George Massey Tunnel Replacement | Proposed

[stump]

Originally Posted by oy1234

You shouldn't have to wait another four months. There is no reason that any reports paid for by tax dollars cannot be released the same day the government receives it. They don't need to comment on it and can simply say they need time to review it before any public comment. Taxpayers paid anywhere between $350,000 and $1 million for this report, it should be released.

The NDP just wants to make sure everyone is back from their summer vacation before releasing it to make sure it goes out to the most people possible....I'm just waiting for that excuse from Trevena

[Firebrand]

Originally Posted by stump

The NDP just wants to make sure everyone is back from their summer vacation before releasing it to make sure it goes out to the most people possible....I'm just waiting for that excuse from Trevena

...and all of this will be meaningless if an earthquake causes the soil to liquify in the dead of August.

[waves]

Originally Posted by oy1234

You shouldn't have to wait another four months. There is no reason that any reports paid for by tax dollars cannot be released the same day the government receives it. They don't need to comment on it and can simply say they need time to review it before any public comment. Taxpayers paid anywhere between $350,000 and $1 million for this report, it should be released.

Preach. I agree with you.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by oy1234

You shouldn't have to wait another four months. There is no reason that any reports paid for by tax dollars cannot be released the same day the government receives it. They don't need to comment on it and can simply say they need time to review it before any public comment. Taxpayers paid anywhere between $350,000 and $1 million for this report, it should be released.

Got a source on that cost?

[oy1234]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Got a source on that cost?

The last two paragraphs of the article in the Sun:

The pace at which Trevena intends to review the report is a marked contrast from the urgency the government showed in giving Cowdell’s firm a $350,000 contract in November. The engineer and his company did not have to go through the province’s normal competitive open bid process, after Trevena’s ministry cited the need to “move ahead with this review in a timely fashion.”

The review could end up costing $1 million due to an additional $650,000 allowance the government authorized in case Cowdell required outside geotechnical experts in the fields of tunnel, bridge, road construction, and transportation planning.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by oy1234

The last two paragraphs of the article in the Sun:

The pace at which Trevena intends to review the report is a marked contrast from the urgency the government showed in giving Cowdell’s firm a $350,000 contract in November. The engineer and his company did not have to go through the province’s normal competitive open bid process, after Trevena’s ministry cited the need to “move ahead with this review in a timely fashion.”

The review could end up costing $1 million due to an additional $650,000 allowance the government authorized in case Cowdell required outside geotechnical experts in the fields of tunnel, bridge, road construction, and transportation planning.

Thanks. That had better be a damn detailed report.

[Cypherus]

Another month of silence of the lambs and the report is still not released. How convenient of this radical leftist government.

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by Cypherus

Another month of silence of the lambs and the report is still not released. How convenient of this radical leftist government.

Oh come on. It's the weekend. Save the hyperbole for Monday.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Oh come on. It's the weekend. Save the hyperbole for Monday.

Originally Posted by Cypherus

Another month of silence of the lambs and the report is still not released. How convenient of this radical leftist government.

i think he meant as in since the report was concluded, nothing has come out in time since then. not as in "it hasn't come out today on Saturday"

it should be illegal to keep reports like this from the public, the public paid for them and it is with regard to the public.

[Firebrand]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

i think he meant as in since the report was concluded, nothing has come out in time since then. not as in "it hasn't come out today on Saturday"

it should be illegal to keep reports like this from the public, the public paid for them and it is with regard to the public.

Thinking about your username, it should be “VancouverOfTheBleakFuture” since almost every move the BC gov’t does is not doing anything or pander to a really specific group of people, which hurts everyone in the present and future. Look what happened to the BC Liberals.

It’s not illegal for them if they bend the rules to get away with their incompetence.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Firebrand

Thinking about your username, it should be “VancouverOfTheBleakFuture” since almost every move the BC gov’t does is not doing anything or pander to a really specific group of people, which hurts everyone in the present and future. Look what happened to the BC Liberals.

It’s not illegal for them if they bend the rules to get away with their incompetence.

yes, i am aware of that. i hope one day, we can have a government like when WAC was in, back when the City of Vancouver and the BC Government both wanted what was best for BC as a whole, building a future prosperous city and province. taking us into a solid future before it was ruined by ideology politics and pandering to special interests. back when debt was considered negative and paying billions a year in interest would have toppled the government.

[Firebrand]

I’ve been thinking about this for a while now. I know that you have to widen the entirety of Hwy 99 ten lanes if the bridge is ten lanes, but once it reaches to the Oak Street Bridge, it has to merge to six lanes to match the lanes Oak St has. Two of these lanes on Oak—and Granville St, since the 99 route follows it on the map—are used as parking spaces. That bridge is where the bottlenecks occur.

[Dengler Avenue]

Honestly, parking on arterial roads is a horrible idea. I just hope there's strong political will to get rid of that.

Metro Vancouver simply isn't built/designed for cars, simplistically speaking.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Firebrand

I’ve been thinking about this for a while now. I know that you have to widen the entirety of Hwy 99 ten lanes if the bridge is ten lanes, but once it reaches to the Oak Street Bridge, it has to merge to six lanes to match the lanes Oak St has. Two of these lanes on Oak—and Granville St, since the 99 route follows it on the map—are used as parking spaces. That bridge is where the bottlenecks occur.

Oak Street Bridge is 4 lanes.

Look back in the thread for lane design for the bridge and Hwy 99.

In a nutshell, the Massey bridge has:
- 2 "climbing lanes" for trucks - bridge only
- 2 HOV transit lanes - veer off via ramp to Bridgeport Station before Oak St. Bridge
- 6 general purpose lanes that merge to 4 for Oak St. Bridge.

Here's the diagrams for the Oak St Bridge area from 2016.

Originally Posted by officedweller

The good stuff is in the Technical Presentation.

Go to the Document Library:
http://engage.gov.bc.ca/masseytunnel/documentlibrary/

http://engage.gov.bc.ca/masseytunnel...esentation.pdf

The following slides are from the Technical Presentation document.

Note Bridgeport transit ramp from HOV to a new(?) road under the Oak St. Bridge
- Like the Government Road ramp (but could be elevated).

From January 2016:

Originally Posted by urbancanadian

Here are a few of the things that I noticed with the alignments:

First (in blue), there are stop lines* at each end of the bus-only ramps at Bridgeport Road. I'm wondering if this is because the ramp is only one lane wide, so the buses need to stop to make sure no one else is on the ramp before proceeding? Probably a budgetary measure, but I don't have a problem with it. When the Oak Street Bridge is eventually rebuilt, I imagine the ramps will be rebuilt so that they slope downward as the bridge rises, to connect directly with Van Horne Way.

Second (in red), at the same location, I don't like how Bridgeport Road merges onto the highway at the same point that the HOV lane ends. Seems like that will cause traffic to slow a lot.

[flipper316]

https://www.peacearchnews.com/news/d...party-funding/
Interesting.

[Dengler Avenue]

It’ll be nice to see that come through. It will be such a big middle finger to the sitting government.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

It’ll be nice to see that come through. It will be such a big middle finger to the sitting government.

LOL What a joke, those people are living in fantasy land. There's no way this type of thing happens.

“Maybe that’s our next project, looking to find a partner,” Jackson said at council. “It could be anybody. It could be another country, it could be a pension fund, it could be an investment company. Who knows? Maybe it’s even the company that’s going to build it — I don’t know.

Jackson isn't even running for re-election in November. Spewing hot garbage instead. Could be a Trump quote there.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

It’ll be nice to see that come through. It will be such a big middle finger to the sitting government.

There's no way that will ever happen.

The proposed bridge was so ridiculously out of scale. Adding a two lane tube to the tunnel would add all the capacity the Oak St bridge could handle.

[Chikinlittle]

Definitely a different planet she's living on. Especially when Richmond was against the project. Even if Richmond were in support of '3rd party' funding, it's still a non-starter.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by whatnext

There's no way that will ever happen.

The proposed bridge was so ridiculously out of scale. Adding a two lane tube to the tunnel would add all the capacity the Oak St bridge could handle.

That's still a crap solution from an engineering standpoint. Nobody wants to put another tunnel in that soil, and the existing ones aren't seismically up to snuff.