Setting the record straight on the new Pattullo
New West NewsLeader Editor Chris Bryan has been a leading voice in the opposition to TransLink’s plan for to replace the Pattullo Bridge. In a recent editorial, he advocated retaining the existing bridges, expanding its lanes to modern safety standards, improving pedestrian and bike access, and giving the crossing a nice paint job. At a cost of $200 million, he suggested the remaining $800 million go towards transit in Surrey. While that all sounds wonderful, there are a few realities that Bryan refuses to acknowledge in his scenario.
First off, there is no pot of money waiting to be used on a $1 billion Pattullo replacement. If a new bridge was built, it is highly likely that it would be paid for by tolls, just as the Golden Ears and Port Mann have done. The talk about Victoria or Ottawa throwing in hundreds of millions to remove the need for tolls is laughable and merely sideshow politics to diffuse the growing toll backlash among commuters.
Therefore, there is not $800 million available to just build transit in Surrey. There’s not even $30 million available to run Kevin Falcon’s promised rapid bus across the new Port Mann. If the money isn’t coming from tolls on a new bridge, then explain where it will arrive from, because until then, the whole debate is moot.
Secondly, does Surrey understand New West’s issues with traffic? Absolutely, as do all cities. However, talk of dismantling the bridge does sound assanine to commuters – and not just those of us South of the Fraser. We live in a region, and lifestyles do not end at municipal borders. So let’s take that talk off the table and start discussing realistic options.
TransLink’s proposal is for a six-lane bridge, two lanes of which would be dedicated to goods movement. Therefore, in all actuality, the new Pattullo would look very much like the old one: four lanes for everyday vehicles. The big difference is that this bridge would actually be built to modern safety standards, which is the current crossing’s biggest issue and the main reason we’re talking about its replacement.
But let’s say the six-lane option is off the table. Vancouver refused to accept an expanded Lions Gate and everything’s turned out all right there. If we keep the existing bridge, as you propose, the only way we can make it safe is by reducing lane width and making the bridge a three-lane counterflow. Let’s be frank; there is no other way to improve the safety of the Pattullo without reducing its capacity. Maybe, in a post-Port Mann II world, with all the new lanes on Hwy 1, it won’t be a big problem. We don’t know yet.
If New West has decided that a modern version of the existing bridge is unacceptable, we will have to move to plan B. It’s fine to do so, but let’s be clear about what we’re actually talking it now: a Pattullo Bridge with reduced capacity from four lanes to three-lanes counterflow, estimated to cost $200 million. And we don’t even have the money to pay for it.
-
Great post Paul!
Although you mentioned something that needs to be further discussed. The new Portmann bridge is going to be built with tolls and the older bridges don’t have tolls. It’s possible that there will be even more traffic going through New West because I believe many people will want to save money by taking the Patullo instead. I don’t think even Paul Bryan wants this.
We need to plan for the future and that means more lanes and improved safety!
-
translink has already determined that the Golden Ears bridge is going to handle the re routed traffic when commuters don’t want to pay the tolls on the new Port Mann bridge … ok I was able to say that with almost a straight face, the reality is that there is going to be between a 60-80% volume shift to the Pattullo bridge in the weeks after the tolls go on the Port Mann bridge. Grid lock will ensue and commuters will look to the only other free option to cross the Fraser at the Alex Fraser bridge, yes there is the tunnel but it is to far west to be a viable option for most. The grid lock that is going to result around the Alex Fraser and Pattullo bridges will force translink to reconsider their tolling policy and there is going to be a drastic reduction in toll fees in the region to increase the use of the Port Mann and Golden Ears. The only option that will solve the problem will be to drop tolling fees to $1.00 for cars and light trucks and $2.50 for commercial vehicles. This will create the same revenue that they are looking for and spread the volume out over the four crossing. Any other option will fail and the Port Mann and Golden Ears will turn into bicycle crossing at best.
-
If it’s about goods movement, why not refurbish or rebuild the train bridge that is upriver the Pattullo? That way the Pattullo can be built (or refurbished) with the notion that fewer cars and trucks will be traveling over it and can be built with a smaller capacity that may appease those living in New Westminster.
Both bridges could be tolled if need be and it would provide future opportunities and capacity for better transit going across the Fraser.
-
I have to really disagree with you on a couple of points. A six lane bridge that opened up goods movement with four lanes ongoing would drop a lot of new traffic onto New West’s local roads, local roads that are already badly snarled. Your assumption that it wouldn’t look all that different is widely optimistic. We’d be building a freeway style bridge to in the heart of New West, with the potential to wreck the city’s resurgence.
A brand new four lane bridge is the absolute biggest new bridge that should be considered and only if the safety issues of the current Pattullo are insurmountable. Frankly, three lanes with proper lane reversals and the new capacity of the Port Mann is just as likely to provide all the capacity needed.
You’re right that there isn’t a pot of a billion dollars lying around but the question still stands: is building a new six lane Pattullo or refurbishing the existing bridge and building transit for Surrey a better use of a billion dollars? The later is almost certainly a better bang for our buck, again considering how much new capacity will be coming on with the new Port Mann.
The unfortunate reality though is that Translink is pushing this project largely because: a. tolls are the only revenue option that hasn’t been cutoff by the project, b. the Ministry of Transportation won’t let it build transit infrastructure projects but will let them build bridges, c. it’s easier to sell politically in a region still dominated by car drivers. In short, thanks to the machinations of those fools in Victoria, this is literally the only project of any serious scope that Translink can pursue. Never mind that the Golden Ears hasn’t worked out all that hot so far.
-
I disagree with some of your points. I’m very familiar with New Westminster and I believe that many of the traffic problems right now are because the Pattullo is so packed. Look at McBride blvd, or Royal Avenue, they’re usually very busy heading out of New West and causes traffic for everybody. If there are six-lanes in the new bridge, Surrey commuters will be able to get home fast and therefore there will be less traffic jams in New Westminster.
-
Or induced demand will quickly fill all of the Patullo with all of the excess backing further into New Westminster. It’s now blatantly obvious that you cannot build your way out of congestion and that it’s foolish to try.
-
So you believe that if we build more lanes;even more cars will fill it up. I would normally agree but I trust that if New West improves it’s road network to better integrate with the new Pattullo bridge(6 lanes) then we would have a much better situation then we do now. Bear in mind that bridge was built before any modern planning. For example, that’s why the Columbia St on-ramp has to be closed during rush hours.
-
-
-
-
Then reduce the current Pattullo to 3 lanes for safety, but have a Congestion Charge on the bridge (and exempt commercial vehicles). This would reduce congestion making it easier for commercial vehicles to cross the Fraser, without costing them. You can then take the money from the Congestion Charge and put it towards transit south of the Fraser?
-
You haven’t driven over the Pattullo lately then, commercial vehicles are the main cause of congestion problems since they are unsure how to drive across a bridge in one lane and therefore straddle two lanes and drive below the posted speed limit. Years ago (and not all that many) when MOT built a scales at south end of Pattullo bridge commercial traffic would not use it because they were all running over weight and the fines were to great. Now that the scales are gone the commercial traffic volume has increased year over year while it has been reduced on the Alex Fraser and Port Mann bridges … where the scales are !!!
-
-
Does any body in New Westminster realize either removing or reducing the bridge will effect new west in a very bad way?
Lets say we remove it complete. Many small local business will like get shut down do to less people coming to the city and shipping and receiving price would go up for supplies. Due to the fact they’d have to go all the way to the port mann pay the toll or alex fraser thus wasting more of the drivers time and gas. On top of some of the smaller place have a good chance of shutting down mean there would likely be less place for locals to work in new westminster. Almost seems likes new west wants to kill itself.
One of the keys to new westminster growth in the past was due to the fact it was where the crossing in the region started with the K de K. Thus allowing people in the valley and USA to travel to shop and sell stuff. Back in the day New west wanted to be were it was at they loved having the only ferry in the area since it brought in business to the area.
-
Eric, You are seriously suggesting that 400,000+ cars a day driving through New West are not enough? That adding 30,000 more will somehow improve small businesses?
Yes, New Westminster’s initial growth was around important transportation links: the River, then the Rail line, then the Interurban, then the Pattullo.
But times change, and if downtown New Westminster businesses want to compete on a basis of car-accessibility, they are going to lose to Coquitlam Centre, Lougheed Mall, Surrey Centre, and big Box retail in Queensborough, Southlands, Richmond, Burnaby. That time is gone, and it ain’t coming back.
But New Westminster is again a hub, with more SkyTrain stations per capita than any community. That is their competitive advantage. A walkable, transit-oriented, compact city mixing commercial, retail, and residential space, a waterfront, and historic character. That is the future, and a 6-lane Pattullo threatens that.
-
-
I agree with there being no money available if there is only tolls. If tolls are not allowed then I think that we should go with the 3 lane refurb option. As for trucks it seems they are not that important:
My thoughts:
This is an interesting finding from the Delcan Report: http://www.translink.ca/~/media/docu…ssessment.ashx
Pattullo Bridge Truck Closure Analysis, Terry Partridge
Associates, (Apr. 2007)
Key Findings:
− The TransLink model was used to test the impacts of
closing the Pattullo Bridge to trucks in 2004 and 2011
scenarios. The results indicated “relatively small and
effectively unnoticeable” changes in truck volumes over
most of the network; the largest changes were at the
approaches to the Alex Fraser and Port Mann Bridges,
with two way diversions of 180 and 250 trucks per hour,
respectively.
Further down:
Significant numbers of
larger vehicles have been observed occupying a portion of the adjacent
lane as they cross the structure, likely to avert potential sideswipe
collisions.
Remove trucks from the bridge? There will be the new Gateway and SFPR to move trucks around the city along with improvements on the north side. This should be seriously considered. Trucks also add to pedestrian and cyclist discomfort much more so than passenger vehicles in my experience. Trucks push large amounts of air and that blows against pedestrians and cyclists.
Sidewalks can be expanded using a cantilevered structure like the Alex Fraser has.Reduce the bridge to 3 lanes, add the movable barrier, ban trucks.
The Lions Gate bridge bans trucks.
It is only 7km to the Alex Fraser on the new SFPR. Nothing.
It is only 13 km to 176 St on the new SFPR
At 80km/hr again pretty quick.If you are trucker in Whalley and need to go to New West it is only 6km extra to go over the Alex Fraser 10 km extra over the Port Mann. If you are not going from anywhere else in Surrey or anything west of New West or NE of New West you might as well drive those routes instead of the Patullo.
-
Wouldn’t the extra widening on the curves not be required if we didn’t have to worry about the off tracking of large vehicles? Rehab should be cheaper if it didn’t accommodate trucks either
-
-
No extra capacity eh?
The trucks that currently use the bridge are not vehicles? Surely, if a 6 lane bridge is built, the trucks that use the current 4 lanes would move onto their designated lane, meaning that the other 4 lanes would be freed from trucks. Yes Extra Capacity, actually, 50% more.
Toll/non-toll, a bridge going through a city of sprawl into a city destined to be the capital of BC is not a good idea. Added to the Waterfront park and walkway, noisy 4000 pound machines idling into a city not designed for 4000 pound machines is not a good idea.
As you recommended a few years ago for the PortMann, a 3 lane alternating centre bridge is a much better option than Translink’s proposal.
Comments