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

[moosejaw]

City of Richmond is still hung up on the seismic upgrades performed 10 years ago that were apparently guaranteed to extend the life of the tunnel 50 years. Don't know if that was true or not but from what i can tell the tunnel received a fire suppression system, curbwork, and cast in place concrete work along the length of the tunnel. This was done to ensure life safety procedures and there would be ample time to evacuate in case of an incident. The city of Richmond is led to believe that the $20m improvements performed 10 year ago is a concrete guarantee the tunnel is safe and can be twinned in its current fashion. Little do they realize that in a earthquake scenario the compacted soils that encase the current tunnel in addition to the 500# rock placed on top and on the sides can collapse and lose structural integrity during an earthquake which does not make this tunnel or even the notion of twinning the existing tunnel safe at all.

Again another counterpoint made by the City of Richmond is the Maas Tunnel. There are many comparisons to the Maas Tunnel in Amsterdam on which the GMT is based on. First the Maas Tunnel is not in a earthquake prone area. The Maas tunnel isn't an evacuation route. The Maas Tunnel isnt a limited access highway, its a city street similar to Cambie or Main Street. Of course its going to last longer as it sees less daily traffic and doesnt have as much truck traffic going through.

Another thing that bothers me is that the City of Richmond claims they were not consulted during the design development of the bridge. Well there were two rounds of public forums whree over 2000 individuals were engaged. Where was the city then? I imagine the public consultations included individuals from Richmond yet the city is maintaining they were never consulted when five options were presented and the majority of those consulted preferred the bridge?

At the end of the day people like Brodie and his council members want stoplights, they want frontage road quality highways transporting the masses through his districts, they dont want free-flowing arterials running rampant through his city. He even admitted it in his publications.

Again I stress the need for independent transportation consultants to weigh in and not politicians. Take all the facts into accounts. ALl the city of Richmond does is twists facts to suit its agenda. The Richmond councilwoman who lacks bluetooth in her Chevette really gets to me though.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

Another thing that bothers me is that the City of Richmond claims they were not consulted during the design development of the bridge. Well there were two rounds of public forums whree over 2000 individuals were engaged. Where was the city then? I imagine the public consultations included individuals from Richmond yet the city is maintaining they were never consulted when five options were presented and the majority of those consulted preferred the bridge?

When cities consult with other organizations in situations like this, they don't happen at the same level as public forums. They're a lot more detail-oriented, with engineers meeting with engineers, and they get into details that the public wouldn't understand because they don't have a background in the different engineering disciplines that are required for large projects like this. Richmond is saying they didn't get these kinds of more in-depth consultations.

[M00dy]

Originally Posted by 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.

Private companies spent and lost many millions of dollars bidding the existing project scope, submitted bids in ~April, bids that will expire soon.

Waste of time & money for political BS.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by M00dy

Private companies spent and lost many millions of dollars bidding the existing project scope, submitted bids in ~April, bids that will expire soon.

Waste of time & money for political BS.

LOL boo hoo, shit happens. If the BC Liberals truly cared about this project they should have started immediately after winning the 2013 election, and construction would be well-underway by now, probably impossible to stop.

[M00dy]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

LOL boo hoo, shit happens. If the BC Liberals truly cared about this project they should have started immediately after winning the 2013 election, and construction would be well-underway by now, probably impossible to stop.

It's easy to say boohoo, but the more private industry gets thrown under the bus in BC, the less viable it'll be seen for investment by companies. More risk = more expensive projects.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by M00dy

It's easy to say boohoo, but the more private industry gets thrown under the bus in BC, the less viable it'll be seen for investment by companies. More risk = more expensive projects.

That's the cost of doing business around the world. Even when your customers are private. Preparing estimates is no guarantee of getting work, for any contractor.

[M00dy]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

That's the cost of doing business around the world. Even when your customers are private. Preparing estimates is no guarantee of getting work, for any contractor.

Agreed, and what I'm saying is that the more volatile politics are in BC, more contingency will be added onto project bids which ends up costing the BC taxpayers.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by M00dy

Agreed, and what I'm saying is that the more volatile politics are in BC, more contingency will be added onto project bids which ends up costing the BC taxpayers.

...or if the profit maximizing "private sector middle-man contractor" becomes too expensive (and finds it difficult to give value for money) we could just cut them out and use (lower cost) government construction agencies/military engineers etc..

[moosejaw]

Ohhh richmond just go away......
http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/richmond-council-discusses-twinning-the-massey-tunnel


such nonsense

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

Ohhh richmond just go away......
http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/richmond-council-discusses-twinning-the-massey-tunnel


such nonsense

Agreed. Nonsense. (especially with our local seismic risk). But as Mrs. Kravitz said about her chicken soup ... "it might woik" .....

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

Ohhh richmond just go away......
http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/richmond-council-discusses-twinning-the-massey-tunnel

such nonsense

Richmond council has said that it supports a new or improved tunnel versus a bridge. Its concerns include that a bridge will encourage car use...

A tunnel won't encourage car use while a bridge will?

[Stingray2004]

With deference to Deasine's post up-thread, I don't believe that the following breaks the intent of his post.

In any event, with the past few hours, all new BC gov't ministers have received their mandate letters, inclusive of MoTI minister Travena. Said mandate letter to Travena does not include any mention of the proposed GMB but does expressly state the following:

Work with the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to secure federal funding for the Pattullo Bridge replacement and rapid transit in Metro Vancouver as part of implementing the mayor's 10-year plan for transit and transportation.

http://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/governm...mlas/minister-letter/trevena-mandate.pdf

In other news, a large electronic message sign is extant NB before the GMT near the Hwy 17A interchange, owned by the municipality of Delta. Today the electronic message board is now broadcasting the following message: "‘NEED BRIDGE NOW" -

Delta Puts Up Sign At Massey Tunnel: 'Need Bridge Now'

DELTA (NEWS 1130) – The Corporation of Delta has put up a sign at the Massey Tunnel as they try to drum up support for the Massey Bridge replacement project.

An electronic message board typically used to warn drivers about road work now flashes the text ‘NEED BRIDGE NOW’ accompanied by a web address.

“It’s a handy, quick information piece, and it’s simply that,” argues Delta Mayor Lois Jackson.

“I don’t think it’s so much a political message as it is information.”

Jackson says concerns that the new NDP government could cancel the Massey Bridge project are part of what prompted the unusual move.

http://www.news1130.com/2017/07/24/delta-puts-sign-massey-tunnel-need-bridge-now/

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Sheba

A tunnel won't encourage car use while a bridge will?

This. I typically consider myself to be on the side of transit/bikes in most situations vs cars, but here it just makes no sense. 8/10 lanes is 8/10 lanes. Neither will encourage or discourage car use. If you're gonna take an anti-car position, just reject any crossing expansion at all. Even if I don't agree with it, at least it's logical. Why a tunnel with the same amount of lanes as a bridge is less conducive to car travel (while also eliminating cycling and pedestrian connections) I don't know.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Sheba

A tunnel won't encourage car use while a bridge will?

Originally Posted by GlassCity

This. I typically consider myself to be on the side of transit/bikes in most situations vs cars, but here it just makes no sense. 8/10 lanes is 8/10 lanes. Neither will encourage or discourage car use. If you're gonna take an anti-car position, just reject any crossing expansion at all. Even if I don't agree with it, at least it's logical. Why a tunnel with the same amount of lanes as a bridge is less conducive to car travel (while also eliminating cycling and pedestrian connections) I don't know.

i don't get that either. how would the same amount of lanes, one under water, one over water, change the encouragement? all it does is get rid of bikes, pedestrian connections. it uses up MORE farm land then the 10 lane bridge. it creates MESSIER road connections on either side of the tunnel. it creates MORE disturbances to the underwater ecosystem.

like, what the flying fuck; why does no one in charge have a brain anymore?

[flipper316]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

City of Richmond is still hung up on the seismic upgrades performed 10 years ago that were apparently guaranteed to extend the life of the tunnel 50 years. Don't know if that was true or not but from what i can tell the tunnel received a fire suppression system, curbwork, and cast in place concrete work along the length of the tunnel. This was done to ensure life safety procedures and there would be ample time to evacuate in case of an incident. The city of Richmond is led to believe that the $20m improvements performed 10 year ago is a concrete guarantee the tunnel is safe and can be twinned in its current fashion. Little do they realize that in a earthquake scenario the compacted soils that encase the current tunnel in addition to the 500# rock placed on top and on the sides can collapse and lose structural integrity during an earthquake which does not make this tunnel or even the notion of twinning the existing tunnel safe at all.

Again another counterpoint made by the City of Richmond is the Maas Tunnel. There are many comparisons to the Maas Tunnel in Amsterdam on which the GMT is based on. First the Maas Tunnel is not in a earthquake prone area. The Maas tunnel isn't an evacuation route. The Maas Tunnel isnt a limited access highway, its a city street similar to Cambie or Main Street. Of course its going to last longer as it sees less daily traffic and doesnt have as much truck traffic going through.

Another thing that bothers me is that the City of Richmond claims they were not consulted during the design development of the bridge. Well there were two rounds of public forums whree over 2000 individuals were engaged. Where was the city then? I imagine the public consultations included individuals from Richmond yet the city is maintaining they were never consulted when five options were presented and the majority of those consulted preferred the bridge?

At the end of the day people like Brodie and his council members want stoplights, they want frontage road quality highways transporting the masses through his districts, they dont want free-flowing arterials running rampant through his city. He even admitted it in his publications.

Again I stress the need for independent transportation consultants to weigh in and not politicians. Take all the facts into accounts. ALl the city of Richmond does is twists facts to suit its agenda. The Richmond councilwoman who lacks bluetooth in her Chevette really gets to me though.

Brodie is like Moonbeam and his Vision cronies.

Another gem out of this idiot. Why give him airtime. Plus check out the doorknob on the bottom of the article weighing in with his 2 cents. The general public are just as dumb as the mayors.

http://www.theprovince.com/news/local+ne...inning+massey+tunnel/13875309/story.html

[p78hub]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

Ohhh richmond just go away......
http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/richmond-council-discusses-twinning-the-massey-tunnel


such nonsense

That first picture in the article really shows one of the biggest reasons why this tunnel needs to go. Counterflow might have been acceptable in the 1960s, but for a region of this size, I don't know how anyone can justify a "solution" where one direction of freeway traffic has one lane at rush hour. Hell, even with three lanes going south in the afternoon, traffic frequently backs up to the No.4 Road exit, and it's not uncommon for traffic to back up over the OSB all the way to 57th.

Seriously, this crossing is essentially the gateway into the city and it's a friggin joke.

[ilikeredheads]

Brodie and his cronies have been in office for far too long and all he cares about is that sweet real estate developer money.

[M00dy]

More from our friends at the City of Richmond

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-co...k-on-massey-tunnel-replacement-1.4220099

I particularly liked

Brodie argues the existing tunnel can be seismically upgraded and the twinning would cause less damage to the environment.

From what I've read, no upgrading is going to help substantially. If the soils liquify under the tunnel then structural upgrading isn't going to do much.

I also don't buy that twinning would cause less damage. For one the tunnel would require dredging of the river/cut & cover for the full approaches. The bridge design didn't even have a pier touching the river.

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by M00dy

More from our friends at the City of Richmond

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-co...k-on-massey-tunnel-replacement-1.4220099

I particularly liked



From what I've read, no upgrading is going to help substantially. If the soils liquify under the tunnel then structural upgrading isn't going to do much.

I also don't buy that twinning would cause less damage. For one the tunnel would require dredging of the river/cut & cover for the full approaches. The bridge design didn't even have a pier touching the river.

You should see the comments on Facebook, its really sad to see people that have no clue voice such a strong opinion that gets a lot of attention by the media. One lady mentioned the skytrain to hope. Many ppl feel that skytrain is a charity. It doesn't matter to them about ridership levels or studies or even planing, just build it because its needed. Disregard the experts as they dont know what the public wants

My favorite is still the city councilor in Richmond who doesnt have bluetooth in her car.

Its really sad since i was a kid there was opposition to HWY 91, to the cassiar tunnel, to Lions Gate Bridge expansion, to HWY 1 expansion, the south fraser perimeter road and somehow someway the same people use the same stall tactics to delay vital peices of infrastructue. Is it not fact that the tunnels are unsafe? Yes the foundations will liquefy in event of an eartquake? What will it take to shut the snowflakes up?

Offtopic ....Here in Miami we have been paying a 1% sales tax surcharge to expand our metrorail (similar to skytrain) for the last twenty years and now this week the mayor has opted to expand BRT instead while reducing metrorail service.

[stump]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

Brodie and his cronies have been in office for far too long and all he cares about is that sweet real estate developer money.

I've lived in Richmond for most of my life and it's embarrassing that he continues to get re-elected. He has been our Mayor for 16 years which is far too long. There needs to be term limits for mayors. I'm not sure if residents just check the box because they recognize the name or if opposing mayoral candidates are that bad because to be beaten by Brodie, they have to be pretty useless.

Quite frankly, after reading some of the things that have come out of his mouth, I think he is just ignorant about many topics or a liar and thinks his constituents don't care since they keep re-electing him.