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

[Metro-One]

Oh I agree, I wish that the government could fund the M line extension under Broadway ASAP and as easily as they are able to find money for these road projects (of course with some federal help would be nice, but that goes for all projects of such scales).

But again, skytrain or LRT is not a realistic solution down this corridor. A new bridge with an expanded highway with a true rapid bus system (using centre lanes, dedicated ramps, park and rides, and maybe even a station hub or two built over the highway as in Seattle) is what I really hope to see here.

It would be wise to push for such during this period of design.

Also, in the defense for roads, they do also carry transit (as in buses) along with the movement of goods.

This is also why I am ok with tolls on a new bridge as well.

And I still wish that the SFPR was built to full freeway standards, but was also implemented with distance based tolls for non commercial vehicles.

[Pinion]

So jealous the debate is between 8 and 10 lanes

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by jhausner

Wow. Amazing how someone (the author of that article) just dripping with absolute bias can accuse Translink of bias.

I hope you mean the MOT because this has nothing to do with Translink.

[theKB]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

And I still wish that the SFPR was built to full freeway standards, but was also implemented with distance based tolls for non commercial vehicles.

I completely agree. This should have been built as a proper freeway and not the way it is. Also distance tolling it would have been smart (a la 407ETR in TO)

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by theKB

I completely agree. This should have been built as a proper freeway and not the way it is. Also distance tolling it would have been smart (a la 407ETR in TO)

The last time I drove the 407 it cost me about $27, one way...

[osirisboy]

8 lanes is good. Plus with the pattullo bridge being expanded (most likely) that should help alleviate some congestion on the gmt. Also as others have mentioned when the new bridge reaches it's limit it'll probably be time to be looking at a new crossing elsewhere.

[Metro-One]

By toll I was thinking around $5 full length one way.

I believe the entire route is 40km long.

Therefore roughly 12 or 13 cents a km.

Automated license plate / decal readers could have been easily installed on interchange on / off ramps.

[GeeCee]

Is a WCE-type service feasible for the corridor? Pacific Station to White Rock or so..

[Metro-One]

Probably, but that requires heavy rail and likely would only meet the needs of a fraction of the tunnel users.

And given that there is no heavy rail corridor beside the tunnels, building one just to have heavy rail tracks on this project would be a huge waste of money.

That would better be done as a separate project, maybe to coincide with faster rail service to and from Seattle. A local WCE train could be ran on the same tracks to areas near and around White Rock.

Rapid Bus is by far the best transit option for this project.

[Mininari]

I agree with nearly all of Metro-One's points about the various reasons for replacing the GMT. The situation is akin to an old house where nothing meets modern code (i.e. electrical, fire, etc). Sometimes there simply isn't space to do the renovation to bring it up to code... and you're better off with a new build. In this case, there is simply no road width whatsoever for accommodating pedestrians in those tunnels, the existing interchanges on either sides are dated relics and function extremely poorly, and rapid bus has no advantage (i.e. HOV lane through the tunnel).

(Just gonna ignore all the big 'political-national economy' forces that are really driving this project for the moment... another thread).

Also, I really don't understand where people are finding logic in extending skytrain service through this corridor. Why? the land is all protected ALR on the south side of the fraser, and South Delta simply does not have the density to warrant such an expensive investment. The Canada line terminates nice and close to the start of the Hwy 99 freeway, and a bus-oriented network of feeder routes can do the job. If anything, plan to invest in expansion of the ill-planned, thrice-voted, spayed and neutered Canada Line. If only they had the foresight to build the stations with longer platforms.

And with that, lets build this bridge to be at minimum, expandable to 10 lanes... but 8 on opening day is fine by me with new approach interchanges, and some minimal highway capacity expansion on either side to support a 3+1HOV design.

[libtard]

Originally Posted by jhausner

The highway will be expanded and reconfigured along with the new bridge. That includes moving the HOV lanes to the center like on HWY1 and they mentioned a few times expanding to 3+1 configuration as far south as KGB at least. It already is arguably 3+1 northbound from the tunnel to East-West connector. They would just have to add a lane southbound from Oak -> New Bridge.

If you have a link that would be great because there is no room for expansion under the recently built SFPR/99 interchange so they will not be extending the 3 + 1 configuration down to KGB.

[ssiguy]

The whole South of Fraser highway network is a mess.

As far as I can figure it, you can't even come from White Rock/Surrey/Seattle To Twassen and take the SFPR............you have to take the old Ladner Trunk because they didn't build the overpass to include it.

Tearing down the Massey and then building a new 8 lane bridge is a huge waste of money as it good for decades to come as was the old Port Mann but the builders keep greasing the politicians hands. All they need to do is add another tunnel portion and preferable it will originate at Steveston Road and not on HWY 99.

Much of the bottleneck is due to heavy traffic merging right before the tunnel and much just gets on at Steveston and gets off for Ladner. In other words, much of the traffic is just between the two so make it accessible for them. With this tunnel they could also include bike and walk lanes. This would also make it easier if there is another accident as it is another tunnel to be used as an alternative routing.

They could phase it in so that the new tunnel section opens they could take turns shutting down the older sections and bring them up to standard and then eventually have them all running.

The traffic is never slow going thru the tunnel but rather right before it and an alternate tunnel for those getting on from Steveston would greatly improve traffic flow. They could even completely cut off the Steveston

[ssiguy]

Sorry, pushed the enter button too soon.
Anyway...........

they could completely close the Steveston southbound exit so traffic would flow easily and Steveston traffic, from both sides of the river would take a parallel tunnel. The tunnels would be right beside each other but allow fast thruway traffic on the 99.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by libtard

If you have a link that would be great because there is no room for expansion under the recently built SFPR/99 interchange so they will not be extending the 3 + 1 configuration down to KGB.

Same thing that happened at the new Hwy 1/160th Street interchange will happen thereon - 3 + 1 toward the interchange... 2 + 1 thru the interchange... and 3 + 1 after the interchange. Considerable on/off traffic at those two volume points.

And yes, along with the new GMT replacement... the entire corridor will be upgraded from the Oak St. Bridge right through to White Rock... akin to the Port Mann Bridge/Hwy 1 upgrades.

BTW, the City of Richmond has been eyeing a new Blundell Road interchange for ages:

http://www.richmond.ca/__shared/assets/022607_item19a16635.pdf

Originally Posted by ssiguy

The traffic is never slow going thru the tunnel

Are you serious?! Back in the 1990's I was still able to go thru the GMT at 80 km - 100 km/hour. These days, going thru the GMT, it's always 50 km/hr with brake-lights galore. Even slower in the right lane.

Hell, I always wanna get outta there knowing that the thing would suffer a catastrophic collapse during a major seismic event.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Also, I really don't understand where people are finding logic in extending skytrain service through this corridor.

I'm not sure if you're responding to my posts earlier today regarding transit, but I never said anything about Skytrain service to the Ladner area. My gripe isn't with the tunnel replacement - I accept that it's a necessary job (although I think 10 lanes is way overkill). My gripe is that the provincial government is parachuting money in on one huge road project after another with zero public consultation while at the same time demanding a referendum before it will approve transit funding. We have transit capacity issues that are just as pressing as bridge congestion but this government is ignoring them.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

The whole South of Fraser highway network is a mess.

As far as I can figure it, you can't even come from White Rock/Surrey/Seattle To Twassen and take the SFPR............you have to take the old Ladner Trunk because they didn't build the overpass to include it.

This was quite a logical move, because if you are coming from any of those areas you will take the 91, not the 99, to the SFPR if you want to go east. Or you will take King George, or if you really want to go east or straight North from the US you will take the #15. Taking the 99 would add many extra km to your trip, so essentially, there is no need.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I'm not sure if you're responding to my posts earlier today regarding transit, but I never said anything about Skytrain service to the Ladner area. My gripe isn't with the tunnel replacement - I accept that it's a necessary job (although I think 10 lanes is way overkill). My gripe is that the provincial government is parachuting money in on one huge road project after another with zero public consultation while at the same time demanding a referendum before it will approve transit funding. We have transit capacity issues that are just as pressing as bridge congestion but this government is ignoring them.

I totally agree with this.

If I was running the show though I would be ramming highway and transit projects through with little public consultation at the same rate, as excessive public consultation usually does more harm than good with missive cross region transit / highway projects.

[theKB]

Originally Posted by GeeCee

Is a WCE-type service feasible for the corridor? Pacific Station to White Rock or so..

I think the seattle route passes through new west and a roundabout route to get back down to whiterock. Looking at the schedule it takes 2 hours 5 minutes to go from terminal to bellingham which i wouldn't be surprised if the majority of the time is taken to reach the border.

Interestingly enough if they went into richmond and utilized the bridge across the fraser and then up arbutus you could almost hit the canadaline if they tore down the starbucks at granville island. Obviously that whole thing would never happen but frankly a provision for a train/lrt should be built into the bridge for future development.

[GlassCity]

I live in Ladner, and it's true there is absolutely no way we deserve a Skytrain extension here, and you'd never convince the nimbys here to allow it anyway. I think a continuation of the bus lanes that start on Highway 99 just north of the Steveston Highway interchange over the bridge will be more than enough to serve our transit needs.

But I'm not even sure we need those. The HOV lanes right before the tunnel carry buses just fine with delays being very rare. Most of the time you coast right by everybody standing there, until you need to merge into the tunnel, which is the real problem. Whatever they choose in terms of that, it'll be good enough.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

By toll I was thinking around $5 full length one way.

I believe the entire route is 40km long.

Therefore roughly 12 or 13 cents a km.

Automated license plate / decal readers could have been easily installed on interchange on / off ramps.

Do that today and you won't have a capacity problem on the GMT or 99 anywhere. No need to build a bridge.