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

[Genauso]

Thanks for investing the time to be specific on the ALR freddinno. You are correct it is not a prediction the ALR will be reduced, it already is.

Metro-One may not have noticed the changes outside the high profile Lower Mainland, even if you believe it's just Christy Clark the fact is the changes will not be reversed.

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by dleung

This is so overbuilt for its purpose. What's the flyover from steveston to southbound hwy 99 for? Is the theater and ice rink such a big destination?

I think you should educate yourself about the needs of this corridor.
The westbound gridlock typically extends for 1km to 1.5 km back to the east from Hwy 99. Not just in rush hour, but also during the daytime on weekends. Probably 1/3 of that traffic is trying to turn southbound into the tunnel. (A similar volume travels the opposite direction.)
A free-flow traffic pattern is desperately needed. Without space for a cloverleaf, a flyover is the only solution.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by dleung

This is so overbuilt for its purpose. What's the flyover from steveston to southbound hwy 99 for? Is the theater and ice rink such a big destination?

Even if it were the least busy of the alignments, if it were not a flyover, that would mean it would need to cross oncoming, busier, lanes in an intersection. That would slow down movement in other directions, like Steveson to 99NB.

That said, I think it is a pretty busy movement. And it can get more busy in the future. There are talks of pushing Steveston hwy through to the port lands. At the end of Steveston is Riverport way. There are quite a few condos there with more planned. Riverport way could also connect through to the Riverport, and connect with Portside or Blundell. It could become a major way into and out of the industrial lands there.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

...I think it is a pretty busy movement. And it can get more busy in the future. There are talks of pushing Steveston hwy through to the port lands. At the end of Steveston is Riverport way. There are quite a few condos there with more planned.

...and it's not just all about Steveston itself. That interchange is the only one south of Westminster highway, so it's basically handling most of the traffic for the entirety of southern Richmond. Heck, in season Richmond Country Farms probably accounts for more traffic than a major condo development.

[aberdeen5698]

I see that the Port Mann has now lost more money than the Fast Ferry scandal that turfed Glen Clark out of the premiership. They keep punting the "break-even" point for the operating budget down the road several years and at the same time expressing "complete confidence" in the predictions with a straight face. Politicians.

When the bridge opened in 2012 the prediction was that it would take about 6 years for revenues to pay for its operating and debt servicing costs. Now in 2017 they predict it will take about 7 years before that point is reached. Does anyone see a trend?

At least with the Port Mann we have an asset to use, but it's interesting that the sheer size of the cost overruns isn't getting more press. Particularly when the credibility of their ability to predict traffic volumes and estimate revenues is so relevant to the Massey Tunnel replacement.

[osirisboy]

What the f*ck is the point of that? We don't build bridges and highways to make money. How much is the tunnel loosing or Alex Fraser?

[madog222]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

What the f*ck is the point of that? We don't build bridges and highways to make money. How much is the tunnel loosing or Alex Fraser?

It does need to recoup costs as it was budgeted for. Excluding the Alex Fraser, all bridges and the GMT were tolled initially.

[Metro-One]

How long until the Evergreen Line breaks even?

How much is our sewer system losing?

You can't rate roads, bridges, trains, and other utilities in such a way.

I agree that the approach of promising to pay off infrastructure through tolls and fares is a bad idea, and I do wish that approach would stop.

Again, can't have it both ways. If the bridge was over performing the story would be "roads inducing demand!"

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

How long until the Evergreen Line breaks even?

How much is our sewer system losing?

You can't rate roads, bridges, trains, and other utilities in such a way.

The issue is the credibility of the government who is telling us that bridges will pay for themselves and that we need to build them to a certain capacity because of demand. When governments lie to the tune of a half billion dollars then I think there needs to be some accountability. And when they then turn around and propose a new infrastructure project based on the same kinds of financing and volume estimates I think that their track record should make us skeptical.

I'm not questioning the need for the Port Mann bridge or a Massey Tunnel replacement. But it should be pretty obvious to everyone that we're being lied to about the details and I think we deserve better.

[Metro-One]

I am not fully against what you are saying, but I feel to compare the Port Mann bridge to the fast ferries feels a little disingenuous to me. They are two very different endeavors and one of them, if you agree with the scope or not, we be far far far more useful for decades to come than the other.

Also need to keep in mind that these price tags are for their entire projects. All the new interchanges and other upgrades are not cheap and as the SFPR has shown should not be value engineered just to bring the cost down.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

When in doubt transparency is ALWAYS key.

+1

If the government hadn't promised that Port Mann would pay for itself, the taxpayers would have probably demanded a 8 lane bridge good enough for the next 50 years, instead of a 10 lane good for the next 100. Even if it doesn't save all that much $$$.

Now George Massey is threatened because people question the need for its size.

When all our latest highway projects are half-empty (aside from the SFPR, because it's not tolled), it raises the question of whether we really need those extra two lanes to those people. Look at the Youtube comments of the George Massey bridge project. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BO5qu9HDJHM

This behemoth of a bridge is built solely to accommodate the expansion of the delta port, adjacent to tsawwassen; truck traffic will dominate the crossing! It's all about business, lets forget about the commuters, the people of ladner and of course: who's going to pay for this??? Delta port should foot the bill not the tax payers. Thank you very much Christy!

51 likes to 31 dislikes. Not very good in terms of Youtube ratings.

You may disagree, but most layman taxpayers don't think about what will happen in 100 years. Most will be dead by then.

And honestly, the government probably doesn't either, because every politician in office will also be dead in 100 years!



Keep in mind the main beneficiaries are two municipalities (Delta and Richmond) out of, 15 plus the electoral district? Most Surrey-ites use the Alex Fraser or Port Mann...

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I am not fully against what you are saying, but I feel to compare the Port Mann bridge to the fast ferries feels a little disingenuous to me. They are two very different endeavors and one of them, if you agree with the scope or not, we be far far far more useful for decades to come than the other.

Yes, I agree, and I did say that after spending the similar amount of money on the Port Mann we have an asset, unlike the fast ferries where the money just vanished. But I found it interesting that the bridge losses have now surpassed the amount that caused such a huge public outrage that it toppled the NDP government so badly that they've never recovered. And especially that the government keeps sticking to its "nothing to see here folks, move along" attitude. I think there needs to be more accountability on this issue, particularly in light of the plans for another massive river crossing.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

I'm amazed that more people don't think this Bridge is excessive. Right now we have 4 lanes, I do not think more than doubling that is necessary even with future growth in mind (considering traffic flow will likely also be improved) , especially if we are planning on moving more people to transit. If we reduced the scope of this project we could fund a lot of other projects which probably would have better business cases and serve more people.

IMO the BC provincial govs construction of the GMB in the current state of planning is highly patriarchal.

Go back in this thread and check it out. Any opposition to this project is highly criticized. Personally I'm less concerned with the actual size of the project, but the price tag. Obviously those two are related, but I'd have just as much problem if the same price paid for 8 lanes, 10 lanes or 12 lanes.

The fact that we are building something with the same capacity and more expensive than the PMB is insane for this crossing. Even the government's own estimates predict less that 90,000 crossings by 2045(!!!) (a few pages up).

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

What the f*ck is the point of that? We don't build bridges and highways to make money. How much is the tunnel loosing or Alex Fraser?

Exactly. How much money is the Point Grey Road bike lane losing or making? Financing infrastructure projects in such a way that these kind of ridiculous terms are used to judge success is stupid. Can't believe the BC Libs were dumb enough to hand their opponents that kind of club to beat them with.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Exactly. How much money is the Point Grey Road bike lane losing or making? Financing infrastructure projects in such a way that these kind of ridiculous terms are used to judge success is stupid. Can't believe the BC Libs were dumb enough to hand their opponents that kind of club to beat them with.

Again, while I'd love to bash our mayor's little private expressway, that only took $6 million to build. For $3 thousand million, some people understandably want to see the best value for their money.

[Genauso]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

I'm amazed that more people don't think this Bridge is excessive.

I expect the greenhouses on ALR land in Delta will one day soon enough be actual houses for people, but I think it probably should match the highway's size and do 4x4 with one lane in each direction for bus/HOV. If substantial growth/interconnection develops, the response should be building a bridge further upstream: the benefits are also disaster or traffic jam resilience.

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Yes, I agree, and I did say that after spending the similar amount of money on the Port Mann we have an asset, unlike the fast ferries where the money just vanished. .

You are absolutely correct, it's a viral message that should carry far. The difference is the BC Liberals are perhaps the biggest advertiser in the province right now, and most of Christy's personal appointments have been friends from her days in the media.

The media amplifies the trivial or absurd, and what they CHOOSE to focus on makes a lot of difference.

If you go to /r/vancouver there are literally armies of shills that turn up to endorse local and provincial governments making bad deals for the public. I can't tell how effective they are, they do get their message to cover a lot of space but in my experience it's the underdog's story people are usually interested in -- not some major developer or taxicab company. Some of them are paid, but I think a lot are just misled by the media who essentially recruit and coach them to push an incorrect narrative.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Go back in this thread and check it out. Any opposition to this project is highly criticized. Personally I'm less concerned with the actual size of the project, but the price tag.

I believe the traffic will be much greater, but the size of the budget is a con-job because it will determine the consultant's fees.

The other part of it is a reaction loop. People who will never use the bridge will complain that it's not needed (and that they have unmet needs that deserve attention), so the people who will use the bridge feel obligated to oppose them.

Divisive politics is terrible, any politician who engages in them shows terrible leadership and is hurting actual the delivery of actual results.

Originally Posted by whatnext

Exactly. How much money is the Point Grey Road bike lane losing or making? Financing infrastructure projects in such a way that these kind of ridiculous terms are used to judge success is stupid. Can't believe the BC Libs were dumb enough to hand their opponents that kind of club to beat them with.

The Point Grey bike route was not even my preferred path for a beach connector. My problem was the allegations of Vision corruption where their friend Harcourt had inside information and made a windfall on his house-flipping project. Given those facts, Development Cost Levies should have been part of the planning to recapture the land price increases associated with having a road replaced with a park as it did in Harcourt's case.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Again, while I'd love to bash our mayor's little private expressway, that only took $6 million to build. For $3 thousand million, some people understandably want to see the best value for their money.

True, but there are better routes for $6 million, as in an elevated boardwalk/seawall on the public beaches (they're big rocks along this part of the route, gets wet at high tide.) Chip Wilson of Westbeach and Lululemon even offered to donate after the idea was floating around, and I think that's when I first heard about it.

If you ram a decision through, possibly to prevent a better alternative, you invite criticism. If you want to hold a thousand press conferences a year, promising you've solved everything with each one... the magic is going to wear off.

If he was doing his job, he would be able to fall back on the methodology that determined now&there was the best benefit available from that spending. But he can't, because Vision Vancouver is a PR-first council. Harper, Christy, Trudeau -- it's standard procedure now. The problem is Vision Vancouver fails at process and their efforts don't add up to making a difference (remember the money spent developing a vending machine for bicycle helmets that delayed the bike sharing rollout?) Vision Vancouver is a PR-only council that's full of doublespeak.

Gregor flipped his lid last night. People care about affordable housing and homelessness, but no one has any faith that his team is able even if he wasn't scamming them. So the people he thinks ought to support him even though he never listened to them, are opportunistically attacking him because now he is the weak one and they are strong.

CTV: Have you lost touch with the voters
http://globalnews.ca/video/3282601/gregor-robertson-shows-frustration-over-logo-flip-flop
$8,000 may be nothing to Gregor. But it is so symbolic that it will become a great meme.

> logo?
< That's absurd FENTANYL FENTANYL FENTANYL
> gfy, you're the one hurting the city and I'm not falling for it any longer

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[Genauso]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Most of Delta is as sea level right? Is it worth having yet another significantly developed area in need of protection when sea levels rise? Imo its better to further density Surrey and Langley than cut into ALR and build in areas that will require serious flood prevention measures in the not too distant future.

Yeah, it sounds like you've properly researched everything.