Turns out that TransLink provides weekly updates on the Pattullo Bridge traffic counts – with some attractive charts if you’re into that kind of thing:
.
.
And if you are, there’s plenty more where that come from – here.
Upshot: There’s lots of variation in the counts, but overall, traffic seems to be up 5 to 7 percent post Port Mann Bridge opening.
That’s probably a small but perceptible change to drivers, given that the use of bridge is maxxed out at rush hours. But not high enough to suggest the leakage will have a negative impact on the expected numbers for Port Mann – unless there’s been a drop-off of traffic crossing the Fraser.
Is there any change to Golden Ears Bridge numbers?
not sure, how this conclusion can be drawn of the link…there is no traffic number prior the opening of the Port Mann…
The number I have (http://voony.wordpress.com/2010/12/01/bridge-traffic/ ) suggests no much difference.
By the way, the translink number are very hard to work with because embedded in pdf, requiring lot of manual operation, the MOT provide excel sheet (much better)
it is time to consider what its french counterpart is doing: http://data.ratp.fr/
Your stats only give one week.
Here’s the full stats week by week from Dec 2- Feb 23: http://ow.ly/j1UJX
With the Port Mann Tolls and the SFPR opening right before, there is little reason for people to not use the pattullo other than the fact that the Pattullo’s congested. The toll’s main detriment is its ability to make people aware of the true costs of roads and bridges.
A toll is exactly what should be done with the massey tunnel: a fifty cent toll per crossing would by my best educated guess reduce the volume of cars by more than 3%, even maybe 7 or 10%. Yes I’m just putting random numbers here, but I hope you get my point that even a small toll will drastically cut down congestion. And while we’re at it, how about charging the Lions Gate and Second Narrows and every other bridge in the region… Maybe it’s time to toll the Pattullo?