Quote:
Originally Posted by Firebrand
You can blame New West for whining of getting a newer bridge. Seriously, the mayors here have a hatred for bridges.
|
The reason was that New Westminster didn't believe it could handle the traffic from a 6-lane, which was proposed at the time. Truthfully, creating induced demand in New West streets isn't exactly a great idea, I can understand the sentiment.
They had to compromise with a 4-land 'expandable'.
And really, only NOF mayors hate bridges. Mostly because they are more transit-oriented due to greater densities, unlike the suburban SOF.
Imagine what would happen when Surrey densifies. No highway expansions in Metro Van
ever again. 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One
The mayors definitely deserve to express their concerns regarding such projects, but in no way should they dictate the designs and scales.
This is a provincial highway / project that is beyond the scope of any single municipality’s needs or preferences.
The LRT disaster in Surrey is the perfect example as to why allowing the mayors to soley decide upon transit and road issues is a bad idea.
If the province allowed the mayors this power for past projects the Canada Line through Richmond and the Evergreen Line would be inferior street grade LRT systems, there would be no SFPR, and Highway one would still be in its embarrassing state today with an old 5 lane bridge and no 555 bus.
Also funny that the directly affected communities against bridges (New West / Richmond) always seem to trump the wishes of the directly affected communities in support (Surrey / Delta).
We are actually just lucky the Vancouver wants the right choice given the Broadway Subway and Surrey has flipped back to Skytrain.
All that said, we all knew that even if the report was in full support of the project it was never to come back in its full form under the NDP. They already had to allow site C to continue and are proceeding with the Liberal’s LNG plans, no way they were going to let this one go as well. The Greens would kill them.
That said, I really really really hope they do the wise compromise with a largely similar project involving an 8 lane bridge.
Because honestly, what other option is there?
Twinning the tunnel, terrible for all the reasons I have listed before.
Just fixing the tunnel? Even worse.
A new 6 lane rout? That would remove a lot of ALR and the tunnel would still need to be upgraded.
A new 6 lane bridge? Nope. The counter flow is already 3 lanes in a single direction and that would severely limit any potential transit (rapid bus / HOV) potential.
Also much of the work already completed (pile driving had already commenced!) could be salvaged with an 8 lane bridge.
I really hope cool heads prevail here. We should all write to the province on this one.
What is my honest prediction under the NDP? Either a 6 lane bridge “expandable” to 8 or a fudged twin tunnel.
|
I'll try to make an educated guess.
https://buzzer.translink.ca/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/translinkhistory.pdf
"Several options for governance were presented during the first workshop. The GVRD ultimately reached the conclusion that it wanted to play the central role in regional transportation, and move toward a solution on a broad and strategic level, while finding a way to use existing tax sources to buy a place at the table. "
"The second major event was a decision by the provincial government to unilaterally “declassify” the responsibility of approximately 600 kilometres of provincial secondary
highways to municipalities. Many municipalities found themselves with the unexpected burden of maintaining these newly acquired roads. The GVRD pounced on the decision as an opportunity to negotiate a new governance and funding agreement for not only the transit system, but the roads as well. Today, Cameron points at the declassification as being a major reason why ultimately a transportation authority was created, instead of merely a transit authority."
Translink is
technically a transportation authority, not a transit authority (even though it's 90% transit, it does own Golden Ears).
The Province gave control of much of the highway system to the municipalities, giving them more control over the highway system (who then prompted to declassify them- which is why 1A and 99A no longer exist- and why the Pautello expansion was originally a Translink Project.)
The idea was to make the transit and highway system work together, in a way that would 'address the multi-modal needs of the region'.
However, the GVRD (and Translink) are largely controlled by the mayors. Who disagree on pretty much everything, and end up constantly trying to compete with each other.
This is both a good, and bad thing- it spurs transit and development growth- but it results in a lot of...unintended consequences.
Vancouver and Surrey are the most powerful municipalities. The Pautello and Port Mann had the Liberals and Surrey as backers. The George Massey has Delta, Richmond, and...no one else, seemingly.
Is it a wonder why it's dead in the water? We either have to wait until the Liberals come back into power, or the NDP is convinced enough to accept the expansion.
The mayors do not decide solely on transportation expansions. In the end, the province still
owns Hwy 99. However, they do have a large amount of influence-more than most other cities.
The biggest issue is that the NDP just
doesn't care. I mean, Richmond, Delta, and even S. Surrey were generally pretty strongly Liberal in the last election, or were either-or districts.
https://www.macleans.ca/politics/bc-election-live-election-results-map/
The anti-highway NOF generally wins out due to higher population. Only Surrey really has the population to compete with the NOF. If the SOF controlled Metro Van, there would probably have been the (admittedly not well-thought-out) NFPR, more road expansions, and generally more sprawl.
It's a mixed bag. However, this is probably the main reason why so many SOF people feel SOF is being screwed over by NOF. Because they kind of are, due to demographics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by misher
Anyone know why Brodie is against the bridge? I usually agree with his decisions.
|
He isn't really against expending the crossing, he just wants it done by twinning for some reason.
Prev
Linear Mode
