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

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I've been saying for years now that the sensible thing to do is to start charging tolls immediately with the understanding that the revenues would be set aside to fund a tunnel replacement when it's needed. Then we'd find out what the tolled volume will actually be, instead of optimistic guesses by the MOT. Chances are that we'd discover the bridge isn't needed right away, which means that we could start to build up a fund to pay for the bridge so that at least some of the money is already there when it's needed.

That or the Alex Fraser bridge would become a parking lot sooner than later and the MOT would know that if they want to toll the new GMB they'd also need to put tolling onto the AFB immediately.

Honestly I don't see any scenario money wise that is remotely good for the region without a new GMB coinciding with tolling being added to the AFB and a new Pattullo. So in essence every crossing over the Fraser is tolled.

And they need to make the toll the same across the board. Then it in essence nullifies things out. We get the money across the board and people will stop diverting to avoid tolls.

Quite frankly I don't care at this point about "tolling everything in Metro Vancouver" I just think they really need to get the Fraser River crossings at this stage.

So when GMB completed (Pattullo should be close to the same time) you have a tolled GMB, AFB, Pattullo, PMB, GEB all with the same toll cost per crossing.

Just my opinion right now.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

All this seems to beg (for me) two questions; why can't the planners "think bigger" in terms of road capacity and / or .... is this not a clarion call for more transit?
Commuter trains, metro, skytrains, as you like it, but more of it. This would especially target the Valley suburbs and the southern suburbs, and presumably reduce automobile ##s.
For car commuters, taking into account the daily bridge tolls, fuel and parking costs, this would seem rather self-evident, the major obstacle, as ever, being $$$ funding.

Speak of the devil - from the CTV news web site: Congestion 'standstill' predicted if Massey Bridge built: documents

“For $3.5 billion, we get one bridge, or half of the mayors’ transit plan, and I know what I would go for if I had the choice”

[Infrequent Poster]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Speak of the devil - from the CTV news web site: Congestion 'standstill' predicted if Massey Bridge built: documents

“For $3.5 billion, we get one bridge, or half of the mayors’ transit plan, and I know what I would go for if I had the choice”




But doesnt the 3.5 billion also include about 20 kms of (badly needed) upgraded freeway , upgraded interchanges (also very needed) and a brand new bridge?

This is obviously a rhetorical statement. As I know it includes all these things. I'm pretty sure, despite your quote, you know this as well. I suppose it doesnt have the same ring when it is suggested that all the money is just for the bridge though....

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Infrequent Poster

But doesnt the 3.5 billion also include about 20 kms of (badly needed) upgraded freeway , upgraded interchanges (also very needed) and a brand new bridge?

This is obviously a rhetorical statement. As I know it includes all these things. I'm pretty sure, despite your quote, you know this as well. I suppose it doesnt have the same ring when it is suggested that all the money is just for the bridge though....

Yes you can argue the PMB only cost $1.2B too, but the bridge and the upgraded highway are useless without each other.

The overall price tag needs to be considered though. For example, what could we get for ~$2B? Probably a good highway upgrade and a new 8-lane tunnel.

[Infrequent Poster]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Yes you can argue the PMB only cost $1.2B too, but the bridge and the upgraded highway are useless without each other.

The overall price tag needs to be considered though. For example, what could we get for ~$2B? Probably a good highway upgrade and a new 8-lane tunnel.

Except nobody does that. Usually its add on a half billion to the price, ignore all interchange upgrades and 30+ kms of upgraded freeway. Then make a statement something like..."we paid 4.5 billion and all we got was a bridge (pmb)that is below the traffic that was predicted!!"

I'm fine with whatever opinions people have. I may not always agree with them. I just get annoyed when people snipe (for lack of a better word) pieces of info or stats to distort other people's views or support their own.

If we could build an 8 lane tunnel and keep all the other improvements as we have been shown so far in the released renders for 2 billion. I would be 100% behind that.

[Cypherus]

Originally Posted by Infrequent Poster

If we could build an 8 lane tunnel and keep all the other improvements as we have been shown so far in the released renders for 2 billion. I would be 100% behind that.

Yeah, because having an extra 2 lanes to handle future capacity constraints driven by increased population and goods movers does not make sense for the long term....

[Infrequent Poster]

Originally Posted by Cypherus

Yeah, because having an extra 2 lanes to handle future capacity constraints driven by increased population and goods movers does not make sense for the long term....

I'm honestly not even sure if you are for or against having the extra 2 lanes. I cant tell if you are being sarcastic or not.....

I think a ten lane bridge is the right choice, myself (for the reasons you mentioned above).

If there was some way we could get a eight lane crossing and not change anything else about this project, and save a billion and a half dollars in doing so. Then I would be for doing that. I also think this is a fantasy to suggest that trimming two lanes off the crossing would save a billion and a half dollars. but if it could be done I would be for it.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Infrequent Poster

If there was some way we could get a eight lane crossing and not change anything else about this project, and save a billion and a half dollars in doing so. Then I would be for doing that. I also think this is a fantasy to suggest that trimming two lanes off the crossing would save a billion and a half dollars. but if it could be done I would be for it.

I don't think two lanes from the bridge would save too much, although some of the interchanges could be simpler as well.

The problem is, we were never given any alternatives. I'm certain a tunnel of some kind would be far cheaper, but we'll never know.

[Mininari]

One does have to wonder a bit if one or two of the interchanges are a bit on the 'overkill' side -- don't get me wrong, I do like the designs, but is a huge interchange at Steveston really warranted? Will all the traffic coming off the highway just get stuck in congestion trying to navigate Steveston Hwy?

Example: since the full Cape Horn Interchange was built, it seems that Lougheed Hwy is always a parking lot up to (and past) the Colony Farm lights. Same goes for the Mary Hill Bypass up to Shaughnessy St. Now the solution has to be widening or interchanges.

Building 10 lanes for the future is wise, but future governments are going to need to do something about capacity across the North Arm, OR widen Hwy 91 and construct the Tree Island Crossing. Or are we really expecting no traffic growth to the City of Vancouver ever?

Given the number of luxury cars on the roads in the GVRD these days, I can't believe these drivers will park their precious cars and take transit. If anything, they seem to be the perfect customers for TOLL ROADS.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Mininari

One does have to wonder a bit if one or two of the interchanges are a bit on the 'overkill' side -- don't get me wrong, I do like the designs, but is a huge interchange at Steveston really warranted? Will all the traffic coming off the highway just get stuck in congestion trying to navigate Steveston Hwy?

In my (admittedly limited) experience with the Steveston Highway interchange the major backups seem to be for traffic attempting to get on to the freeway, not off it.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

In my (admittedly limited) experience with the Steveston Highway interchange the major backups seem to be for traffic attempting to get on to the freeway, not off it.

it was a bit of both but they have fixed the problems with the exit onto Steveston Highway. they recently improved Westbound traffic exiting HWY99 by making it 2-thru-lanes, 2-left-turn-lanes, 1-right-turn-lane. (google maps has updated the satellite images and you can see what i mean)

the biggest problem now is people trying to go Eastbound through the tunnel. you have 2 lanes merging into 1 on-ramp, merging into a bus lane, merging onto the 2 lane highway thought a very narrow congested tunnel. the 2-lane overpass certainly doesn't help either. that interchange, as designed, would be exactly what is needed since they aren't building the Blundell Interchange.

i have a lot of experience with that interchange and it is 100% needed. as designed is completely needed. the City of Richmond will need to widen to 4 lanes, the section of Steveston Highway East of HWY99 since that is only 2 lanes, 1 each direction for a short section. Just under 1km of that part of the road is 2 lanes and then it opens up to 4 lanes when you get to the ice centre, movie theaters etc.

[Stingray2004]

Steveston Hwy interchange:



17A interchange:

[GlassCity]

Did they have those at the open house?! I wasn't gonna go because they billed it as the "EA open house" and I've already been to one, but if they have models to look at it might be worth making another trip.

[Infrequent Poster]

I dont know where you found those. But nice find. Looking forward to seeing those built.

[libtard]

I think I just had a heart attack.... that ..... looks fantastic..... such a huge improvement........... Is this 100% guaranteed what it will look like?

[Pinion]

I can't believe that interchange is going to be in Metro Vancouver (in a pleasantly surprised way).

[urbancanadian]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

17A interchange:

Thanks for the pics!! Is the transit/HOV off-ramp new? Don't recall seeing that before. Looks like it's just a single ramp.

[Klazu]

If built as shown, this is going to make Highway 1 look like a puny backcountry road. Those interchanges are huge!

[WarrenC12]

This is the $6B version... won't happen IMO.

[Metro-One]

6 Billion my ass, outside of the bridge and these two interchanges the rest of the project is pretty light and is only about half the length of the 3.5 billion Highway 1 project.

Either build it as shown, or not at all, no half done jobs.

I feel about this highway project the same I do for rail projects (skytrain along Broadway and to Langley, no half baked LRT).