Hwy 99 Fraser River Tunnel (George Massey Replacement) | Proposed

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by jhausner

According to census numbers, in 2001 the population was actually 1,990,000. That's +700,000 people or a mistake of 200,000 people total. Again this is projections 10 years into the future, not roughly 30 years into the future like the projections in the transit studies

Or, we could look at actual, recorded numbers, which show that traffic through the tunnel has been declining for almost a decade. If you're looking for something to base a decision on, it's hard to argue with actual traffic counts.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Or, we could look at actual, recorded numbers, which show that traffic through the tunnel has been declining for almost a decade. If you're looking for something to base a decision on, it's hard to argue with actual traffic counts.

Do you have a link to these numbers? Is the peak traffic declining, or is it overall traffic? I only ask because I've had some terrible rush hour experiences at that crossing.

I thought part of the discussion was around the end of the tunnel's useful life, earthquake risk, etc.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Do you have a link to these numbers?

The MOT web site: http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/trafficdata/tradas/tradas.asp?loc=P-16-4NS

The data is summarized in this blog post: http://canadianveggie.wordpress.com/2012/11/01/end-of-blacktop-politics-peak-car-use-in-vancouver/

Graph from the latter:

[jlousa]

gotta love a graph that doesn't start at 0, really skews the visuals. Looking at the graph it appears the tunnel carries ~82K cars/day on average if we toss out 2004 which appears to be an anonomly, last year it took 80.5K/day (estimated) which is down ~2%. Well within the margin of error.
The reason we don't see the numbers increase over the years is the tunnel is at capacity, it can't go up. Looking at the graph there certainly isn't an observable downward trend if anything it shows traffic pretty steady even in the face of increasing gas prices.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by jlousa

gotta love a graph that doesn't start at 0, really skews he visuals. Looking at the graph it appears the tunnel carries ~82K cars/day on average if we toss out 2004 which appears to be an anonomly, last year it took 80.5K/day (estimated) which is down ~2%. Well within the margin of error.
The reason we don't see the numbers increase over the years is the tunnel is at capacity, it can't go up. Looking at the graph there certainly isn't an observable downward trend if anything it shows traffic pretty steady even in the face of increasing gas prices.

But it can go down if there are a few extra major accidents that shut it down or take out lanes, or if there is any sort of construction that reduces the capacity of the at capacity bridge.
simple math: subtract weekends and holidays and you have roughly 250 days in the year, one accident during the rush hour that shuts it down for most of the day could reduce the annual volume by as much as 0.25%. These things would add up very quickly to give you a year over year fluctuation of a few percent.

[WarrenC12]

I agree with the above 2 posts, although I doubt it's "at capacity" like the old PMB was.

That being said, with the age of the tunnel and the volume and safety issues, it needs replacing. However I also think 6 lanes (with one each way as HOV) is probably plenty of capacity for that corridor. Then maybe another crossing around No. 8 road in the future.

[jlenko]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I doubt it's "at capacity" like the old PMB was.

I never take the tunnel... because it's always backed up really, really bad... kind of like the Port Mann used to be.

If it's not at capacity (during rush hours), then I don't know how else one would describe it.

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I agree with the above 2 posts, although I doubt it's "at capacity" like the old PMB was.

That being said, with the age of the tunnel and the volume and safety issues, it needs replacing. However I also think 6 lanes (with one each way as HOV) is probably plenty of capacity for that corridor. Then maybe another crossing around No. 8 road in the future.

6 through lanes is plenty. But I would say an extra add/drop lane (like the Pitt River) is definitely warranted (8 lanes total - 2 HOV, 4 general purpose, 2 add/drop).

If you have three lanes in either direction at that location, and interchanges at each end, you need those add/drop lanes.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by jlousa

The reason we don't see the numbers increase over the years is the tunnel is at capacity, it can't go up. Looking at the graph there certainly isn't an observable downward trend if anything it shows traffic pretty steady even in the face of increasing gas prices.

Before you discount those numbers, you should be aware that they're almost exactly in line with a continent-wide trend toward less driving. Vehicle miles travelled per person all across North America has steadily declined since 2004, driven partly by the fact that more and more Millennials are using other modes of transportation. This is exemplified by the fact that fewer young people have drivers licenses now than at any time since 1967.

Here's an interesting post on the subject from Jarrett Walker's Human Transit blog.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

6 through lanes is plenty. But I would say an extra add/drop lane (like the Pitt River) is definitely warranted (8 lanes total - 2 HOV, 4 general purpose, 2 add/drop).

Problem is that you are not looking 30 - 40 years into the future!

Think Granville Street Bridge in Vancouver that went to 8 lanes in the early '50's design (from an ancient and dilapidated 4-lane existing structure)! Now that's looking forward into the future. Not the now or the near-now!

2+3+3+2 or the new PMB is what I suspect will happen. But the new PMB should have had 2+4+4+2 for the next 30 plus years IMHO. Just look at when new bridges were constructed in Metro Vancouver and when they were at capacity.

The Knight Street Bridge, for example, was 4-lanes when it opened up circa 1974 in order to replace the old 2-lane Fraser St. Bridge. Yet 20 years later, as witnessed in the 1990's GMT studies, a further expansion to 6-lanes was required. That expansion should have happened over a decade ago. Every evening that thing is a complete bottleneck heading into Van City.

Always think big people!!!!

PS. As a White Rock resident, I always have to detour to Hwy 91 when I head to Van City in the late afternoon. I wish people here would have the ability to enjoy what a late weekday afternoon is like heading NB into the GMT - 3 NB Hwy 99 lanes, 2 NB Hwy 17 lanes (with ferry traffic), and 2 NB River Road lanes backed up for a total of 7 lanes. Waits can be atrocious!

And they all have to squeeze into 1 lane NB thru the GMT. Totally brutal!

PSS. The new GMT replacement won't be announced until after the 2017 election and won't be completed until circa 2025.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Problem is that you are not looking 30 - 40 years into the future!

Think Granville Street Bridge in Vancouver that went to 8 lanes in the early '50's design (from an ancient and dilapidated 4-lane existing structure)! Now that's looking forward into the future.

A future that never happened. The bridge was supposed to be part of the freeway network that delivered commuters right into downtown, along with the Georgia viaduct. Those freeways never materialized, and the Granville Street bridge has never been fully used. That's why they're considering converting the middle two lanes into a pedestrian/cyclist mall.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Before you discount those numbers, you should be aware that they're almost exactly in line with a continent-wide trend toward less driving. Vehicle miles travelled per person all across North America has steadily declined since 2004, driven partly by the fact that more and more Millennials are using other modes of transportation. This is exemplified by the fact that fewer young people have drivers licenses now than at any time since 1967.

Here's an interesting post on the subject from Jarrett Walker's Human Transit blog.

Basically celebrating the fact that the economic opportunities that allowed young people personal mobility are drying up in North America. That's "progress".

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Basically celebrating the fact that the economic opportunities that allowed young people personal mobility are drying up in North America. That's "progress".

I'm sure that there's some of that going on. But a lot of young people are choosing to live in urban areas specifically so that they don't need a car. They don't do that because they can't afford a car, they're choosing to forgo the "American Dream" of owning a house in the 'burbs because they have different priorities than their parents did. I actually see that as a very positive thing.

[GlassCity]

I can confirm as a young person that 95% of young people would drive if they could afford it.

[Millennium2002]

Sigh. This talk of who needs/wants a car is becoming more of a urban vs suburban lifestyle debate, which I'd wish not to debate here. Personally, I'd favour a more environmentally sensible type of development that is denser and more oriented towards shorter and greener commutes, but anyway...

I'm pretty sure there are more moderate opinions here like me that favour a mix of road and transit expansions to add traffic capacity and promote a sensible and appropriate mix of transport options for all types and volumes of traffic.

In the case of the George Massey Tunnel, I'm thinking that a toll bridge of three or four general traffic lanes + one HOV lane in each direction beside the existing tunnel is the most likely option. Assuming traffic stays steady, three lanes should handle existing volumes; however, induced demand and future expansion concerns probably favours four lanes over three.

In some ways this proposal sounds like a repeat of the ongoing Highway 1 / Port Mann Bridge project... lol.

[red-paladin]

Yes, please stick to the topic

[Metro-One]

Even with slight to moderate declines in personal vehicle use this tunnel still needs to be replaced, there is no excuse for the regions primary north / south route to be reduced to a single in one direction twice a day. Also the tunnel is old, the lanes very narrow, and there are no options as it is for rapid bus transit expansion or pedestrian / cycling use.

An 8 lane bridge (2 general purpose each way, 1 HOV / Bus lane each way, and 1 add / drop lane each way) with wide separated sidewalks for pedestrians and bikes is the best way to go for this replacement.

[libtard]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Even with slight to moderate declines in personal vehicle use this tunnel still needs to be replaced, there is no excuse for the regions primary north / south route to be reduced to a single in one direction twice a day. Also the tunnel is old, the lanes very narrow, and there are no options as it is for rapid bus transit expansion or pedestrian / cycling use.

An 8 lane bridge (2 general purpose each way, 1 HOV / Bus lane each way, and 1 add / drop lane each way) with wide separated sidewalks for pedestrians and bikes is the best way to go for this replacement.

There is no excuse for the region's primary north/south route to funnel onto a four lane bridge that instantly becomes an arterial road full of stop lights. The problem is way beyond the George Massey tunnel

[tybuilding]

Originally Posted by libtard

There is no excuse for the region's primary north/south route to funnel onto a four lane bridge that instantly becomes an arterial road full of stop lights. The problem is way beyond the George Massey tunnel

It does, it will stay that way. Lets face it that there is not much reason to commute daily from Delta to West Van across Vancouver. Adding a freeway to Vancouver is impracticable and expensive and unnecessary. People commuting to downtown should switch to transit. With parking at $20 a day you would be stupid to commute downtown in my opinion.

As far as cycling is concerned there needs to be serious upgrading of the networks outside of the crossing. This project will be unacceptable if they just throw $2 million or so to upgrade the networks. It is not enough considering this project will likely cost another $3-5 billion if it is like the Port Mann. Surrey has a plan for a greenway pathway parallel to the 99 on the east side of the 99. This project should fund the entire length. At the same time the route though Delta should be done properly, ideally a multi-use path separated from the 99 or highway 10. The path on Shell Road in Richmond should be upgraded and extended and connected to the Canada Line bridge and to the tunnel.

My Proposed Cycling infrastructure routing and upgrades

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by libtard

There is no excuse for the region's primary north/south route to funnel onto a four lane bridge that instantly becomes an arterial road full of stop lights. The problem is way beyond the George Massey tunnel

Agreed but it's always going to stay that way and there's no use arguing about the spilt milk. Thats whats been dealt. My boss compared it to visiting a third world country when he was invited on a ski trip to Whistler and he was forced to navigate through all these streets. He asked if there are all these beautiful buildings, a great transit system, world class dining establishments, etc, why is there not a freeway anywhere? I told him that Vancouverites expect you to take public transit to go skiing.

Originally Posted by tybuilding

It does, it will stay that way. Lets face it that there is not much reason to commute daily from Delta to West Van across Vancouver. Adding a freeway to Vancouver is impracticable and expensive and unnecessary. People commuting to downtown should switch to transit. With parking at $20 a day you would be stupid to commute downtown in my opinion.

As far as cycling is concerned there needs to be serious upgrading of the networks outside of the crossing. This project will be unacceptable if they just throw $2 million or so to upgrade the networks. It is not enough considering this project will likely cost another $3-5 billion if it is like the Port Mann. Surrey has a plan for a greenway pathway parallel to the 99 on the east side of the 99. This project should fund the entire length. At the same time the route though Delta should be done properly, ideally a multi-use path separated from the 99 or highway 10. The path on Shell Road in Richmond should be upgraded and extended and connected to the Canada Line bridge and to the tunnel.

My Proposed Cycling infrastructure routing and upgrades

I dont know of anyone commuting from Delta to West Van and if they did I dont envy them.