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

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by Ray1957

This Massey Tunnel traffic issue is nothing more than a scam by insider politic ans taking bribes from US coal and Rail companies, so they can bypass White Rock and not disturb the peace. They can now go directly to the Surrey Fraser docks, with huge shipments of toxic dusty coal and off load to the deep haul ships.
OH MY.... but first we have to blow out the Massey Tunnel so we can increase the deep haul shipping traffic...... Bet the government insiders could pull the wool over the tax payers eyes easy with this one. Just tell them how much easier it will be for truck traffic and cars to climb the Huge Massey bridge, Kinda like the Alex Fraser jam ups ...... and then to go where?
Oh yes, now we can plug up the Oak and Night street bridge quicker and make out like our billions of tax dollars is actually going to improve anything.
Only thing it will increase is the back door money coming from insider payoffs, and getting those coal profits out of the ground before anyone notices....Haa haa Haa ..... Keep up the Media press reports over the traffic issue this should help to disguises the truth!!

I heard that Elvis crashed a UFO into the GMT, and they are going to build the new bridge via the Freemasons funneling UNICEF funds from the 911 red cross relief which is buried with the remains of Noah's Ark.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I honestly would like to make all controlled access highways in Metro-Vancouver as far east as Abbotsford as distance based tolls.

I think distance based is too complex to implement today, but bridges are the perfect start. Tolling them at marginal levels, variable at peak periods, would provide excellent data on what people are truly willing to pay. That data would help immensely in planning and budgeting future upgrades.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I think distance based is too complex to implement today, but bridges are the perfect start. Tolling them at marginal levels, variable at peak periods, would provide excellent data on what people are truly willing to pay. That data would help immensely in planning and budgeting future upgrades.

Agreed. Distance based could be an endgame approach. For now, all bridges would be best. And I like the idea of variable peak periods. If all bridges were tolled I would say some where around 1 dollar to 2 dollars would be a good base rate? (maybe 1 dollar for older structures and 2 for new).

Also, some sort of re-bate system for low income earners at the end of the year would be nice as well (this should also be applied to transit).

[SOSS]

Distance based tolling would not be overly complicated to implement. It's done in so many other jurisdictions. Of course it would be limited to full freeway and limited access roads. A gantry type scanner like the one found on the Surrey side of the PMB located at every on-and off-ramp would need to be implemented. I'd like to see it from Lions Bay or even Minaty Bay along 99 through to Abbotsford for the Transcanada//99 route and from both the Oak Street and Knight Street bridges to the border via Highway 99 and 91 corridors. This way someone commuting from Surrey to Coquitlam doesn't pay the same as someone commuting from Abbotsford to North Vancouver (cause you know people do).

At say $0.04/km on a standard vehicle would cost $5.00 to travel from Chilliwack to Whistler, $0.20 to travel from Surrey over the PMB to Coquitlam, $1.28 to travel from Langley to Vancouver (200 St to Grandview Hwy), $1.28 to travel from Whiterock to Vancouver, $0.84 to travel from Whitewrock to Burnaby. Expand this system to the SFPR would cost $3.20 to travel from Abbotsford to Tswwassen.

Cost could be variable based on time of day, route taken (maybe less for SFPR until full freeway - or more to pay for upgrades...), type of vehicle etc.

This to me is far more equitable then tolling single bridges. Yes, there will always be toll dodgers - that is inevitable. But if you charge a small amount based on the distance that one travels you are far less likely to have people driving out of their way to the aging Patullo to avoid $0.20 toll.

Simply put you can never build your way out of congestion. Distance based tolling would provide steady long-term income stream required for upkeep and improvements to infrastructure. People driving electric vehicles would pay the same as internal combustion engines (unlike how the gas tax works). The less fortunate could get rebates etc.

Yes it would cost a fair bit to implement; and likely have some hiccups.... thinking of Compass. The largest hurdle is the political will to do it. A will that I highly doubt the current BC Liberals have.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by Ray1957

This Massey Tunnel traffic issue is nothing more than a scam by insider politic ans taking bribes from US coal and Rail companies, so they can bypass White Rock and not disturb the peace. They can now go directly to the Surrey Fraser docks, with huge shipments of toxic dusty coal and off load to the deep haul ships.
OH MY.... but first we have to blow out the Massey Tunnel so we can increase the deep haul shipping traffic...... Bet the government insiders could pull the wool over the tax payers eyes easy with this one. Just tell them how much easier it will be for truck traffic and cars to climb the Huge Massey bridge, Kinda like the Alex Fraser jam ups ...... and then to go where?
Oh yes, now we can plug up the Oak and Night street bridge quicker and make out like our billions of tax dollars is actually going to improve anything.
Only thing it will increase is the back door money coming from insider payoffs, and getting those coal profits out of the ground before anyone notices....Haa haa Haa ..... Keep up the Media press reports over the traffic issue this should help to disguises the truth!!

Why do you think anyone cares that much about White Rock? It's about what it's always about - more money due to more trucks moving quickly through the region.

[Procrastinational]

I'm all for tolls whether applied to bridges or distance-based. Putting a price on road use eliminates the single biggest drawback to road expansion, which is induced demand.

Any similar public good is going to be overused if there is no price associated with its use (can you imagine how busy the Skytrain would be if there were no fares?). Road pricing would mean less congested roads, and a stable funding mechanism for their maintenance and expansion.

I've noticed an interesting trend. If a highway or bridge is upgraded, one of two things will occur. If it isn't tolled, traffic increases quickly and pre-upgrade levels of congestion are reached in a matter of years. The anti highway crowd cries foul on how you can't build your way out of congestion. If it is tolled, you'll see lower traffic figures than expected (Port Mann) and the anti highway crowd will claim that the upgrade was unnecessary. These views contradict themselves. You can absolutely build your way out of congestion, but only if road use is priced.

Also, I have a hard time seeing how improved port access to the Fraser is a bad thing. Sure the province has been a bit sneaky about why a bridge is the preferred replacement, and they probably have ulterior motives, but ultimately the end result is what counts. Goods need to leave the region somehow, and sea shipping routes are extremely cost effective. If we don't improve port access, the industries (and jobs) associated with it will leave in favour of more accommodating regions.

[Stingray2004]

Sorry. But think that you guys are all livin` in a dream world in terms of social engineering. New and major bridge crossings such as the GEB, PEB, and new Massey... yes a toll to assist paying interest/capital costs. That`s always been the case historically wherever.

That said, even methinks that the current toll for both the GEB and PMB should be reduced to either a loonie or toonie at most. The real world, here in BC, sees a very high cost of livin`for many folk. And ya don`t want to add to that financial burden.

Starts to move toward political suicide.

In that vein, the feds are responsible for the $4 billion+ replacement cost of the new Champlain Bridge in Montreal. The fed Cons required a roughly $3 toll for each crossing upon completion.

Both the fed NDP and then the fed Liberals completely opposed any toll at all. And now there will be no toll with fed election results.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/c...ontreal-liberal-justin-trudeau-1.3214158

BTW, since the Champlain Bridge in Montreal is a fed crossing, even us BCers will be paying on behalf of those in Montreal now having to no longer pay any toll at all.

Again, the real world ain`t no utopian or social-engineered world.

[libtard]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Sorry. But think that you guys are all livin` in a dream world in terms of social engineering. New and major bridge crossings such as the GEB, PEB, and new Massey... yes a toll to assist paying interest/capital costs. That`s always been the case historically wherever.

That said, even methinks that the current toll for both the GEB and PMB should be reduced to either a loonie or toonie at most. The real world, here in BC, sees a very high cost of livin`for many folk. And ya don`t want to add to that financial burden.

Starts to move toward political suicide.

In that vein, the feds are responsible for the $4 billion+ replacement cost of the new Champlain Bridge in Montreal. The fed Cons required a roughly $3 toll for each crossing upon completion.

Both the fed NDP and then the fed Liberals completely opposed any toll at all. And now there will be no toll with fed election results.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/c...ontreal-liberal-justin-trudeau-1.3214158

BTW, since the Champlain Bridge in Montreal is a fed crossing, even us BCers will be paying on behalf of those in Montreal now having to no longer pay any toll at all.

Again, the real world ain`t no utopian or social-engineered world.

Their ridiculous fantasies will never come to fruition, its all good

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by SOSS

Distance based tolling would not be overly complicated to implement. It's done in so many other jurisdictions. Of course it would be limited to full freeway and limited access roads. A gantry type scanner like the one found on the Surrey side of the PMB located at every on-and off-ramp would need to be implemented. I'd like to see it from Lions Bay or even Minaty Bay along 99 through to Abbotsford for the Transcanada//99 route and from both the Oak Street and Knight Street bridges to the border via Highway 99 and 91 corridors. This way someone commuting from Surrey to Coquitlam doesn't pay the same as someone commuting from Abbotsford to North Vancouver (cause you know people do).

At say $0.04/km on a standard vehicle would cost $5.00 to travel from Chilliwack to Whistler, $0.20 to travel from Surrey over the PMB to Coquitlam, $1.28 to travel from Langley to Vancouver (200 St to Grandview Hwy), $1.28 to travel from Whiterock to Vancouver, $0.84 to travel from Whitewrock to Burnaby. Expand this system to the SFPR would cost $3.20 to travel from Abbotsford to Tswwassen.

Cost could be variable based on time of day, route taken (maybe less for SFPR until full freeway - or more to pay for upgrades...), type of vehicle etc.

This to me is far more equitable then tolling single bridges. Yes, there will always be toll dodgers - that is inevitable. But if you charge a small amount based on the distance that one travels you are far less likely to have people driving out of their way to the aging Patullo to avoid $0.20 toll.

Simply put you can never build your way out of congestion. Distance based tolling would provide steady long-term income stream required for upkeep and improvements to infrastructure. People driving electric vehicles would pay the same as internal combustion engines (unlike how the gas tax works). The less fortunate could get rebates etc.

Yes it would cost a fair bit to implement; and likely have some hiccups.... thinking of Compass. The largest hurdle is the political will to do it. A will that I highly doubt the current BC Liberals have.

This is pretty much the toll system i have long envisioned.

It is not hard to do, every on / off ramp on Japanese freeways have toll booths, and this is with very old / outdated / costlier technology than what we could implement. (There is still a lot of manual toll collecting in Japan, a situation that I think is similar to many cities in the world not upgrading their new metro lines to be automatic, because once a work force is in place from an older time you can never remove it).

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Procrastinational

I've noticed an interesting trend. If a highway or bridge is upgraded, one of two things will occur. If it isn't tolled, traffic increases quickly and pre-upgrade levels of congestion are reached in a matter of years. The anti highway crowd cries foul on how you can't build your way out of congestion. If it is tolled, you'll see lower traffic figures than expected (Port Mann) and the anti highway crowd will claim that the upgrade was unnecessary. These views contradict themselves. You can absolutely build your way out of congestion, but only if road use is priced.

The key here isn't "building", it's "pricing". Building has little to do with it. You could have eliminated the Port Mann bridge congestion simply by adding tolls without spending such a huge amount of money on capacity expansion.

Of course such a move would have been political suicide. That's why it's so important to toll new infrastructure - you can use the cost of construction as an excuse to impose the toll.

And the other factor in the equation is that in a region with a growing population it's not really feasible just add tolls in order to throttle traffic, you also have to provide reasonable alternatives. That's why transit is so important, and that's why I'm so incensed that the Provincial government is building tolled roads left and right with no public consultation while at the same time it has a completely different set of rules that make it almost impossible to fund transit expansion.

[Infrequent Poster]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

The key here isn't "building", it's "pricing". Building has little to do with it. You could have eliminated the Port Mann bridge congestion simply by adding tolls without spending such a huge amount of money on capacity expansion.

Of course such a move would have been political suicide. That's why it's so important to toll new infrastructure - you can use the cost of construction as an excuse to impose the toll.

And the other factor in the equation is that in a region with a growing population it's not really feasible just add tolls in order to throttle traffic, you also have to provide reasonable alternatives. That's why transit is so important, and that's why I'm so incensed that the Provincial government is building tolled roads left and right with no public consultation while at the same time it has a completely different set of rules that make it almost impossible to fund transit expansion.

So do nothing to vancouvers crumbling infrastructure except toll it? All the traffic problems will vanish?

Lets say the pmb and associated highway improvements never happened but the same toll was charged on the old bridge. We have the traffic numbers for the pmb since they introduced the toll (and they are trending up http://www.pmh1project.com/about-the-project/about-ti-corp/Pages/Traffic.aspx ). Even with a slight reduction in traffic volume (because of tolls) the old bridge would be almost exactly as congested as it was before. The rest of the highway would still be an embarrassing joke as well and horribly congested. As none of the current improvements would have happened either.

Making motorists pay more money while doing exactly nothing to old, under built infrastucture is not the answer to congestion in my opinion.

[Procrastinational]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

The key here isn't "building", it's "pricing". Building has little to do with it. You could have eliminated the Port Mann bridge congestion simply by adding tolls without spending such a huge amount of money on capacity expansion.

And the other factor in the equation is that in a region with a growing population it's not really feasible just add tolls in order to throttle traffic, you also have to provide reasonable alternatives.

You hit the nail on the head with the growth issue. For any given population, theoretically, there exists an optimal amount of transportation infrastructure. This applies to both roads and public transit. As the population grows, the optimal amount of all forms of infrastructure grows as well.

Right off the bat, without a pricing mechanism, supply and demand are unlikely to be in equilibrium, and you end up in the situation where it will always appear that there is insufficient capacity. Only when you have an efficient pricing mechanism will it become evident whether there is a surplus or shortage of capacity. We are in this situation right now. With no road pricing of any sort, roads will always have an inefficient amount of congestion regardless of upgrades. Tolls along with smart upgrades (more to improve safety and traffic flow than increase capacity) is probably the best way to reduce congestion. Eliminating choke points probably reduces congestion as much or more than adding extra lanes.

If you are in equilibrium, any population growth will make infrastructure necessary. In other words, even in a region that isn't growing, attempting to control congestion only with tolls would only work if we already have a significant surplus of highway capacity, and we are just using it inefficiently. Adding growth to the equation makes this condition much less likely. It's hard to view Vancouver's road infrastructure as adequate (for the current population, let alone the future) if you have spent much time in other similarly sized metros.

If you make tolls high enough that you force a huge number of vehicles of the road, you are going to lose a lot more from constricting economic growth than you will gain in reduced congestion.

Now I would certainly agree that transit is significantly under built in Vancouver (far more dire situation than with roads), but both are quite pathetic compared to many parts of the world, and we shouldn't be short selling ourselves by only upgrading transit.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Infrequent Poster

Lets say the pmb and associated highway improvements never happened but the same toll was charged on the old bridge. We have the traffic numbers for the pmb since they introduced the toll (and they are trending up http://www.pmh1project.com/about-the-project/about-ti-corp/Pages/Traffic.aspx ). Even with a slight reduction in traffic volume (because of tolls) the old bridge would be almost exactly as congested as it was before.

Infrastructure needs to be replaced when its no longer economically feasible to maintain it. That's the situation we're in now with the Patullo bridge, and it may be true of the Massey Tunnel as well (although I'm a little less inclined to believe that one).

That same situation did not exist with the Port Mann bridge. The original proposal was to twin the crossing by building a new 5-lane bridge. The existing bridge was still usable for quite a number of years yet.

And if $3.00 tolls didn't ease the congestion enough, then you have the option of going to $5.00 tolls, etc. Pricing can control congestion, you just have to set the price to the correct level.

I agree with you that the public won't stand for something being taken away from them without getting something back in return. That's why I said it's political suicide to impose tolls without any other changes. My point is that this is a political issue, not a technical one. You can control congestion through pricing alone if you have the will or the dire need to do it.

I completely agree with Procrastinational regarding the balance among the various types of transportation available in the region. Building highway after highway and bridge after bridge while denying funding for transit is not healthy for the region. There needs to be a better strategy to meeting everyone's needs than what we've been seeing from this government.

[s211]

Originally Posted by Ray1957

This Massey Tunnel traffic issue is nothing more than a scam by insider politic ans taking bribes from US coal and Rail companies, so they can bypass White Rock and not disturb the peace. They can now go directly to the Surrey Fraser docks, with huge shipments of toxic dusty coal and off load to the deep haul ships.
OH MY.... but first we have to blow out the Massey Tunnel so we can increase the deep haul shipping traffic...... Bet the government insiders could pull the wool over the tax payers eyes easy with this one. Just tell them how much easier it will be for truck traffic and cars to climb the Huge Massey bridge, Kinda like the Alex Fraser jam ups ...... and then to go where?
Oh yes, now we can plug up the Oak and Night street bridge quicker and make out like our billions of tax dollars is actually going to improve anything.
Only thing it will increase is the back door money coming from insider payoffs, and getting those coal profits out of the ground before anyone notices....Haa haa Haa ..... Keep up the Media press reports over the traffic issue this should help to disguises the truth!!

Wow. Never had anyone end up on my ignore list right after their first post.

[ssiguy]

This Massey Tunnel proposal has little to do with transportation and far more to do with the Port Authority.

They want a deeper tunnel and are more than willing to let the taxpayers pay for it.
All they have to do is build twin tunnels at a fraction of the cost and have them strictly serve people getting on/off between Steveston Road and River Road/Ladner which is where half the traffic is going thru.

After yet more tolls, the only toll free option between SoF and the rest of Metro will be the Alex Fraser which isn't even a bloody freeway!

Also, how can they expect people to make an informed decision when they won't tell them how much it will cost. I don't go to looking for a BMW expecting it to cost the same as a Chevy Cruze.

The decision was made long ago and it was made by the Port Authority.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Also, how can they expect people to make an informed decision when they won't tell them how much it will cost.

They don't expect to people to make any decisions - the decision has already been made. Same as all the other highway and bridge projects in the province. For some reason the province thinks that transit is the only transportation mode that the public needs to be consulted on.

[WarrenC12]

Some land acquisition news:

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/p...assey+bridge+project/11513133/story.html

Interesting details:

- Looking at widening Hwy 99 by 15 meters (how many lanes might that be?)
- Hints of the new bigger scope and giving agricultural land back (what does that mean, land under the long lead up to the bridge deck?)
- 60% of traffic doesn't make it to Oak St. bridge, alleviating the bottleneck fears there

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

- 60% of traffic doesn't make it to Oak St. bridge, alleviating the bottleneck fears there

60% of a 10 lane bridge is a 6 lane bridge. Last time I looked the Oak Street bridge only has 4 lanes.

Whoops - misread that. If 60% doesn't make it to the Oak St. bridge, then only 40% does. Well if that's true then perhaps it won't be an issue.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

- 60% of traffic doesn't make it to Oak St. bridge, alleviating the bottleneck fears there

Isn't the Oak Street Bridge already a bottleneck for the 99? It always seems congested whenever I drive over it, and I never drive over it in rush hour.

[KPELLY]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Some land acquisition news:

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/p...assey+bridge+project/11513133/story.html

Interesting details:

- Looking at widening Hwy 99 by 15 meters (how many lanes might that be?)
- Hints of the new bigger scope and giving agricultural land back (what does that mean, land under the long lead up to the bridge deck?)
- 60% of traffic doesn't make it to Oak St. bridge, alleviating the bottleneck fears there

Even though 60% of traffic doesn't make it to the oak street bridge, doesn't mean it won't necessarily be a bottleneck. What about traffic entering 99 north from 91 westbound, or Steveston, or Bridgeport?