Their wish list has no relation at all to reality.
and
Directly contradict building it as a submerged tunnel. In river works would be required unless it's bored.
Probably why it's a wish list of all the wants of the mayors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klazu
But they do support car traffic, why else would have they removed all tolls?
The amount of indecisiveness in this province is not funny anymore. Just build a damn thing. Anything! Without a 10-lane bridge, I am actually for a 8-lane tunnel, just because it is a much more urban element than a bridge, which there are already so many.
With a tunnel, I suppose they will be replacing the old tunnel, as the lane split would make no sense and it is at the end of its life cycle.
More than a new crossing, I want to see highways on both side getting and extra lane (or two, but that'snot happening).
"More urban"
This area is the exact opposite of urban, sir.
Hopefully if the Liberals come back and actually get this project ball rolling again, the project can be expanded to address the chokepoints in the North Arm. Add a connection from Dunsmuir Bridge to Alderbridge/91, widening Knight St and Oak St. Bridges to 6 lanes, connecting the Knight St. expressway directly to 99, and maybe even a cut-and cover Sea Island Way. Maybe even a new Fraser St. Bridge.
Trevana will probably take at least 6 months to read this 2 page letter and then another 6 months come up with a memo to ask for another business plan. Not holding my breath.
Hahahaha, at this rate the NDP will have only installed lights in the old tunnel, before the liberals come back to power in 10 years and just restart the old sidelined project.
Hahahaha, at this rate the NDP will have only installed lights in the old tunnel, before the liberals come back to power in 10 years and just restart the old sidelined project.
Or maybe sooner.
The provincial government will soon be asking for proposals on options to replace the George Massey Tunnel.
Work to develop options for a long-term solution for the George Massey crossing is currently underway and the request will be posted on BC Bid over the next few days to identify a technical team to support this phase.
Options will be based on consultation as well as the results of the independent technical review released in December 2018. The target completion for this phase of work is the end of November 2019...
...A final business case will be completed by fall 2020, according to the province.
Premier promises quick action to twin George Massey tunnel
RICHARD LAM / PNG
VICTORIA — Premier John Horgan appears to have accelerated the province’s timeline to fix traffic congestion at the George Massey tunnel, vowing Thursday to move quickly with a plan to twin the tunnel instead of building a new bridge.
Horgan said local mayors have united behind the plan to add a second tunnel to the crossing, and fix the existing one, in a bid to reduce the worst traffic congestion in the province.
The mayors and local First Nations wrote a letter to Horgan last month calling for a new tunnel with six lanes for regular traffic, two lanes dedicated to rapid bus, and dedicated facilities for cyclists and pedestrians. The mayors and chiefs want it done by 2025 or 2026.
“I think we could get going on this quite quickly,” Horgan said Thursday when asked about the tunnel at an unrelated press conference in Surrey.
“We have to go to Treasury Board. There’s a lot of money involved.”
Horgan’s emphasis on quick action could accelerate the slow pace his government has set to study the project over at least another 17 months.
Premier John Horgan is throwing support behind a call from mayors to twin the George Massey tunnel, saying it can be done quickly.
The Ministry of Transportation is hiring a technical team that would “identify viable options” for the crossing and “provide active transportation alternatives along this busy corridor” before producing a report in November that would then be turned into a final business case by the fall of 2020.
Those options are supposed to include examining the feasibility of a six-to-eight lane bridge, a new tunnel of up to eight lanes and whether the existing tunnel can be refurbished to be used in conjunction with a new tunnel.
But Horgan appeared to brush aside the bridge option Thursday and refocus on only one of the options.
“I’m very excited that the mayor’s council, particularly Delta and Richmond have come to an agreement that the best way forward would be to twin the tunnel, significantly less cost than the proposal that was on the table prior to the election… faster to do and would not require tolls,” Horgan said Thursday.
“Now that we have an opportunity to get a federal partner and have unanimity in the mayor’s council I think there’s every opportunity we could get started on this in a timely way.”
The premier’s comments not only appeared to circumvent his own government’s consultation process, but caught mayors off guard.
Outside a TransLink meeting Thursday, where most mayors were only learning about Horgan’s comments, there was confusion.
“For a number of years, our city council has advocated for the twinning of the tunnel,” said Richmond Mayor Malcolm Brodie.
“We have thought the existing tunnel can be upgraded to a seismic standard consistent with all the other water crossings in the region.”
But Brodie also said he’d thought there was to be a review of other options.
“It would be a surprise that he made (this decision) but we would be supportive of it,” he said. “The level of his depth and analysis (of that decision) is up to him. It (a twinned tunnel) has always been our choice.”
Vancouver Mayor Kennedy Stewart said he’d yet to hear Horgan’s comments directly but would be supportive of moving ahead with two tunnels.
Coquitlam Mayor Richard Stewart, who was not part of the letter from mayors seeking a twinned tunnel, said he’d been hoping the province would end 20 years of dictating regional transportation projects and was still committed to consultation.
“So we’re encouraged by the level of dialogue that province has indicated it wants to have,” said Stewart. “I would be surprised if the province had made a decision unilaterally. I’m hopeful the spirit of cooperation continues.”
The Horgan government has been under increasing pressure to put forward its own plan to deal with gridlock between Delta and Richmond, after it cancelled the $3.5-billion, 10-lane bridge that the previous B.C. Liberal government had planned to build.
The existing Massey Tunnel is not seismically secure and the current volume of traffic overwhelms the tunnel leading to long backups and daily gridlock.
The Opposition Liberals and the Independent Contractors and Businesses Association – both of whom have been sharply critical of the NDP government’s delays – held a mock birthday party for the Massey, which was officially opened 60 years ago on Thursday.
“The party has long been over for the thousands of drivers who use the Massey every day, and who know just how small, out-of-date and unsafe the tunnel has become,” said Chris Gardner, president of the contractors association.
“A new crossing was well under way until the NDP government came to power in 2017 and killed it for no good reason. They’re still dragging their heels on a replacement years later, and drivers are still asking for a new crossing.”
A government-commissioned review by engineer Stan Cowdell concluded last year that a new immersed tube tunnel of up to eight lanes is feasible and would result in increased benefits and cost savings compared to a new bridge if the existing tunnel was structurally retrofitted and used in conjunction.
However, the Cowdell review also found that a new tunnel would cost more than a new bridge, and that the combination of retrofitting the existing tunnel and building a new one would likely exceed more than $4 billion
The review also said a redesigned smaller bridge with an altered alignment could cut costs and potentially be an acceptable outcome as well.
The joint letter said the leaders agree that the project should include six lanes for regular traffic, two lanes for public transit and have access for enhanced rapid transit, with the potential to include high-speed rail.
If it can be future-proofed to include the potential for a high-speed rail link then I'm all for it!
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,446
Wasn't a bored tunnel going to be extremely challenging due to the fact that the geology of this area is essentially a 600 metre-thick layer of river sediments sitting on bedrock?
hmm, so building a tunnel through an environmental area wont trigger a long winded environmental review? great! *i say with sarcasm*
haha rail thorough the tunnel. considering trains can't do steep grades, good luck with that.
well, no one has ever accused a politician, or group of politicians, as being smart.
also whats with everyone wanting a tunnel? they are literally saying no to a better, less risky option that provides better benefits and the possibility of a cheaper price. stupid people everywhere.
Do let me get this straight... we cancelled a project that had already began (I believe over 100 million spent?) that had a solid plan of replacing the tunnel, upgrading interchanges to modern safety standards, a solid rapid transit component (true rapid bus with median lanes, stations, and direct dedicated ramp access to Skytrain Bridgeport Station) that even involved a net gain in ALR.......
..... and are replacing that with a project that will retain the existing structure (another major project 20 or 30 years after opening when bandaids won’t keep it together anymore?), will likely awkwardly split traffic flow (the tunnels even if upgraded are narrow and sub-par to modern highway design standards), still won’t allow hazardous materials to be transported through, will likely take away ALR to accommodate the split in the highway at the tunnels, will be unpleasant to ride a bike through, and will likely cost just as much given the delay and technicality of building tunnels...
Also expecting them to cheap out on the interchanges / general highway upgrades as well (the report even suggested retaining the existing Steveston interchange overpass.........)
Time to send out the or at least let's hope the NDP drag there feet long enough that the Liberals come back into power and start from where they left off and build the bridge as planned.
I didn't see any drawings and or exact plans for the project plus where the F*** are they going to find the money to fund this without tolls????
Ugh what a waste of time, the twinned tunnel is such a stupid idea but I agree with Libtard, do something already! I commute to my job in Delta near the tunnel from my house at Oak and 16. If I go in around 11, I can zoom down the highway and to work in basically 20 mins. If I went in rush hour, at least 45 mins. It is quicker for me to take the 91, Alex Fraser, and backtrack on the SFPR that it is to take the tunnel, but burns a lot more gas. And that is what people have been doing for years, how much more fuel burned and added pollution than if they could just take a quick, relatively uniterrupted direct route. And I don't even have close to the worst of it since I am going against rush hour. The other direction gives me nightmares when I see it on the other side of the divider, the back-up is catastrophic all the time, like gridlock from the 91 to the tunnnel. That is basically 3/4 of the length of Richmond in back-up, that's insane! It is disgusting how the NDP cancelled the project and didn't even care. The ridiculous endless consultation and studies are a waste of time, they don't need more data to know something had to be done decades ago!
Do let me get this straight... we cancelled a project that had already began (I believe over 100 million spent?) that had a solid plan of replacing the tunnel, upgrading interchanges to modern safety standards, a solid rapid transit component (true rapid bus with median lanes, stations, and direct dedicated ramp access to Skytrain Bridgeport Station) that even involved a net gain in ALR.......
..... and are replacing that with a project that will retain the existing structure (another major project 20 or 30 years after opening when bandaids won’t keep it together anymore?), will likely awkwardly split traffic flow (the tunnels even if upgraded are narrow and sub-par to modern highway design standards), still won’t allow hazardous materials to be transported through, will likely take away ALR to accommodate the split in the highway at the tunnels, will be unpleasant to ride a bike through, and will likely cost just as much given the delay and technicality of building tunnels...
Also expecting them to cheap out on the interchanges / general highway upgrades as well (the report even suggested retaining the existing Steveston interchange overpass.........)
What a joke!
I could not agree more or said it better myself. This was a brilliant, future-proofed project that was well under-way and considered cars, transits, hazardous goods, bikes and pedestrians and met current safety standards. I can barely even contain myself when I think of the waste and lack of vision taking place now.
Perfectly summarized. What an expensive joke this whole has indeed been and NDP has absolutely killed everything sensible about this project. Now we pay more and will get a lot less!!
There is a common saying in design & development: ""Fast, good or cheap. Pick two."...
Quote:
“I’m very excited that the mayor’s council, particularly Delta and Richmond have come to an agreement that the best way forward would be to twin the tunnel, significantly less cost than the proposal that was on the table prior to the election… faster to do and would not require tolls,” Horgan said Thursday.
Prev
or at least let's hope the NDP drag there feet long enough that the Liberals come back into power and start from where they left off and build the bridge as planned. 
Linear Mode
