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

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by Bobert

Why would you ban trucks at rush hour when there are thousands of warehouses/distributors who rely on those shipments...

Exactly, and then wouldn't making them divert to further away river crossings and then backtrack to their destinations be working against the environment?

Also what other crossings! Are they all just going to take the Alex Fraser? Or will the mayors and provincial government force New West to accept 6 lanes on the Pattullo come opening day to help accommodate for this loss of a crossing during the day?

How about the NDP do this instead then, upgrade the entire SFPR to freeway standards, open the Pattullo as 6 lanes, and have a limited access connection between the number one and the new Pattullo. Maybe then they can make a case for not needing the new GMB so soon.

Will that happen? I am guessing......nope!

[Trainguy]

Mayor Moonbeam is at it again. No wonder nothing ever gets done around here. Everyone has their own agenda.

Vancouver's mayor maintains position against Massey Replacement Bridge

VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) – As chair of the Metro Vancouver TransLink Mayors’ Council, Mayor Gregor Robertson has consistently maintained the multi billion-dollar project is too costly and will only serve to increase congestion in our region.

Despite a new report released this week by Delta municipal staff pushing for the project to continue, he is not changing his views on the project.

[WarrenC12]

So being consistent and getting re-elected is a problem? I'm not really a fan of his, but not sure what your complaint is.

[logicbomb]

My guess is we see no road improvements go forward with the NDP government. These guys don't get it.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Mayor Moonbeam is at it again. No wonder nothing ever gets done around here. Everyone has their own agenda.

Vancouver's mayor maintains position against Massey Replacement Bridge

VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) – As chair of the Metro Vancouver TransLink Mayors’ Council, Mayor Gregor Robertson has consistently maintained the multi billion-dollar project is too costly and will only serve to increase congestion in our region.

Despite a new report released this week by Delta municipal staff pushing for the project to continue, he is not changing his views on the project.

Robertson is sooooo far away from the Massey Tunnel... couple of muni jurisdictions away... I even doubt that he has ever used same. Just an "Ivory Tower" type.

All political rhetoric. Nothing to do, whatsoever, with BC strategic regional growth requirements - highway logistics. In the NDP's own words "Christy Clark's Bridge". Unbelievable.

Same NDP (CCF) from 1950's opposing then proposed GMT.

Same rhetoric happened in early 1980's when then Van City mayor Mike Harcourt publicly and strenuously opposed the then proposed Alex Fraser Bridge/Hwy 91 combo.

And then the BC NDP opposed new PMB.

Historical footnote:

When NDP gov't elected back in October, 1991 the Vancouver Island freeway project was underway with considerable grading works (ready for paving) north of Parksville. BC NDP gov't shut the Van Isle Hwy program immediately down - included fwy upgrades to Hwy 17 and new fwy from Victoria north to Campbell River. Only years later did they revive same with major downgrades.

While twinning plans were already in the works for the PMB, then BC NDP gov't had too much pressure from enviros opposing same so they just added an HOV lane to Hwy 1 and shoe-horned in another lane on the old PMB.

BC NDP's modus operandi is that everyone should take a bus - not that far-fetched as the caucus is full of SJWs and enviros opposing all highway development.

And then we come to the Broadway Subway, for example. With the new GreeNDP at war with the feds on KM, etc. relations will frost up with JT and the feds. Same thing happened in 1990's. Ergo, the 40% fed CAPEX for the Broadway Subway will likely be delayed for a considerable period of time as a result. JT and the feds will do no favours for the GreeNDP gov't.

History has a way of repeating itself and political reality can be a b##ch.

PS. All assuming GreeNDP lasts beyond September.

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

My guess is we see no road improvements go forward with the NDP government. These guys don't get it.

My thought (or hope) is that any road project underway that has a federal funding component will proceed -- it would be crazy to cancel a project that has federal money committed.

Of course, the GMB project didn't receive any direct federal funding in the 2017-2018 federal budget. I've hypothesized in previous posts that it is a(n) (excellent) candidate for the federal infrastructure bank, but that would probably only happen under a Prov. liberal government... NDP's no bridge tolls promise means no ROI for investors...

The bridge is going to be cancelled. We all have to deal with it.

Instead, the GreeNDP will focus on helping Translink get the Patullo rebuilt without tolls required... unless the government is defeated sooner than anyone expected. Such an uncertain time...

I like the idea of making the new Patullo 6-lanes, upgrading the SFPR to freeway, and improving connectivity to Hwy 1. In fact, maybe one could make the case to revisit the Sapperton Bar bridge option in this scenario; it costs a lot, but would provide a direct connection and tie in with a United / Brunette interchange rebuild (another project I expect will otherwise be cancelled / forgotten by the GreeNDP). The additional cost of this option would more than be paid for by redirecting some of the funding from the GMB project.

And the above post reminds me of the KM battle that is about to begin...

[libtard]

The Patullo is peanuts compared to the GMB. This whole situation is disgusting. Deferring to the mayors council??? Seriously??

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Robertson is sooooo far away from the Massey Tunnel... couple of muni jurisdictions away... I even doubt that he has ever used same. Just an "Ivory Tower" type.

All political rhetoric. Nothing to do, whatsoever, with BC strategic regional growth requirements - highway logistics. In the NDP's own words "Christy Clark's Bridge". Unbelievable.

Same NDP (CCF) from 1950's opposing then proposed GMT.

Same rhetoric happened in early 1980's when then Van City mayor Mike Harcourt publicly and strenuously opposed the then proposed Alex Fraser Bridge/Hwy 91 combo.

And then the BC NDP opposed new PMB.

Historical footnote:

When NDP gov't elected back in October, 1991 the Vancouver Island freeway project was underway with considerable grading works (ready for paving) north of Parksville. BC NDP gov't shut the Van Isle Hwy program immediately down - included fwy upgrades to Hwy 17 and new fwy from Victoria north to Campbell River. Only years later did they revive same with major downgrades.

While twinning plans were already in the works for the PMB, then BC NDP gov't had too much pressure from enviros opposing same so they just added an HOV lane to Hwy 1 and shoe-horned in another lane on the old PMB.

BC NDP's modus operandi is that everyone should take a bus - not that far-fetched as the caucus is full of SJWs and enviros opposing all highway development.

And then we come to the Broadway Subway, for example. With the new GreeNDP at war with the feds on KM, etc. relations will frost up with JT and the feds. Same thing happened in 1990's. Ergo, the 40% fed CAPEX for the Broadway Subway will likely be delayed for a considerable period of time as a result. JT and the feds will do no favours for the GreeNDP gov't.

History has a way of repeating itself and political reality can be a b##ch.

PS. All assuming GreeNDP lasts beyond September.

Ditto Stingray2004 and Mininari

[moosejaw]

Five years ago the provincial govt proposed 5 options to explore to replace the massey tunnel and presented it to the public

These were the options

Scenario 1 – Retrofit Tunnel
Scenario 2 – Replace Tunnel with a bridge
Scenario 3 – Replace the existing Tunnel with a new tunnel
Scenario 4 – (a) Retrofit Tunnel and build new adjacent six-lane bridge
(b) Retrofit Tunnel and build new adjacent six-lane tunnel
Scenario 5 – Maintain Tunnel and build a new six-lane crossing in a new corridor

Link here.....https://engage.gov.bc.ca/app/uploads/sit...iew-of-Replacement-Options-July-2016.pdf


Back in 2013 Mayor Robertson was against all of these options emphasizing that priorities need to be shifted to address rapid transit issues in Surrey and Vancouver and that any Massey Tunnel options be pushed back in line behind these serious transit issues as they deserve the provinces utmost attention. Well the last time rapid transit was entrusted to these regional mayors they single tracked the skytrain line in Richmond pretty much ending any hope of expansion south.

Now four years later he's claiming that no one was consulted, that adding a tunnel is cheaper, that the bridge is more expensive than the tunnel, that 10 lanes of traffic will all enter vancouver. Well the link i posted proves otherwise.

The presentation exhibits bus rapid transit, bicycle access all the things that the regions mayors are claiming it doesnt have. So this was already explored in 2013, why do they need to look at options again? What right does he have to question it when he had that opportunity back in 2013?


These typical BC politicians.....................Mayor Robertson just like Mayor Brodie dont want an American style highway in their backyard. Why are politicians dictating how infrastructure works, why not let planners and civil engineers determine whats good for the public?

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

Five years ago the provincial govt proposed 5 options to explore to replace the massey tunnel and presented it to the public

These were the options

Scenario 1 – Retrofit Tunnel
Scenario 2 – Replace Tunnel with a bridge
Scenario 3 – Replace the existing Tunnel with a new tunnel
Scenario 4 – (a) Retrofit Tunnel and build new adjacent six-lane bridge
(b) Retrofit Tunnel and build new adjacent six-lane tunnel
Scenario 5 – Maintain Tunnel and build a new six-lane crossing in a new corridor

Link here.....https://engage.gov.bc.ca/app/uploads/sit...iew-of-Replacement-Options-July-2016.pdf


Back in 2013 Mayor Robertson was against all of these options emphasizing that priorities need to be shifted to address rapid transit issues in Surrey and Vancouver and that any Massey Tunnel options be pushed back in line behind these serious transit issues as they deserve the provinces utmost attention. Well the last time rapid transit was entrusted to these regional mayors they single tracked the skytrain line in Richmond pretty much ending any hope of expansion south.

Now four years later he's claiming that no one was consulted, that adding a tunnel is cheaper, that the bridge is more expensive than the tunnel, that 10 lanes of traffic will all enter vancouver. Well the link i posted proves otherwise.

The presentation exhibits bus rapid transit, bicycle access all the things that the regions mayors are claiming it doesnt have. So this was already explored in 2013, why do they need to look at options again? What right does he have to question it when he had that opportunity back in 2013?


These typical BC politicians.....................Mayor Robertson just like Mayor Brodie dont want an American style highway in their backyard. Why are politicians dictating how infrastructure works, why not let planners and civil engineers determine whats good for the public?

Bang on moosejaw. Major projects should not be decided by these incompetent mayors. Professional planning engineers should be consulted and then let the public decide.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Bang on moosejaw. Major projects should not be decided by these incompetent mayors. Professional planning engineers should be consulted and then let the public decide.

"The public" in Metro Vancouver is even more anti-road/anti-growth/anti-planning for the future than the mayors. If it's not for them specifically, they're against it.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by Pinion

"The public" in Metro Vancouver is even more anti-road/anti-growth/anti-planning for the future than the mayors. If it's not for them specifically, they're against it.

Sorry, but all anecdotal as well as polling evidence to date completely contradicts your assertion on all these matters.

To wit, just the proposed new GMB...

A previous Insights West opinion poll of Metro Van residents confirms that a majority supports the GMB even with "tolls". Hell, even a near majority of Van City proper residents (46% to 29%) support the new GMB certainly indicating that Van City mayor Robertson is even off-side with residents of his own city:

[Pinion]

I was talking about new infrastructure support in general, not this project specifically. That poll said the support number drops dramatically for people who wouldn't use it - as I said.

Almost two-thirds—63%—of all those surveyed in Surrey support the proposal, compared with 51% in the region overall. Across Metro Vancouver, men (59%), residents aged 35-54 (58%) and those who drive to work or school (55%) were the biggest supporters.

Poll respondents were divided on how the project should be funded. More than 70% of those polled said they were opposed to increasing property taxes or increasing fuel taxes. Two-thirds were against the idea of tolling roads and 65% said they did not support an increase in transit fares.

Drivers were more likely to support the idea of increasing transit fares (51%) than those who use public transit (17%). Among transit users, 42% support the idea of a vehicle levy, compared with 25% of drivers.

“Despite supporting the Massey replacement proposal, Metro Vancouverites do not appear ready at this point to embrace polls, levies or higher taxes to fund transit projects,” said Insights West vice-president of public affairs Mario Canseco.

https://www.biv.com/article/2016/1/support-massey-tunnel-replacement-highest-surrey-s/

The point was that the public and mayors that they elected should not be squashing projects that serve the overall good because it doesn't help them personally.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by Pinion

I was talking about new infrastructure support in general, not this project specifically. That poll said the support number drops dramatically for people who wouldn't use it - as I said.

I believe that you misinterpreted said poll. 2 key questions were asked therein:

1. Support for proposed GMB under MoTI jurisdiction.

2. Support for various proposals on that old bogeyman - Translink transit funding:

Metro Vancouverites were also asked about specific ideas to help fund transit projects. Around two thirds of residents voice opposition to increasing property taxes (71%), increasing fuel taxes (also 71%), tolling roads (66%) and increasing transit fares (65%).

The level of opposition is lower, but still significant, when it comes to implementing a vehicle levy (60%) or a levy based on the distance travelled by a vehicle in the past year (also 60%) and tolling bridges (51%).

https://insightswest.com/news/half-of-metro-vancouverites-support-proposed-massey-bridge/

[Stingray2004]

I have previously posted about the cable-stayed Alex Fraser Bridge and its ability to withstand structural damage in an 8.5 quake when designed in the early 1980's. Turns out that with time, tech advances same for the new GMB to ~9 quake - the ultimate "big one".

OTOH, when the existing GMT had seismic upgrades (steel band-aids on rooftop sectionals) it still would not withstand structural damage in a 6.5 earthquake. At a higher seismic level, the tunnel would likely "snake" based upon other authorities. Good read here on some aspects thereto:

The tunnel was designed to withstand a magnitude 6.5 earthquake, much less than current seismic standards. The 2001 Nisqually earthquake, centred in Puget Sound just northeast of Olympia, Wash., was a magnitude 6.8 tremor and caused between several billions of dollars worth of property damage.

“If we would have had the same thing that happened in the Seattle-Olympia area, that tunnel would have been gone,” Harvie said.

Although seismic upgrades were completed inside the tunnel in 2006, the work was intended to make the intake of water through cracks slower so the public could escape. Emergency pumps are expected to keep the water level low enough for people to exit the tunnel within an hour of the earthquake, but the structure would likely be unusable from that point forward.

The new bridge, by comparison, would be able to withstand anything up to a magnitude 9.0 event.

And then we have the large rig issue:

The design of the tunnel’s sprinkler system leaves it vulnerable to damage from large trucks. According to the report, the tunnel’s sprinkler system was damaged twice between June 23 and July 1, 2017. The second incident rendered the entire system inoperable, leaving the tunnel with no sprinkler or standpipe firefighting capabilities. As of the writing of the report (July 5), the system was still down, though it was fixed by July 7.

And of course, accidents/first responder problems:

The report also shows that the tunnel has a higher-than-average number of accidents, and those tend to be more severe than ones on open roads. The tunnel and adjacent interchange saw an average of 300 collisions annually between 2009 and 2013, 40 per cent of which resulted in injury or death. It is estimated that a bridge would reduce the number of collisions by 35 per cent.

Congestion in and around the tunnel coupled with the lack of a shoulder can make it difficult for first responders to reach accidents, sometimes forcing them to approach the site on foot while carrying all the necessary gear.

http://www.missioncityrecord.com/news/de...-and-misinformation-about-massey-bridge/

[moosejaw]

A brilliant idea instead of the tunnel
I mean really really brilliant

I guess truckers being out of work and shipping charges going up are of no concern to this gentleman

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/longshoreman-traffic-congestion-1.4204415

while short sea shipping is popular in europe and the great lakes, i have never seen it used in a city to suburb origin and destination or vice versa

All this mindless thinking to stop a bridge? Ive not seen one validated point to not build a bridge. Nothing from the cities, nothing from the mayors. I wonder who will be the first on the mayor commission to endorse this harebrained idea

[Metro-One]

Haha, wow, that would be a lot of barge shipping for super short distances. Could you imagine the environmental blowback once they realized how much more congested this would make the Fraser River (not to mention all the new facilities that would need to be constructed) and I am guessing they would just love the increase in dredging that I am guessing would be needed.

[s211]

Originally Posted by flipper316

Because these politicians live in a bubble and they're entitled to an opinion just like everyone else. I wonder if trucks are banned in any of the numerous tunnels in Europe or the New York area tunnels?

Add planners and bureaucrats to that list. Planning schools could also benefit from a 300 level course in REALITY.

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Haha, wow, that would be a lot of barge shipping for super short distances. Could you imagine the environmental blowback once they realized how much more congested this would make the Fraser River (not to mention all the new facilities that would need to be constructed) and I am guessing they would just love the increase in dredging that I am guessing would be needed.

The railways would also love having to wait longer to use the rail bridge across the Fraser since marine traffic get priority. Another stupid idea!! How many times does a container needed to get handled before it reaches its destination?

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by s211

Add planners and bureaucrats to that list. Planning schools could also benefit from a 300 level course in REALITY.

Caveat: planning-schools missions tend to be about CHANGING/RESHAPING REALITY (hopefully for the "better")!