TOMapleLaughs Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Wait, what? That stupidass tunnel needed a massive upgrade years ago. As you were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coda Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Factual data > your anecdotes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Anyway, a bigger capacity bridge between Delta and Richmond isn't going to help much unless the capacity between Richmond and Vancouver (currently the Oak and Knight Street Bridges) is also increased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Less Traffic (in terms of number of cars through the tunnel per day) and a commute taking longer are not mutually exclusive. If a road slows to a crawl for hours each day, like in the Massey Tunnel Bottleneck, fewer cars get through, more people divert to other routes, and the commute takes longer for everybody. Anyway, a bigger capacity bridge between Delta and Richmond isn't going to help much unless the capacity between Richmond and Vancouver (currently the Oak and Knight Street Bridges) is also increased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offensive Threat Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I'm not proposing all of Canada but rather something just in BC (Maybe into Alberta similar to what they have in the Alps, to connect all the small towns which attract plenty of Skiers and Snowboarders during the winter (Our biggest tourist attractions are the ski resorts). It just gives another quicker option rather than driving everywhere, since we don't have any major airports connecting all the smaller towns and ski resorts. We need something cheap and quick with multiple lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
key2thecup Posted October 4, 2012 Author Share Posted October 4, 2012 That's not the problem, and expanding the highway would make it worse. The problem exists because you have 2 lanes of highway traffic, combining with all the inflow/merging traffic from 72nd and nordel (so another 4 lanes for 6 total) into 3 bridge lanes. Same on the other side. You have 2 lanes of highway traffic that merge with one, then another, then two more, then another, and all have to fit onto 3 lanes on the bridge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainly Mattias Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 what you would never hear a man say: "I don't happen to be an engineer but tunnels don't seem to be in vogue right now." NOT EVERYONE GOES TO VANCOUVER. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 ..but ..but ..we don't care about those people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverpig Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Great point about Oak Street, someone else made that point a few years ago while promoting the SFPR. Who was that again? "Kevin Falcon, who a few year’s ago, when Minister of Transportation, observed that a new tunnel would not be needed-- It would only push the congestion a few kilometres down the road to the Oak Street Bridge." http://www.yourlibra...60218/news.html Huh, weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 How the heck does it take 10 years just to "plan and design"??? Then what - 10 more years to build the bloody thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkeeterHansen Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 He can't hear you, he's posing for more pictures over in Hawaii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 " From the 2008 Regional Screenline Survey (measuring traffic volumes in the Lower Mainland): . The total number of vehicles per day in 2008 was 390,972, which reflects a minor decrease of 2.6% from 401,227 vehicles in 2004; the greatest decreases were at the Deas Tunnel (-7.5%) and the Pattullo Bridge (-5.8%) …" Just sayin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 I bet the traffic volume yesterday was WAY down from the norm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 I have no idea what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Gridlock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 So traffic yesterday is indicative of traffic trends over 4 years? Do you think the stats are lying? I don't know what you're getting at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Less volume is indicative of MORE congestion. Less congestion would = more volume. Lower volume is stupid reasoning for whether improvements would be helpful or not to a given crossing. Your post/data are if anything are counter to the point you were trying to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Panties = no knots. Not making any assumptions. I drive that route every day. If there's lower volume it's because there's an issue with congestion. Not because of a lack of demand or whatever point you were trying to make. The exits two/from Steveston and Highway 17 being the likeliest culprits for causing the issues as both areas continue to add development/density that increase traffic choking those merge points to and from the highway/tunnel. They can't handle the capacity and every rush hour the exits on to the highway are backed up and the exits off of the highway are backed up creating parking lots. All because of choke points there. Not because of traffic heading to Vancouver (though surely some of it is) not because of Oak street or the bridge of the same name. Because people can't get in or out of south Delta or Richmond and it gridlocks the tunnel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 To add to that, perhaps we don't actually need a new tunnel, perhaps we need better or more merge points in and out of South Richmond/Delta. Though I think then the tunnel becomes the choke point rather than the exits so we're back to where we started with also needing a new tunnel. Otherwise, have you come up with any ideas for mass transit in the 99 corridor yet? I'd love to be able to take a bus down Scott road in the morning and hop on a train at say highway 10 or something that went right to South Richmond but that's a good few decades off I'd wager. Until then we're going to need to do something with the current gridlock, never mind the millions more people whoe are expected to show up, some of which are surely going to need to head down the 99... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Panties = no knots. Not making any assumptions. I drive that route every day. If there's lower volume it's because there's an issue with congestion. Not because of a lack of demand or whatever point you were trying to make. The exits two/from Steveston and Highway 17 being the likeliest culprits for causing the issues as both areas continue to add development/density that increase traffic choking those merge points to and from the highway/tunnel. They can't handle the capacity and every rush hour the exits on to the highway are backed up and the exits off of the highway are backed up creating parking lots. All because of choke points there. Not because of traffic heading to Vancouver (though surely some of it is) not because of Oak street or the bridge of the same name. Because people can't get in or out of south Delta or Richmond and it gridlocks the tunnel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.