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

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

I'm totally for more transit across the city, no question, but to all advocating more transit on this bridge, what exactly do you want?

The bridge links farmland to farmland. The most sensible thing to do would be run express busses that link up to the Canada line, which is clearly feasible with the HOV lane shown in the rendering.

No way skytrain makes sense, and any commuter rail will need much more planning than just a bridge.

Why not extend Canada Line with limited stops along 99, then highway 17 to the ferry? Build it into the cost much like the full Highway 1 project was "built in" to the new PMB.

Your farmland to farmland argument doesn't make sense if you also think a 10 lane bridge is required.

[theKB]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

I think a bigger factor that people aren't counting on is that EVs will lower the cost of driving, vastly reduce noise and eliminate most point sources of emissions. In an analysis I've done recently, an EV is already much cheaper than it's gas counterpart, as such I will be picking one up in the near future.

People always complain basically are noise, fumes and that it's bloody expensive to own a car in Vancouver. All 3 of those pretty much go out the window with decent EVs, that are coming down in price and will continue to do so.

That is a very interesting point that I don't think a lot of people have considered. The advent of the EV and it becoming mainstream could potentially throw a big wrench into the no driving thing. As we start to see more options and the price continue to fall, the fact is that people may consider getting back into their cars if Gas was not a factor in the cost of ownership. Let's face the facts, transit as it is unless you live relatively close is a royal pain and most commuters who do take transit most likely own a car as well (it's kind of tough to live in whiterock or south surrey and not own a car).

Spend 70-80 dollars for a tank of gas or 1-6 dollars for a charge. Oh and translink's funding will continue to dry up in that area as well. And frankly the discussion over translink funding should be to eliminate the gas tax entirely and move the revenue source to something that is dependable year in and year out.

[Axe]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

While I agree with you, this also has to deal with an aging population. A lower portion of the population will be working due to the wave of boomers retiring.

I think a bigger factor that people aren't counting on is that EVs will lower the cost of driving, vastly reduce noise and eliminate most point sources of emissions. In an analysis I've done recently, an EV is already much cheaper than it's gas counterpart, as such I will be picking one up in the near future.

People always complain basically are noise, fumes and that it's bloody expensive to own a car in Vancouver. All 3 of those pretty much go out the window with decent EVs, that are coming down in price and will continue to do so.

The big issues that are left to address after that are the costs of parking, infrastructure and making sure that people get enough exercise as not to be a burden on the medical system.

I have an EV. it is the best car i have ever owned.

[WarrenC12]

EVs are great and I look forward to one myself.

But to think you can fit 1 million more people and 1 million more vehicles in Greater Van, you're fooling yourself.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by theKB

That is a very interesting point that I don't think a lot of people have considered. The advent of the EV and it becoming mainstream could potentially throw a big wrench into the no driving thing. As we start to see more options and the price continue to fall, the fact is that people may consider getting back into their cars if Gas was not a factor in the cost of ownership. Let's face the facts, transit as it is unless you live relatively close is a royal pain and most commuters who do take transit most likely own a car as well (it's kind of tough to live in whiterock or south surrey and not own a car).

Spend 70-80 dollars for a tank of gas or 1-6 dollars for a charge. Oh and translink's funding will continue to dry up in that area as well. And frankly the discussion over translink funding should be to eliminate the gas tax entirely and move the revenue source to something that is dependable year in and year out.

Agree with this. As you say, if people had a choice, most transit users would choose to have their own vehicle. Not only would it be far cheaper to fuel the vehicle, there are very few moving parts compared to an ICE vehicle, so maintenance and repair costs would be much lower. I think we'll also see a shift to much smaller EV's as well - a new hybrid motorcycle/car that will lower costs even further as well as creating more space for vehicles to navigate city streets. Side streets could be used as arterials for such vehicles.

My prediction is that the price of EV's will be streamlined to the point of being affordable to the average transit user. If that happens, a 10 lane bridge may not look so much like overkill.

[gary92]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Why not extend Canada Line with limited stops along 99, then highway 17 to the ferry? Build it into the cost much like the full Highway 1 project was "built in" to the new PMB.

i would love to see this. have a skytrain going to the new malls being built in tsawwassen

and then possible see it extended to south surrey later on? wishful thinking?

[theKB]

Originally Posted by logan5

Agree with this. As you say, if people had a choice, most transit users would choose to have their own vehicle. Not only would it be far cheaper to fuel the vehicle, there are very few moving parts compared to an ICE vehicle, so maintenance and repair costs would be much lower. I think we'll also see a shift to much smaller EV's as well - a new hybrid motorcycle/car that will lower costs even further as well as creating more space for vehicles to navigate city streets. Side streets could be used as arterials for such vehicles.

My prediction is that the price of EV's will be streamlined to the point of being affordable to the average transit user. If that happens, a 10 lane bridge may not look so much like overkill.

That is already available and fairly affordable. Smart's EV sits at around $26000 before incentives and has a 130km range and costs ~$1-2 for a charge at home and provisions are already in place to charge cheaply downtown for those who have range anxiety. Easypark charges $1/hour to plug an EV in at their lots (that is inclusive of the parking charge). If anyone hasn't driven an Electric smart I strongly suggest taking one for a spin (car2go has a few in their fleet). Very impressive little cars especially since that horrible smart transmission is taken out of the equation. It's no tesla but a great car non the less!

Originally Posted by gary92

i would love to see this. have a skytrain going to the new malls being built in tsawwassen

and then possible see it extended to south surrey later on? wishful thinking?

and realistically some form of LRT would be the way to go for long distances and frankly at least a provision to be added at a later date for such a thing in the bridge construction should be mandatory.

[SFUVancouver]

Regarding EV cars, I think they're fantastic and if I had my druthers I would replace at once my household's car with a Tesla Model S. With that said, regardless of fuel, navigation (self-driving), and household cost, what EVs do not address is the physical space that vehicles require in a city.

Our cities will be far more pleasant places to live when engine noise and exhaust pollution are reduced, though tire noise, wind resistance, and heavy duty vehicles and trucks will continue to represent the majority of road noise. However, I don't want to forfeit the goal of creating livable communities that are much less car dependent and emphasize investments in transit, walking, cycling, combined with sound mixed-use land use zoning, even if the vehicles are whisper quiet, drive themselves, and run on sunshine and hydro power.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by gary92

i would love to see this. have a skytrain going to the new malls being built in tsawwassen

and then possible see it extended to south surrey later on? wishful thinking?

You'd get to South Surrey via Expo Line extension down King George Blvd (as there is too much ALR between South Delta and South Surrey/White Rock).

The only source of ridership for any rapid transit line using the GMT alignment would be Ladner, Tswwassen (including TFN lands) and the ferry terminal. So unless Ladner and Tswwassen densify in a big way, rapid bus will likely be sufficient in the long term.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Regarding EV cars, I think they're fantastic and if I had my druthers I would replace at once my household's car with a Tesla Model S. With that said, regardless of fuel, navigation (self-driving), and household cost, what EVs do not address is the physical space that vehicles require in a city.

Our cities will be far more pleasant places to live when engine noise and exhaust pollution are reduced, though tire noise, wind resistance, and heavy duty vehicles and trucks will continue to represent the majority of road noise. However, I don't want to forfeit the goal of creating livable communities that are much less car dependent and emphasize investments in transit, walking, cycling, combined with sound mixed-use land use zoning, even if the vehicles are whisper quiet, drive themselves, and run on sunshine and hydro power.

With new driverless technology and navigation systems coming online and a smart integrated road system you will be able to fit double or triple the cars on to the roads without blinking an eye. Currently we are wasting most of our road space because people drive inefficiently and lights are inefficient, among other things.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

...I don't want to forfeit the goal of creating livable communities that are much less car dependent and emphasize investments in transit, walking, cycling, combined with sound mixed-use land use zoning, even if the vehicles are whisper quiet, drive themselves, and run on sunshine and hydro power.

Exactly. Electric Vehicles do absolutely nothing to eliminate the kind of car-oriented development that characterizes so much of Surrey, Richmond, etc., where you have malls set way back from the sidewalk behind acres of parking. Those are joyless places to walk around. You drive to them in a car, and even if you want just want to go from one mall to the adjacent one most people typically use a car to do it.

Contrast that with the vibrant shopping areas in Vancouver such as Gastown, Granville Mall, Robson Street, Commercial Drive, etc. etc. where simply walking along the street is so much more of an engaging and enjoyable experience.

[officedweller]

delete (wrong thread)

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by cornholio

With new driverless technology and navigation systems coming online and a smart integrated road system you will be able to fit double or triple the cars on to the roads without blinking an eye. Currently we are wasting most of our road space because people drive inefficiently and lights are inefficient, among other things.

What does a smart integrated road system look like? I am at a loss to conceive of how our intersections can handle two to three times as many vehicle movements, certainly without affecting safety, limiting pedestrian signal control and crossing times, or increasing the speed at which vehicles travel and take corners. How will parking (off-street and on) accommodate two to three times as many vehicles?

As I said, I'm a huge fan of electric vehicles and I can easily imagine how self-driving cars (part of the Internet of Things) will massively improve the capacity and safety on fast suburban roads and especially on highways. Once you get into dense urban areas, though, it's a fantasy to think that we can accommodate two to three times as many vehicles without negative effects on livability or other road users (transit buses, cyclists, delivery vehicles, goods movement) or that we will have the money to spend on retrofitting and expanding the road network to accommodate those numbers. It's a fantasy to think that electrification and automation will be a panacea for congestion and the unalterable physical space limitations of mature built-up cities.

Anyway, back to the George Massey Tunnel replacement. My office is very eager to learn more about the planned upgrades to the 99/Steveston Hwy interchange. We're located near No.5 and Steveston Highway and most of the office commutes through the Tunnel. Several of my colleagues simply plan to move north of the Fraser to avoid the congestion and construction delays the interchange upgrades and the bridge project will create and, more generally, to avoid the tolls that are pretty likely to be imposed on the new crossing and probably all of the Fraser Crossings in the not too distant future.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

What does a smart integrated road system look like? I am at a loss to conceive of how our intersections can handle two to three times as many vehicle movements, certainly without affecting safety, limiting pedestrian signal control and crossing times, or increasing the speed at which vehicles travel and take corners.

There are a lot of people who seem to be under the misguided notion that smart, driverless cars will eliminate the need for traffic signals by allowing cars to stream through intersections without stopping by coordinating amongst themselves to pass through gaps between them. Or that following distances could be drastically reduced between vehicles. These are ludicrous ideas that could only ever work in a perfect world in which design and software errors didn't exist and hardware never, ever failed.

The reality is that automated vehicle control systems must always allow for the possibility of failure - either of the control system itself or of the sensors, motors, brakes, etc. - and be able to bring about a safe resolution, which usually means stopping. You can see this in automated systems such as Skytrain, which uses a moving block concept to reserve exclusive occupancy of a section of track by a train. Other trains are not allowed to enter the block, and the block extends beyond the train for enough distance to ensure that a following train can stop safely even if it looses power or communication with the central control system.

Driverless cars will require the same "safety zone" around them so that a catastrophe doesn't happen when a particular car or a car near to it suffers some sort of failure. No manufacturer would try to sidestep this because of the huge liability issues involved. Chances are that this will mean less road capacity than now because humans are not so particular about safety and routinely follow at distances too close to stop without avoiding collision

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Exactly. Electric Vehicles do absolutely nothing to eliminate the kind of car-oriented development that characterizes so much of Surrey, Richmond, etc., where you have malls set way back from the sidewalk behind acres of parking. Those are joyless places to walk around. You drive to them in a car, and even if you want just want to go from one mall to the adjacent one most people typically use a car to do it.

Contrast that with the vibrant shopping areas in Vancouver such as Gastown, Granville Mall, Robson Street, Commercial Drive, etc. etc. where simply walking along the street is so much more of an engaging and enjoyable experience.

Do you think surburbanites don't go out for walks? So they do their shopping with a car, when its electric the environmental impact will be much less.

The Tesla Model S is already the best selling car in Norway, as prices come down they will be even more mainstream and BC with abundant hydroelectric power will be one of the most sensible places to own an EV.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Do you think surburbanites don't go out for walks?

Sure would be interesting to see a study comparing the amount of walking done by people living in Surrey vs. those who live in Vancouver.

Regardless, I stand by my opinion that the commercial districts in Vancouver are a lot more pedestrian-friendly than those in many of the suburbs.

[tybuilding]

Originally Posted by cornholio

With new driverless technology and navigation systems coming online and a smart integrated road system you will be able to fit double or triple the cars on to the roads without blinking an eye. Currently we are wasting most of our road space because people drive inefficiently and lights are inefficient, among other things.

Then why do we need 10 lanes? Keep it 4 lanes and let technology solve our problems.

[Klazu]

Always overbuild your bridges. Working and living Downtown I almost never drive during the rush hour, but last Friday I needed to leave the city at 4pm heading to the border. Knowing that GMT would be a disaster I opted for the Alex Fraser Bridge. I had no idea how the 6-lane bridge is during rush hour, but I must say the congestion caught me by a surprise.

27 years after completion one needs 20 minutes to just get on the bridge thanks to only 3 lanes southbound with 91 and 91A merging right before the bridge. Once past the merge the traffic seemed to be pcik up speed, but lesson learned is that there needs to be preferably 2 merging lanes over any major bridge.

I am really happy that with Port Mann Bridge this was taken into account, no matter how it may feel overbuilt today. I hope also the future George Massey Bridge will have 10 lanes as there is lots of merging traffic over the bridge.

[GeeCee]

Nearly half of us support Massey Tunnel replacement: poll

METRO VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) – We still don’t know if it will be tolled, but we are already forming opinions surrounding the replacement of the Massey Tunnel.

A new survey suggests 45 per cent of people in Metro Vancouver are in support of plans for the bridge. But it seems a lot of people haven’t made up their minds yet.

“It’s a big topic, it’s a lot of money and we just wanted to see where people stand on it,” says Dr. Lesley Duncan with NRG Research.

Only 14 per cent of respondents are against the replacement.

...

http://www.news1130.com/2013/10/15/nearly-half-of-us-support-massey-tunnel-replacement-poll/

[WarrenC12]

Only 45% with no official word that it will be tolled? Doesn't sound like a lot of support.