HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #841  
Old Posted May 5, 2014, 2:08 AM
aberdeen5698's Avatar
aberdeen5698 aberdeen5698 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post
Also of note is this new link will also have pedestrian and bike capabilities, something the current crossing also does not have.
Yes, that's something I'd very much look forward to.

Still waiting for these on the Port Mann. Not too much longer, I hope.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #842  
Old Posted May 5, 2014, 2:53 AM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 17,902
I you have not already ride over the Golden Ears Bridge one day, i use to do it all the time in the summer, a very fun ride and some amazing views from the bridge. It is also cool because they have these historical information plaques you can read along the way as well.
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/30634635@N03/with/29495547810/ and Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0_0h9qKlhxXFxuAey_q6Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #843  
Old Posted May 5, 2014, 2:57 PM
s211 s211 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: The People's Glorious Republic of ... Sigh...
Posts: 8,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post
Also of note is this new link will also have pedestrian and bike capabilities, something the current crossing also does not have.
I had an out-of-province friend on a bike road trip that road his bike through the tunnel, on his way to the ferry terminal. He couldn't figure out why everyone was so upset with him! Poor guy.
__________________
If it seems I'm ignoring what you may have written in response to something I have written, it's very likely that you're on my Ignore List. Please do not take it personally.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #844  
Old Posted May 6, 2014, 12:20 AM
DKaz DKaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Kelowna BC & Edmonton AB
Posts: 4,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post
I you have not already ride over the Golden Ears Bridge one day, i use to do it all the time in the summer, a very fun ride and some amazing views from the bridge. It is also cool because they have these historical information plaques you can read along the way as well.
I should ride on that bridge again, not on my wife's bike. lol.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #845  
Old Posted May 6, 2014, 10:16 PM
GMasterAres GMasterAres is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 3,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
Ya I've driven it, it's busy, I get it.

What would the new bridge cost? Toll? Expected crossings?
And that's exactly the point. A lot of people are making decisions that it should be X or Y and have A and B yet we don't even know the answers to those 3 questions. Will an 8 lane bridge be $100 million less than a 10 lane or 700 million less? Will a 10 lane require cheaper interchanges on either end? Will the crossing even be tolled given the US connection?

All I know from experience (and this is just my opinion remember) that given what is being built in South Surrey/Delta and Richmond, with 99 being the major link to the US for the region (outside maybe HWY17 though that does eventually connect directly to HWY99), and given current traffic craziness on a daily basis, 8 lanes in a configuration of 3 + HOV would to me be the bare minimum.

Reason? Currently in rush hour they already have 2 lanes + HOV and that doesn't cut it today. So you'd basically be building 1 more lane either direction. I think 10 lanes would make it future proof to the point we wouldn't talk about this crossing for another 50 years at least.

Quote:
I bet if you slapped the future toll on the tunnel today, the traffic would be significantly reduced.
Meh that will happen the day they slap a toll on the Granville Bridge in the hopes to force more people to ride bikes in Vancouver. It's a silly statement not founded in reality.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #846  
Old Posted May 6, 2014, 10:32 PM
GMasterAres GMasterAres is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 3,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberdeen5698 View Post
That's what started this discussion.
Missed that post by him. My bad. I agree then that rapid transit is a pointless 'perk' of a new bridge that will never see it built anyway. They should just say "new bridge for all the bloody trucks that use the crossing and will have HOV lanes." and be done with it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #847  
Old Posted May 8, 2014, 6:28 AM
VancouverOfTheFuture's Avatar
VancouverOfTheFuture VancouverOfTheFuture is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 3,481
i still think LRT/RRT is something that should be considered. we really don't know what the area will be like in 75-100 years. with how the Lower Mainland is growing we just can't know, as of now, what that area will be like. (i do agree, though, that it was thrown in just to appease people; i couldn't care less if it has it or not).

i know they are adding sidewalks/bike paths but i think that is a little odd, as of now that is. it would be a very long walk to not really get anywhere. though it is a good idea to add for the same reason as above, we just can't know what it will be like.

as for 8 or 10 lanes. some have had very good points on that here. the tunnel is 3 lanes in certain directions and certain times and it is still crazy busy. to truly make this crossing "future proof" it really should be 10 lanes. (it would have been interesting to see what it would be like now if the 6 lane tunnel had been built, and not the 4 lane version).

as for tolling it, I'm not a fan of tolls, but i get why they are needed. as of now the BC GOV has still not said if there will be tolls or not. i cant compare this to the toll announcement for the PMB since i don't know what phase of the project they announced that.

i do find it curious how people seem to be anti almost any type of road capacity increase in the Lower Mainland. and not just people on this forum but literally every project someone somewhere is holding up a sign whether it be online or on the pavement. we arent the same small cities that we were in the 1950's.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #848  
Old Posted May 8, 2014, 6:52 AM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Rational urbanist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 5,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture View Post
i still think LRT/RRT is something that should be considered. we really don't know what the area will be like in 75-100 years. with how the Lower Mainland is growing we just can't know, as of now, what that area will be like. (i do agree, though, that it was thrown in just to appease people; i couldn't care less if it has it or not).

i know they are adding sidewalks/bike paths but i think that is a little odd, as of now that is. it would be a very long walk to not really get anywhere. though it is a good idea to add for the same reason as above, we just can't know what it will be like.

as for 8 or 10 lanes. some have had very good points on that here. the tunnel is 3 lanes in certain directions and certain times and it is still crazy busy. to truly make this crossing "future proof" it really should be 10 lanes. (it would have been interesting to see what it would be like now if the 6 lane tunnel had been built, and not the 4 lane version).

as for tolling it, I'm not a fan of tolls, but i get why they are needed. as of now the BC GOV has still not said if there will be tolls or not. i cant compare this to the toll announcement for the PMB since i don't know what phase of the project they announced that.

i do find it curious how people seem to be anti almost any type of road capacity increase in the Lower Mainland. and not just people on this forum but literally every project someone somewhere is holding up a sign whether it be online or on the pavement. we arent the same small cities that we were in the 1950's.
I could get to work much quicker if they had bike lanes for example, so they're not completely unnecessary, they just serve a small population. As far as what the area will look like later on, I don't think it will change all that much. Most land here is ALR, and as far as densification I think that South Delta could challenge for Nimby Capital of Metro Vancouver. Seriously. Just about the entire weekly newspaper is written about developments.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #849  
Old Posted May 23, 2014, 1:20 AM
makr3trkr makr3trkr is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 593
http://www.surreyleader.com/news/260171541.html

Transportation Minister Todd Stone won't say whether the public will get a veto over possible tolls on a new bridge to replace the Massey Tunnel.

The province hasn't decided the scope or cost of the Highway 99 corridor project but Stone was asked by Black Press how he intends to get public approval for tolls if they're to finance the promised new bridge.

"If we end up going down the road of tolls on the George Massey Bridge, we would want to make sure that was well informed by the public in terms of some public input," Stone responded Wednesday.

Asked if the province would impose tolls anyway or abandon the idea if the public opposes paying to cross a new Massey Bridge, Stone was non-committal.

"It's absolutely premature," he said. "We don't know if the desired funding model would be a tolled option."

Stone confirmed the province will soon launch a review of the [tolling] policy, which allows tolls only on new infrastructure and only when there's a reasonable untolled alternate route.

"It's a matter of fairness and equity for folks who live South of the Fraser," he said, noting possible tolls on replaced Massey and Pattullo crossings would leave the Alex Fraser as Metro Vancouver's only free bridge over the Fraser River and invalidate much of the provincial tolling policy.

He said finishing touches are being put on the planned review as part of a new 10-year provincial transportation plan.

As for the Massey Bridge/Highway 99 project, Stone said the province must decide how much highway improvement is needed on each side of the Deas Island crossing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #850  
Old Posted May 23, 2014, 2:32 AM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 27,565
Why on earth would they call it the George Massey Bridge? Let's see some creativity.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #851  
Old Posted May 23, 2014, 3:14 AM
WarrenC12's Avatar
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 24,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by makr3trkr View Post
He said finishing touches are being put on the planned review as part of a new 10-year provincial transportation plan.
I wonder if this will include some hint of a Broadway skytrain line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #852  
Old Posted May 23, 2014, 7:10 AM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
I wonder if this will include some hint of a Broadway skytrain line.
I was thinking it would be more along the lines of a 10-year plan for the Trans-Canada twinning and Cariboo twinning projects. Maybe a plan for the remaining 2-lane sections of Sea to Sky.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #853  
Old Posted May 23, 2014, 8:11 AM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 17,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
Why on earth would they call it the George Massey Bridge? Let's see some creativity.
Because George Massey was a major force behind this corridor in general, and it would be quite the insult to erase his name from this connection.
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/30634635@N03/with/29495547810/ and Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0_0h9qKlhxXFxuAey_q6Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #854  
Old Posted May 23, 2014, 6:50 PM
SFUVancouver's Avatar
SFUVancouver SFUVancouver is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 6,655
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
I wonder if this will include some hint of a Broadway skytrain line.
It was already in the 2008 Provincial Transit Plan... I won't hold my breath until the day the ribbon's cut and the trains start rolling.
__________________
VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #855  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2014, 4:41 AM
makr3trkr makr3trkr is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 593
http://globalnews.ca/news/1329795/christy-clark-lukewarm-on-rapid-transit-for-broadway-corridor/

“I know that mayors want their little piece of the infrastructure pie, but my job as premier is to look after everybody,” [Christy Clark] said ... in a wide-ranging interview on the anniversary of her surprise election victory.

“Vancouver has a fantastic transit network, it has room to grow, it’s not perfect, I understand that. But boy, for anyone that sits in that Massey Tunnel, it feels a lot less perfect than Vancouver’s system.”

Clark was explaining why the government has committed to replacing the aging Massey Tunnel, linking Delta to Richmond, ahead of a proposed $2.8 billion subway line to UBC.

“I think we need a balanced approach,” said former NDP leader Mike Harcourt. “I think the tunnel does need to be replaced, the Patullo does need to be replaced, but we do need to complete the transit system. It’s roads and transit, it’s not either/or.”

SFU City Program Director Gordon Price agreed that both projects should be treated with equal importance.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #856  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2014, 10:07 PM
tybuilding tybuilding is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 898
I totally agree and Surrey does to considering they are planning for it in the Greenways plan

http://www.straight.com/blogra/649606/highway-99-needs-bike-greenway-cycling-advocate-says

Highway 99 needs bike greenway, cycling advocate says
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #857  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2014, 11:21 PM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 17,902
I really do wish they would fund both at the same time (Broadway Line and this project).

Also I support a kickass bikeway alongside this project. Seeing how most of the terrain if flat it would not be too expensive to build and it would be the most attractive for leisure cyclists IMO.
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/30634635@N03/with/29495547810/ and Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0_0h9qKlhxXFxuAey_q6Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #858  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2014, 12:19 AM
SFUVancouver's Avatar
SFUVancouver SFUVancouver is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 6,655
I would like a separated multi-use paths incorporated on our public transportation rights of way (highway corridors). It's not a high priority for me, but it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand either.
__________________
VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #859  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2014, 2:18 AM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 17,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by West_aust View Post
New Champlain Bridge Proposal
Video Link
So, the new Champlain Bridge is being proposed with a 3X2X3 configuration. I think this configuration would also be perfect for the George Massey Tunel replacement and is a good compromise on all fronts.

You have 6 lanes of general traffic, 3 in each direction, and 2 centre lanes dedicated for busses only.

Therefore you have an adequate bridge for the region's primary north / south freeway regarding general use and you have a solid commitment to improving transit.
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/30634635@N03/with/29495547810/ and Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0_0h9qKlhxXFxuAey_q6Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #860  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2014, 5:28 AM
VancouverOfTheFuture's Avatar
VancouverOfTheFuture VancouverOfTheFuture is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 3,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post
3X2X3 configuration. I think this configuration would also be perfect for the George Massey Tunel replacement and is a good compromise on all fronts.

You have 6 lanes of general traffic, 3 in each direction, and 2 centre lanes dedicated for busses only.
i don't know about that. i don't think 3-2-3 is enough to make the bridge future proof really. SOF really is expanding a lot and i don't think traffic will get much better. this new bridge will have to be a relief of the AFB. if they want a bridge to make this bridge last 75-100yrs i think it needs to be 4-2-4.

i am hoping they make the bus lanes the inside lanes throughout the entire freeway with dedicated overpasses/ramps. it would be the best way i think to give transit a better foothold in that area. quick connections = more users.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:37 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.