canyon-facing-2-more-years-of-repair/ar-AA12Gf8X (https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/flood-damaged-sections-of-trans-canada-highway-in-fraser-canyon-facing-2-more-years-of-repair/ar-AA12Gf8X)
This news release is about Highway 1 through the Fraser Canyon, not the Coquihalla Highway (which is Highway 5).
Here's the TranBC press release: https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2022TRAN0100-001502
My mistake.
Highway 1 widening between 216 Street and 264 Street (Langley to Aldergrove, roughly) is underway. To cost $345 million (US$260 million) and will include several elements: a set of HOV lanes, new bridges to replace low clearance crossings, and pedestrian/cycling improvements at two crossings. Scheduled to be completed in 2025. The BC government plans to widen Highway 1 all the way to Whatcom Road in Abbotsford at a later date.
https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2022TRAN0115-001693
Anyone know of a good archive of BC highway maps or logs? I'm researching the history of Highway 99 and have some significant gaps to cover, namely when it was extended across the Lions Gate Bridge and when the Duffey Lake Road was first opened to traffic.
Quote from: Bruce on December 04, 2022, 08:37:09 PM
Anyone know of a good archive of BC highway maps or logs? I'm researching the history of Highway 99 and have some significant gaps to cover, namely when it was extended across the Lions Gate Bridge and when the Duffey Lake Road was first opened to traffic.
UBC Science Library (original library) had some folders about 25 years ago containing old maps for transit and highway maps. There is also a pretty good stash of old maps at the Whitehorse, Yukon museum. Regarding Hwy 99 along the Duffy Lake, it was around 1986 (just around Expo '86) that I remember the route being paved north of Pemberton, except for about 10 km of flat section which ran through the Mount Currey Indian Reservation. Highway 12 between Lillooet and Hat Creek lost its '12' numbering to 99 sometime in the 90's. I am not sure if I agree with that move.
The old numbering system of US highways (99, 97, 95, and 93) was continued into BC, replacing the old, simpler BC system, occurred in the early 1950s; before that BC97 in the Okanagan was Highway 5 and 93 and 95 had different numbers too, I think 4. By 1950 the King George VI Highway, to become mostly 99A around 1960, had already been numbered 99, connecting to US99 at Douglas Customs. This is recorded in road travel guides by CP Lyons, a prolific naturalist of BC, but also Washington. Milestones on the Mighty Fraser, with first printing 1950, by CP Lyons, mentions BC 99 in the text and on a map. Did you happen to find when BC 99 was first used? In contrast, Milestones in Ogopogland, also written by CP Lyons in the early 50s, records that now BC 97 was Highway 5, likely renumbered in 1953.
You seem to have information already on this section , but you can read about the present BC 99 between the border and Vancouver in a highway history called "From Frontier to Freeway" https://www.crownpub.bc.ca/Product/Details/7680001809_S
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/reports-and-reference/reports-and-studies/frontier_to_freeway.pdf
Highway 1 went across the Patullo Bridge and along Kingway to Vancouver until all the freeways got build and rejigged the system around 1960. For a while, the freeway sections were named 499 and 401, as the BC government was fighting with the feds. The Trans-Canada would be Highway 1, except in the four-lane sections, kind of mimicking Ontario.
It seems that 99 was not extended north of the Fraser Highway (Highway 1) until the Port Mann Bridge and Dease Island Thruway (George Massey Tunnel) were built, rerouting both systems.
Wikipedia is pretty useless at the older history, somehow most of the highways appeared in 1953, the first majority government year of BC Social Credit government reign, but really most had been around back to the 1920's, just not in nowhere the condition they would be improved to in the 1950s.
I hope this helps, but would be interested to know what you have found yourself.
Well, I found on the internet that HYW 99 signage extended north of Pemberton in 1992, which is probably about right, but that was pretty cosmetic as paving had been done earlier. Improvements to the highway north of Lillooet occurred before the Olympics, and the section from Pavilion to Hat Creek was widened, straightened and the speed limit raised to 100 km/h from 80 km/hr in the early 90s. If changing the signage to get that work done was required, so be it.
On the Duffey Lake, does it warrant being numbered. Much of the route is 60km/hr, which is actually about as high as it should be. Some of the single-lane bridges have been replaced in the past 10 years and approaches straightened. For the longest time it was simply a logging road with asphalt slapped down on it.
Thanks, I've already managed to find some of this information by combing through newspaper archives. Found that the first use of "99" (and the other numbers) was in March 1940, a year earlier than what Wikipedia already had. The highway also had a special purple shield for the King George Highway section for a few years at least. Highway 99 was extended through to West Vancouver by 1955, so this preceded the Port Mann Bridge and Second Narrows Bridge by a few years.
I'm currently stuck on trying to find when the Whistler and Pemberton sections were paved, as all I can find are some vague years (1966 and 1975, respectively). The yearly reports from the Highway Ministry aren't all that clear either, so it's back to newspaper combing. I also need to dive deeper to find when the Sea to Sky Highway; the earliest mentions are from around 1985, so I presume it was being marketed as part of Expo 86. The provincial government had also worked on some rebuilding projects on the highway at the time, mostly in response to a bridge collapse that killed 9 people in 1981.
If you do have the information, don't hesitate to edit Wikipedia!
The Ontario articles are relatively well written simply because someone painstakingly sifted through old archives and stuff to write them!
The West Vancouver to Squamish section of the highway was simply known as the Squamish Highway, infamous of course for mudslides and washouts. I can remember the M Creek washout reports on the news in the early 80s. Part of the rebranding to Sea-to-Sky was probably to allay fears some people had from the early 80's and pitch the tourism aspect, especially Whistler.
A book by R.G. Harvey, carving the Western Path, aRoutes to Remember, has a good segment on the debris torrents in HowemWound in the early 80's. He describes some of the remedial actions by highways crews in the mid 80's.
The segment of highway through the Mount Currie Indian Reserve north of Pemberton actually stayed unpaved years after the Duffey Lake Road was paved, even though it was signed 99. It certainly kept the traffic slower.
You must be able to find the annual BC Highways tourism maps of that era, mid 1960's to 70's. They were available at all chambers of commerce and tourism bureaus. They were pretty accurate when it came to pavement, as the governments of the time knew asphalt equalled votes. The later ones from the mid 80's on showed towns as all the same font size and missed details of the earler maps.
Quote from: splashflash on December 10, 2022, 12:40:31 PM
The segment of highway through the Mount Currie Indian Reserve north of Pemberton actually stayed unpaved years after the Duffey Lake Road was paved, even though it was signed 99. It certainly kept the traffic slower.
You must be able to find the annual BC Highways tourism maps of that era, mid 1960's to 70's. They were available at all chambers of commerce and tourism bureaus. They were pretty accurate when it came to pavement, as the governments of the time knew asphalt equalled votes. The later ones from the mid 80's on showed towns as all the same font size and missed details of the earler maps.
Already found some newspaper clippings for the Mount Currie situation, which included a blockade and standoff. Unfortunately the maps aren't readily available to me, since I'm not willing to pay $10+shipping for a map on eBay that may or may not be in good condition. Plus, they're not exactly usable as citations on Wikipedia amid the current climate there.
I assume you are looking at these types of files?https://open.library.ubc.ca/viewer/bcsessional/1.0377971#p6z0r0f:
They do have highway district info on paving.
And yes, the Wikipedia pages for BC highways has improved in the last year or so, with history before 1953. Perhaps this partly owing to researchers like you.
I once mentioned it on the late Canroads mailing list and I thought it might be good to re-mention it here. I saw these old pictures posted on Skyscraperpage forums where TCH-1 was known as TCH-401.
https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5737743&postcount=3353
Edit: Looks like I also did a thread on AARoads about it, sorry. :-/ https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6978.0
Wow, all those new bridges are quite a sight to behold. This is truly an engineering marvel! I can't wait to drive on it once it's done.
Random question (cross-posted to the Washington thread): Why are commercial vehicles (trucks/buses) banned from using the Peach Arch border crossing between BC and Washington? The only information I can find online is that it's been that way since 1970, but no explanation as to why that's the case. Any insight appreciated!
Quote from: webny99 on March 04, 2023, 11:56:00 AM
Random question (cross-posted to the Washington thread): Why are commercial vehicles (trucks/buses) banned from using the Peach Arch border crossing between BC and Washington? The only information I can find online is that it's been that way since 1970, but no explanation as to why that's the case. Any insight appreciated!
As noted in the Washington thread, there is a parallel truck route 1.5 km east (BC-15, WA-543).
https://goo.gl/maps/iorgrrE8mcrPcwR3A
https://goo.gl/maps/2fHA9whNqwdfwutH6
Was first time noticing how BC Ministry of Highways or Transportation shields the Trans Canada Highway.
Interesting.
Quote from: roadman65 on March 06, 2023, 07:11:30 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/iorgrrE8mcrPcwR3A
https://goo.gl/maps/2fHA9whNqwdfwutH6
Was first time noticing how BC Ministry of Highways or Transportation shields the Trans Canada Highway.
Interesting.
What's interesting about it? These shields are similar to what other western provinces use. Are you comparing to Ontario?
(https://i.imgur.com/LXw6vLC.png)
New shields that have been popping up in the last 1-2 years. I do not like.
Quote from: webny99 on March 04, 2023, 11:56:00 AM
Random question (cross-posted to the Washington thread): Why are commercial vehicles (trucks/buses) banned from using the Peach Arch border crossing between BC and Washington? The only information I can find online is that it's been that way since 1970, but no explanation as to why that's the case. Any insight appreciated!
Because it's in the middle of a park.
Re the new shields on BGSs - less aesthetically pleasing, sure, but I can't help but notice they're better as far as visibility goes
Quote from: bcroadguy on March 07, 2023, 06:50:51 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/LXw6vLC.png)
New shields that have been popping up in the last 1-2 years. I do not like.
It seems to have taken inspiration from Quebec (with the condensed shields)
Quote from: bcroadguy on March 07, 2023, 06:50:51 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/LXw6vLC.png)
New shields that have been popping up in the last 1-2 years. I do not like.
Just noticing that all of those new signs for the 91/17 connector have Highway Gothic cardinal directions. So weird to see new Highway Gothic on an overhead guide sign in BC.
Now if only they could switch away from Clearview for all numbers. I don't mind Clearview on destination legends too much as long as the font size is appropriate, but Clearview numerals are yuck.
Quote from: vdeane on March 08, 2023, 12:57:27 PM
Now if only they could switch away from Clearview for all numbers. I don't mind Clearview on destination legends too much as long as the font size is appropriate, but Clearview numerals are yuck.
It's possible. They already specify three different fonts for various situations: Highway Gothic for the "1" on the TCH shield, Helvetica for the vast majority of other shields, and Clearview for sign legend.
Quote from: jakeroot on March 08, 2023, 11:26:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 08, 2023, 12:57:27 PM
Now if only they could switch away from Clearview for all numbers. I don't mind Clearview on destination legends too much as long as the font size is appropriate, but Clearview numerals are yuck.
It's possible. They already specify three different fonts for various situations: Highway Gothic for the "1" on the TCH shield, Helvetica for the vast majority of other shields, and Clearview for sign legend.
Speaking of which, the numerals for highway 17 on this sign are also in highway gothic! I'm beginning to wonder whether these font changes and the alternate shield design are a mistake or a new standard...
Quote from: stevashe on March 09, 2023, 11:22:21 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 08, 2023, 11:26:43 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 08, 2023, 12:57:27 PM
Now if only they could switch away from Clearview for all numbers. I don't mind Clearview on destination legends too much as long as the font size is appropriate, but Clearview numerals are yuck.
It's possible. They already specify three different fonts for various situations: Highway Gothic for the "1" on the TCH shield, Helvetica for the vast majority of other shields, and Clearview for sign legend.
Speaking of which, the numerals for highway 17 on this sign are also in highway gothic! I'm beginning to wonder whether these font changes and the alternate shield design are a mistake or a new standard...
The new Highway Gothic shields do appear in the updated-for-2022 Guide Sign manual, but I don't see any specific mentions of Highway Gothic:
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/transportation-infrastructure/engineering-standards-and-guidelines/traffic-engineering-and-safety/traffic-engineering/traffic-signs-and-pavement-markings/standard-traffic-signs/standard-traffic-signs/guide_signs.pdf
Publication on expansion of BC-1 from 264th to Chilliwack:
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/transportation-infrastructure-projects/highway-1-fraser-valley/hwy1-264-highway11/2023-discussion-guide-264-highway11.pdf
New DDI at BC-11! Most of the Abbotsford bottlenecks eliminated too.
Quote from: TXtoNJ on August 03, 2023, 10:00:53 PM
Publication on expansion of BC-1 from 264th to Chilliwack:
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/transportation-infrastructure-projects/highway-1-fraser-valley/hwy1-264-highway11/2023-discussion-guide-264-highway11.pdf
New DDI at BC-11! Most of the Abbotsford bottlenecks eliminated too.
Very impressive plan, and very sorely needed. The backups west from Abbotsford into Vancouver are biblical.
I appreciate that this isn't a small-time plan; from 4, up to 8 lanes, plus 99-style bus-running in the shoulder. And massive interchange rebuilds too.
The DDI is pretty cool, I think that's a smart location for one as well. But I gotta say, that 264 St interchange is mighty impressive too. That whole interchange has needed rebuilding for a long time, the on-ramp merges are crazy dangerous (no merge area at all), plus the overpass is strangling Hwy 1.
As a side-note, I find having both an HOV and bus lane on the same carriageway to be highly unusual.
Canadian military wages annual war against avalanches in Rogers PassTeri Fikowski · CTV News Calgary · Published Feb. 16, 2024 7:12 a.m. MST · Updated Feb. 16, 2024 9:35 a.m. MST
https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/canadian-military-wages-annual-war-against-avalanches-in-rogers-pass-1.6771738
QuoteRogers Pass is between Revelstoke and Golden, B.C., where the Trans-Canada Highway and the Canadian Pacific Railway snake through the Selkirk Mountains.
At roughly 1,300 metres above sea level, Rogers Pass receives on average 10 metres of snowfall each winter, with more than 130 active avalanche paths criss-crossing a 40-kilometre stretch of the busy highway.
Since 1961, the year before the Trans-Canada Highway fully opened, Parks Canada and the Canadian Armed Forces have worked together to run the world's largest mobile artillery avalanche control program and Canada's longest-running domestic military operation.
Interesting story about avalanche control in Glacier National Park between Revelstoke and Golden.