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

[moosejaw]

Another great opinion
this is why we cant have nice things

Notice my response at the bottom.

http://www.delta-optimist.com/opinion/le...-t-survive-the-big-one-either-1.21231391

[Metro-One]

If you people hope to see this project have a chance to continue I suggest that you send the new minister an e-mail:

Claire Trevena's website and wiki page

Please be constructive and as always keep it civil (that goes for any such e-mail of course).

[Stingray2004]

Waste of time.

Claire Trevena, new MoTI minister, is a hardcore enviro and left-wing ideologue who is also on the record as wanting resources transferred into public ownership (from back in 2011).

For that matter, Michelle Mungall, new Energy, Mines & Petroleum Resources minister is also a hardcore enviro and left-wing ideologue. And the list goes on.

GMB, other highway projects and many resource projects are now DOA. It's all a waiting game now as to when the GreeNDP falls.

[Metro-One]

Simply accepting defeat is a far worse strategy IMO.

If you care about these projects at all, still have your voice heard, even if it falls of deaf ears.

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Claire Trevena's website and wiki page
.

No way she will spearhead a ten lane bridge across the fraser
My money says she supports that mayor coalition to twin the tunnel. Which is a somewhat foolish idea. Well see rapid transit as a result

For certain that steveston interchange and landner interchange is dead

[Metro-One]

Again, if you really care about this project, and others, let them know directly. Seriously, I can't understand the roll over and die attitudes on this forum.

Sometimes I think I am one of the few who actually tries to do something on here beyond bitching about it in our echo chamber.

Want a bridge built, let them know and don't relent. Want Skytrain built instead of LRT? Let them know and don't relent (I went to every Evergreen Line open house and rallied for Skytrain instead of LRT... it became Skytrain, after that I insisted that Lincoln Station to be built from the get go, it was. Now obviously it was not because of me that these things happened, but I do believe that my support may have helped, especially when it compounded with other voices demanding the same.)

Just send a damn e-mail, even if you think it is futile, how hard is that?

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Again, if you really care about this project, and others, let them know directly. Seriously, I can't understand the roll over and die attitudes on this forum.

Sometimes I think I am one of the few who actually tries to do something on here beyond bitching about it in our echo chamber.

May work with the fed centrist Libs, for example.

But, unfortunately, you obviously don't know the BC NDP very well. I know the background of all BC NDP MLAs as well as the folk within the party. For years. Again, essentially hardcore enviros and left-wing ideologues. They operate akin to a "church" and couldn't care less. Much worse than the 1990's BC NDP version, which still had some pro-highway development, pro-resource development MLAs in their midst. No longer today.

If 100,000 folk attended at the BC Legislature with pitchforks and flaming torches... then they will pay attention. But ain't gonna happen.

Know when to pick your battles. Complete waste of time here. Again, it's now all about WHEN the GreeNDP gov't falls. Period.

[Feathered Friend]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Again, if you really care about this project, and others, let them know directly. Seriously, I can't understand the roll over and die attitudes on this forum.

Sometimes I think I am one of the few who actually tries to do something on here beyond bitching about it in our echo chamber.

Want a bridge built, let them know and don't relent. Want Skytrain built instead of LRT? Let them know and don't relent (I went to every Evergreen Line open house and rallied for Skytrain instead of LRT... it became Skytrain, after that I insisted that Lincoln Station to be built from the get go, it was. Now obviously it was not because of me that these things happened, but I do believe that my support may have helped, especially when it compounded with other voices demanding the same.)

Just send a damn e-mail, even if you think it is futile, how hard is that?

I couldn't agree with you more. While the Massey Project doesn't impact me directly, it's a fool that doesn't see the impact on goods and services, and how that affects everything. It's a shame that some here forget that there must be a balance with funding for all forms of movement.

It's a shame that on a forum that has so much insight into planning, development and the region, that blatant partisan garbage has infected so many topics.

Please take Metro-One's advice. If you believe in something write government, be a pest, and get out of the comfy chair; do something to see the change that you desire. The alternative is to become someone so jaded they only see their own view points as salvation, and detest all others and those who hold them.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

I couldn't agree with you more. While the Massey Project doesn't impact me directly, it's a fool that doesn't see the impact on goods and services, and how that affects everything.

"Goods and services". Everyone seems to hold up "goods and services" as a reason that we need to build bigger highways. If people were really worried about the movement of goods and services, they'd support tolls with exemptions for commercial vehicles. But I never see anyone advocating this, and therefore I must conclude that they're just using "goods and services" as a rationalization, and what they're really concerned about is their ability to drive their single occupancy vehicle at unrestricted speed during the rush hour.

[deasine]

As much as it is an on-going topic and that there are expected impacts to the future of transportation projects such as this, please avoid exerting your political views on this and other Transport threads.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

"Goods and services". Everyone seems to hold up "goods and services" as a reason that we need to build bigger highways. If people were really worried about the movement of goods and services, they'd support tolls with exemptions for commercial vehicles. But I never see anyone advocating this, and therefore I must conclude that they're just using "goods and services" as a rationalization, and what they're really concerned about is their ability to drive their single occupancy vehicle at unrestricted speed during the rush hour.

Umm, then I am guessing you have never seen my posts??

Even yesterday I have clearly stated that removing the tolls is a bad idea.

I have also advocated for region wide tolling on our freeways several times in the past, but that they would all need to be built to a certain standard.

Perfect example is the SFPR. I directly stated several times that it should have been built as a toll road with exemptions for commercial vehicles, but in doing so it should have been built as a full controlled access corridor (all interchanges, no signaled intersections).

As for the GMB replacement, again I supported the idea of tolls. But either way the tunnels need to be replaced and the highway needs to be majorly updated. Twinning the tunnels is a terrible idea because it will lead to a bandaid designed traffic flow / interchanges on either end and will need to be built twice (adding the new tunnels now and then again replacing the originals 20 years or so in the future, huge waste on money and poor design). Also the rapid bus proposed with this highway update was exactly what this corridor needed in regards to transit, and such a superior bus system cannot be built without the entire corridor being renovated (if not you get what we have now, a slapped on bizarre network of bus lanes and zones of conflict.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Umm, then I am guessing you have never seen my posts??

Even yesterday I have clearly stated that removing the tolls is a bad idea.

I have also advocated for region wide tolling on our freeways several times in the past, but that they would all need to be built to a certain standard.

Perfect example is the SFPR. I directly stated several times that it should have been built as a toll road with exemptions for commercial vehicles, but in doing so it should have been built as a full controlled access corridor (all interchanges, no signaled intersections).

As for the GMB replacement, again I supported the idea of tolls. But either way the tunnels need to be replaced and the highway needs to be majorly updated. Twinning the tunnels is a terrible idea because it will lead to a bandaid designed traffic flow / interchanges on either end and will need to be built twice (adding the new tunnels now and then again replacing the originals 20 years or so in the future, huge waste on money and poor design). Also the rapid bus proposed with this highway update was exactly what this corridor needed in regards to transit, and such a superior bus system cannot be built without the entire corridor being renovated (if not you get what we have now, a slapped on bizarre network of bus lanes and zones of conflict.

Metro-One, one function of tolls is to pay for respective road maintenance. Towards this goal, transportation officials usually see the heavier trucks/buses/commercial vehicles as prime precipitators/culprits of road surface damage, hence the prime targets for paying tolls.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Umm, then I am guessing you have never seen my posts?? Even yesterday I have clearly stated that removing the tolls is a bad idea.

I agree. But I've never seen someone who frets about "goods and services" say that selective tolls could be a solution - they always seem to use it to rationalize an argument for more road building.

[moosejaw]

i just read an article where Malcolm Brodie was concerned that Steveston Highway interchange was bigger than any interchange in Los Angeles. He was also concerned that the lack of traffic lights and vehicles stopping at this interchange would make traffic entering Richmond a gridlock nightmare

Any people voted for this guy?

I also heard a blog where a city councillor from richmond was refuting the 60% of northbound 99 traffic ends up in richmond. She claims that figure was achieved by only tracking cars that had bluetooth capability(like they use some other method for calculating these type of statistics. She argues since her car doesnt have bluetooth that most British Columbians drive cars not equipped with bluetooth and somehow that statistic is grossly miscalculating the car counts entering Vancouver. I guess she feels that cars entering Richmond have bluetooth and cars going into vancouver do not. And somehow that statistic is misleading!!!!

[Feathered Friend]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

"Goods and services". Everyone seems to hold up "goods and services" as a reason that we need to build bigger highways. If people were really worried about the movement of goods and services, they'd support tolls with exemptions for commercial vehicles. But I never see anyone advocating this, and therefore I must conclude that they're just using "goods and services" as a rationalization, and what they're really concerned about is their ability to drive their single occupancy vehicle at unrestricted speed during the rush hour.

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I agree. But I've never seen someone who frets about "goods and services" say that selective tolls could be a solution - they always seem to use it to rationalize an argument for more road building.

I genuinely believe it's important to invest in multi-mode transportation, including a road network that can service the needs of industry, contractors, delivery, freight, etc. To that end, I believe it's forward thinking to replace the tunnel, even if I find it a novelty the few times I'm out that way.

Should there be fees/tolls? From the information I've been exposed to, I would lean to congestion/distance pricing rather than tolling specific crossings. That of course will have other knock off effects, but again, to me this seems to be the best option to insure multi-mode transportation funding. Also, I admit that in bringing that up I'm getting close to going off topic from this project.

I say this while recognizing that I'm fortunate enough to live near False Creek. The few times a month that I'm in a single occupancy vehicle, there's at least one other person. As I said, improvements to this corridor have no direct impact in my day to day, but that doesn't mean I don't recognize the value of them.

[GlassCity]

I can't find the article for the life of me now, but I remember reading (or maybe I heard it on CBC Radio) that Horgan isn't necessarily against the plan as is. From what I understand he intends to redo the review of the project (I know, I know), and then see if "the current plan is the best way to do it." Obviously this doesn't sound overly promising, but the fact that he isn't flat-out against it I think should be recognized. Maybe an 8-lane compromise is possible after all. I think politically it would be his best option.

[flipper316]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

i just read an article where Malcolm Brodie was concerned that Steveston Highway interchange was bigger than any interchange in Los Angeles. He was also concerned that the lack of traffic lights and vehicles stopping at this interchange would make traffic entering Richmond a gridlock nightmare

Any people voted for this guy?

I also heard a blog where a city councillor from richmond was refuting the 60% of northbound 99 traffic ends up in richmond. She claims that figure was achieved by only tracking cars that had bluetooth capability(like they use some other method for calculating these type of statistics. She argues since her car doesnt have bluetooth that most British Columbians drive cars not equipped with bluetooth and somehow that statistic is grossly miscalculating the car counts entering Vancouver. I guess she feels that cars entering Richmond have bluetooth and cars going into vancouver do not. And somehow that statistic is misleading!!!!

I seriously wonder if these people should get a psychiatric assessment. Do they honestly believe any of the bullshit that comes out of their pie holes?

[cornholio]

There should be no tolls, no congestion tolling nothing. This infrastructure should be paid out of general tax revenue which is derived naturally from economic activity which is believe it or not related closely to mobility. This bridge needs to be built, and roads and highways need to continually be expanded and improved in conjunction with other transportation projects. On a side note I am so happy I left the region, it has gotten so bad on so many levels (including mobility) with no hope in hell of things improving any time soon. I mean I new things have gotten bad, but now I can see they are worse then I though. Canceling this bridge would be just another nail in the coffin of this now overrated part of the western world.

I do hope they build it though, I do still have to go back a couple times a year and would like to minimize my suffering.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by cornholio

There should be no tolls, no congestion tolling nothing. This infrastructure should be paid out of general tax revenue which is derived naturally from economic activity which is believe it or not related closely to mobility. This bridge needs to be built, and roads and highways need to continually be expanded and improved in conjunction with other transportation projects. On a side note I am so happy I left the region, it has gotten so bad on so many levels (including mobility) with no hope in hell of things improving any time soon. I mean I new things have gotten bad, but now I can see they are worse then I though. Canceling this bridge would be just another nail in the coffin of this now overrated part of the western world.

I do hope they build it though, I do still have to go back a couple times a year and would like to minimize my suffering.

I agree 100%. Where did you move to?

Also I don't think Brodie believes what he says, he's just trying to keep cars out of Richmond. Which is why mayors should have nothing to do with inter-regional travel.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by cornholio

There should be no tolls, no congestion tolling nothing. This infrastructure should be paid out of general tax revenue which is derived naturally from economic activity which is believe it or not related closely to mobility. This bridge needs to be built, and roads and highways need to continually be expanded and improved in conjunction with other transportation projects. On a side note I am so happy I left the region, it has gotten so bad on so many levels (including mobility) with no hope in hell of things improving any time soon. I mean I new things have gotten bad, but now I can see they are worse then I though. Canceling this bridge would be just another nail in the coffin of this now overrated part of the western world.

I do hope they build it though, I do still have to go back a couple times a year and would like to minimize my suffering.

Ironically, highway congestion does retard or kill the economic activity that lays the "golden-profit/tax revenue-egg".