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

[officedweller]

I don't think there is bedrock there (anywhere remotely close to the surface)

[WarrenC12]

This deleted document thing is getting ridiculous. Does this imply that this thread is the best source of information?!?

http://www.news1130.com/2015/11/04/province-documents-massey-bridge/

The business plan for the bridge was initially promised for the spring of 2014 and it is now 18 months overdue.

I don't see this actually being started in 2017 at this rate.

[KPELLY]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I don't think there is bedrock there (anywhere remotely close to the surface)

Sorry for the late response, but you are correct, there is no bedrock anywhere close to the surface, it is hundreds of metres (~800 m) below surface. However in response to VancouverOfTheFuture you certainly do not need bridges to be supported by bedrock. Many of the Metro Vancouver bridges are built on friction piles. For instance the Golden Ears Bridge is built on 80 metre long, large diameter piles as the bedrock is a few hundred metres below grade.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by KPELLY

Sorry for the late response, but you are correct, there is no bedrock anywhere close to the surface, it is hundreds of metres (~800 m) below surface. However in response to VancouverOfTheFuture you certainly do not need bridges to be supported by bedrock. Many of the Metro Vancouver bridges are built on friction piles. For instance the Golden Ears Bridge is built on 80 metre long, large diameter piles as the bedrock is a few hundred metres below grade.

Maybe of interest.

Originally Posted by Klazu

Interesting map of different soil types in Metro Vancouver: http://ftp2.cits.rncan.gc.ca/pub/geott/ess_pubs/209/209909/gscof_3511_e_1998_mn01.pdf

[officedweller]

Thanks KPELLY -
I didn't think you needed to hit bedrock, but I wasn't sure.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I don't think there is bedrock there (anywhere remotely close to the surface)

Interesting that BC MoTI minister Todd Stone was on Global BC Newshour tonight discussing the project.

He stated that due to underlying soil conditions the technical issues were much greater than they had even anticipated. As a result, the new bridge structure will be both higher and longer than originally anticipated. Apparently the replacement structure will also be larger than the new Port Mann Bridge.

Just waiting for the "Project Definition Report" to come out myself.

[SOSS]

.... a higher bridge is for larger barges. Gosh, how much land is going to be acquired for the massive approaches? This is getting ridiculous.

Pretty sure CC had the conversation with the Port Authority or the like and they wanted a bridge over a tunnel b/c construction will effect naval traffic less. Pretty sure CC had the conversation with the Trucking Association or the like and they wanted a bridge over a tunnel b/c bridges allow for hazardous routes whereas tunnels do not.

3 billion without a business case- crazy.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by SOSS

.... a higher bridge is for larger barges. Gosh, how much land is going to be acquired for the massive approaches? This is getting ridiculous.

Pretty sure CC had the conversation with the Port Authority or the like and they wanted a bridge over a tunnel b/c construction will effect naval traffic less. Pretty sure CC had the conversation with the Trucking Association or the like and they wanted a bridge over a tunnel b/c bridges allow for hazardous routes whereas tunnels do not.

3 billion without a business case- crazy.

why do you say 3-billion for a bridge? where did you get that from? the Port Mann that only cost ~820 million and not 3 billion because that included all of Gateway? seems like such a random number you picked for a cost of a bridge that no one has even seen a plan for, business, engineering, or anything substantial.

[Metro-One]

Yeah I have no idea where that 3 billion dollar figure came from...

I suspect that 3 billion will end up being the cost for the total corridor though (given fewer interchanges, slightly shorter project length, inflation, and a larger bridge compared to the highway 1 / Port Mann project).

I am guessing the bridge alone will be between 1.2 and 1.5 billion though.

The Fraser is wide at this point, needs to accommodate marine traffic below it, and has relatively difficult geology to work with (deep sediment until bedrock), so such a cost should not come as a surprise.

Ironically seeing how this bridge will be built over / replace the current highway alignment, having longer approaches may actually free up more land than take away due to elevated structures replacing at grade highway segments.

In Japan there are many areas where highways are elevated above farmland / land is still extensively utilized under high approaches.

Actually, I am quite excited to see the proposed alignments / renderings / project scope when they get released.

[WarrenC12]

Global News last night:

http://globalnews.ca/news/1149299/watch-news-hour/

5 mins in, there is some info on the GMT replacement from Stone, but just commentary from Keith Baldrey saying it will be "well in excess of $3B".

Bonus: Around 2 mins there is a viaduct comment from Todd Stone. His tone has changed a bit, his language talks about them going down rather than "no way".

Given the lack of info around the project, the delays, the empty FOI responses, I have to believe the news is bad in terms of cost.

A $5 toll each way to pay for this thing will limit my trips to the US... hello AFB!

[osirisboy]

I don't know why they keep saying the bridge will be 3 billion. It's like when they refer to the port mann as costing 3 billion. Wtf. Did the rest of the highway 1 project just get built for free?!

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

I don't know why they keep saying the bridge will be 3 billion. It's like when they refer to the port mann as costing 3 billion. Wtf. Did the rest of the highway 1 project just get built for free?!

Can't have one without the other (in this case, PMB is a little more debateable).

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Can't have one without the other (in this case, PMB is a little more debateable).

Yeah. So? you can't say the bridge is 3 billion. That's false and misleading. How much was the bridge 850 million?

When they refer to the bridge as 3 billion people assume that it's just for the bridge, which is totally wrong. Are you seriously arguing me on this?

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

Yeah. So? you can't say the bridge is 3 billion. That's false and misleading. How much was the bridge 850 million?

When they refer to the bridge as 3 billion people assume that it's just for the bridge, which is totally wrong. Are you seriously arguing me on this?

I'm saying it's one project... the financing/tolls/etc. will all use the number for the whole project. It's semantics.

[cornholio]

Probably say 3 billion to justify 35 years of tolls after its built to cover the entire scope of the highway improvement project. Which is unfortunate because it should not be tolled, the money should come from general revenue. Revenue obtained through progressive taxation. This project will benefit the entire province. It improves this corner of this world we live in a d makes life easier and more economical.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by cornholio

it should not be tolled

why shouldn't it be? it was tolled before. and it was more important back then because it replaced a ferry. this is just an upgrade, where as before it was a completely new crossing.

source TransBC

[WarrenC12]

This government loves user-fees. I'm ok with it for this type of infrastructure.

[Ray1957]

This Massey Tunnel traffic issue is nothing more than a scam by insider politic ans taking bribes from US coal and Rail companies, so they can bypass White Rock and not disturb the peace. They can now go directly to the Surrey Fraser docks, with huge shipments of toxic dusty coal and off load to the deep haul ships.
OH MY.... but first we have to blow out the Massey Tunnel so we can increase the deep haul shipping traffic...... Bet the government insiders could pull the wool over the tax payers eyes easy with this one. Just tell them how much easier it will be for truck traffic and cars to climb the Huge Massey bridge, Kinda like the Alex Fraser jam ups ...... and then to go where?
Oh yes, now we can plug up the Oak and Night street bridge quicker and make out like our billions of tax dollars is actually going to improve anything.
Only thing it will increase is the back door money coming from insider payoffs, and getting those coal profits out of the ground before anyone notices....Haa haa Haa ..... Keep up the Media press reports over the traffic issue this should help to disguises the truth!!

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by Ray1957

This Massey Tunnel traffic issue is nothing more than a scam by insider politic ans taking bribes from US coal and Rail companies, so they can bypass White Rock and not disturb the peace. They can now go directly to the Surrey Fraser docks, with huge shipments of toxic dusty coal and off load to the deep haul ships.

OK. I will bite. Haven't looked outside yet.. but suspect that a full moon beckons.

BTW, I reside in White Rock. And the BNSF waterfront line ain't goin' anywhere for a myriad of reasons. And Cloud Peak Energy just announced that it will halt US thermal coal exports to Roberts Bank in Delta, BC., which will not only impact Roberts Bank with a 13% drop in through-put but BNSF as well.

All due to the high US dollar and collapsing thermal coal markets/prices globally.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2...producer-is-eating-fees-to-avoid-exports

BTW, what are your thoughts on 9-11? Ya think that it was an inside job?

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

This government loves user-fees. I'm ok with it for this type of infrastructure.

I honestly would like to make all controlled access highways in Metro-Vancouver as far east as Abbotsford as distance based tolls.