George Massey Tunnel Replacement | Proposed

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

If companies staffed up for the project, you can know for sure that either those staff are gone, or are working on something else. It's hard to keep good project teams in limbo for long. Competent engineers and planners aren't cheap staff to keep as an overhead.

It seems pretty doubtful to me that any of the companies that might have worked on the project would have staffed up until they had signed contracts in hand or, at least had something a lot more certain to go on than the outcome of a provincial election.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

It seems pretty doubtful to me that any of the companies that might have worked on the project would have staffed up until they had signed contracts in hand or, at least had something a lot more certain to go on than the outcome of a provincial election.

I can assure you that they did.

You don't win work without taking a risk on occasion.

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

It seems pretty doubtful to me that any of the companies that might have worked on the project would have staffed up until they had signed contracts in hand or, at least had something a lot more certain to go on than the outcome of a provincial election.

If they had someone transitioning from the close of another project then yes most likely and that person is placed somewhere else.
Would they have hired someone without a contract in hand?...more than likely not.

[waves]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

In that is the case, then they've just made the proponents jobs harder.

If companies staffed up for the project, you can know for sure that either those staff are gone, or are working on something else. It's hard to keep good project teams in limbo for long. Competent engineers and planners aren't cheap staff to keep as an overhead.

My impression is that it would be highly unlikely that the engineering companies staffed up for this. Usually they have other projects going on. If one drops off they will just work on another project. Engineering is not quite like the construction industry where there is a lot of fixed term hires. Especially since they were still in the design phase. Correct me if I am wrong?

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by waves

My impression is that it would be highly unlikely that the engineering companies staffed up for this. Usually they have other projects going on. If one drops off they will just work on another project. Engineering is not quite like the construction industry where there is a lot of fixed term hires. Especially since they were still in the design phase. Correct me if I am wrong?

Dude, design phase was essentially done. The project would have been well under construction by now.

[waves]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Dude, design phase was essentially done. The project would have been well under construction by now.

As far as I was aware the only real construction that had actually started was the pre stress weights for expanding the number of lanes between Steveston and the 91? I dont recall any other prep construction work that had started? They hadn't even announced who won the construction bid so it would have been highly stupid of the construction companies to staff up before knowing they won.

Also even though they were putting it to tender its likely detailed design work was still ongoing. Construction phase wouldnt have started till well after the contract was awarded to allow for subcontracting, new hires, design changes, high level critical path scheduling, ect.

[Alex Mackinnon]

I wasn't personally on the project, but it seems like each qualified bidding team did a prelim design to prep for a competitive bidding process. Once the project was awarded, they would go back for construction ready drawings.

The teams that did those prelim designs are all probably undergoing significant changes now.

[libtard]

Originally Posted by waves

As far as I was aware the only real construction that had actually started was the pre stress weights for expanding the number of lanes between Steveston and the 91? I dont recall any other prep construction work that had started? They hadn't even announced who won the construction bid so it would have been highly stupid of the construction companies to staff up before knowing they won.

Also even though they were putting it to tender its likely detailed design work was still ongoing. Construction phase wouldnt have started till well after the contract was awarded to allow for subcontracting, new hires, design changes, high level critical path scheduling, ect.

Wow have you ever even driven south of the tunnel. Those pre stress weights are all the way out to the OTHER end of the 91

[waves]

Originally Posted by libtard

Wow have you ever even driven south of the tunnel. Those pre stress weights are all the way out to the OTHER end of the 91

Thanks for the correction. It still doesn't change my thoughts from earlier. On a separate note, what my commuting patterns have to do with this discussion is somewhat beyond me. Why don't you explain what is bothering you rather than going off on an ad hominem.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by waves

As far as I was aware the only real construction that had actually started was the pre stress weights for expanding the number of lanes between Steveston and the 91? I dont recall any other prep construction work that had started? They hadn't even announced who won the construction bid so it would have been highly stupid of the construction companies to staff up before knowing they won.

Also even though they were putting it to tender its likely detailed design work was still ongoing. Construction phase wouldnt have started till well after the contract was awarded to allow for subcontracting, new hires, design changes, high level critical path scheduling, ect.

Most of the pre construction done was for the bridge itself. I can't remember exactly what was done but it was in preparation for pile driving.

[M00dy]

Bidding a P3/ DBFOM project like the Massey Replacement is a huge undertaking, and massive amount of hours are put into the preliminary design by each bidding proponent team, as well as construction planning, preliminary pricing/procurement, estimating and preparation of construction budgets, etc etc etc.

I can tell you first hand that there were large teams working on the proposals, with the proposals costing each of the proponent teams in the range of $5-10m. The people involved in those proposals have either been re-assigned to other projects, or laid off/quit to other companies. Many have likely had to leave BC for the time being due to lack of work.

[CanSpice]

It's interesting to find that despite the Liberals saying twinning the tunnel was never a serious option, an FOI request found that they met with a Dutch engineering company who prepared a report on twinning the tunnel. This was found after an initial FOI request (done when the Liberals were in power) didn't turn anything up, and now that the NDP are in power they somehow managed to find the report.

Judging from the summaries I've read twinning the tunnel does in fact tick all of the same boxes as a 10-lane bridge would, except for being able to transport hazardous materials through it. It increases capacity, it's cheaper, it would be done so that the river depth could be increased, it's actually safer than an open highway, it has a smaller footprint and is less damaging to the environment, and it can accommodate foot and bicycle traffic.

This review from 2016 seems to have the opposite views as safety of a tunnel from the Dutch engineering report. It almost seems like the Liberals wanted to hide the Dutch engineering report because it didn't fit their narrative.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

It's interesting to find that despite the Liberals saying twinning the tunnel was never a serious option, an FOI request found that they met with a Dutch engineering company who prepared a report on twinning the tunnel. This was found after an initial FOI request (done when the Liberals were in power) didn't turn anything up, and now that the NDP are in power they somehow managed to find the report.

Judging from the summaries I've read twinning the tunnel does in fact tick all of the same boxes as a 10-lane bridge would, except for being able to transport hazardous materials through it. It increases capacity, it's cheaper, it would be done so that the river depth could be increased, it's actually safer than an open highway, it has a smaller footprint and is less damaging to the environment, and it can accommodate foot and bicycle traffic.

This review from 2016 seems to have the opposite views as safety of a tunnel from the Dutch engineering report. It almost seems like the Liberals wanted to hide the Dutch engineering report because it didn't fit their narrative.

But twinning the tunnel actually means tripling the tunnel, as the first one is unsafe and needs to be shut.

[officedweller]

In my view, the biggest issue with a twinned tunnel is that the combined footprint of both tunnels (old and new) would be wider than the bridge and because of the trenched approaches, will sterilize the right-of-way land from use compared to an overhead bridge, where uses are possible underneath.

But if it's a lot cheaper, that would make up for the loss of parkland (at Deas Island Regional Park).

Here's the aerial shot.

A twin can really only go to the east of the existing tunnel and can't be too close to the existing one in case the old one collapses in an earthquake.


http://canadians.org/blog/deltarichm...r-fraser-river

[Mininari]

Very interesting Report on the Bridge Costs:
Its a Delta Staff report, so it could be biased... but if the lowest bid came in $900M under the 3.5B figure, that is worth mentioning!

CBC News Posted: Mar 13, 2018 5:30 PM PT Last Updated: Mar 13, 2018 5:30 PM PT

Report states bridge replacement for Massey Tunnel could be cheaper than anticipated

...
"The low bid for the bridge construction came in well below the initial estimate of $3.5 billion at $2.6 billion, placing the bridge as the lowest cost option by a significant margin," the report stated.

"Surprisingly, the potential savings of $900 million has not been widely reported." ...



http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...cost-1.4574831

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Very interesting Report on the Bridge Costs:
Its a Delta Staff report, so it could be biased... but if the lowest bid came in $900M under the 3.5B figure, that is worth mentioning!

CBC News Posted: Mar 13, 2018 5:30 PM PT Last Updated: Mar 13, 2018 5:30 PM PT

Report states bridge replacement for Massey Tunnel could be cheaper than anticipated

...
"The low bid for the bridge construction came in well below the initial estimate of $3.5 billion at $2.6 billion, placing the bridge as the lowest cost option by a significant margin," the report stated.

"Surprisingly, the potential savings of $900 million has not been widely reported." ...



http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...cost-1.4574831

If a bid came in 25-30% lower than the competition.......i would be shitting bricks if i put that proposal together

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

If a bid came in 25-30% lower than the competition.......i would be shitting bricks if i put that proposal together

LOL no kidding. Did they not read the seismic specs or something?

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Very interesting Report on the Bridge Costs:
Its a Delta Staff report, so it could be biased... but if the lowest bid came in $900M under the 3.5B figure, that is worth mentioning!

It may be that the bid economized on one or more aspects of the project. It's could be quite misleading to bandy the low cost about without also understanding what was in the actual proposal.

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Very interesting Report on the Bridge Costs:
Its a Delta Staff report, so it could be biased... but if the lowest bid came in $900M under the 3.5B figure, that is worth mentioning!

CBC News Posted: Mar 13, 2018 5:30 PM PT Last Updated: Mar 13, 2018 5:30 PM PT

Report states bridge replacement for Massey Tunnel could be cheaper than anticipated

...
"The low bid for the bridge construction came in well below the initial estimate of $3.5 billion at $2.6 billion, placing the bridge as the lowest cost option by a significant margin," the report stated.

"Surprisingly, the potential savings of $900 million has not been widely reported." ...



http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...cost-1.4574831

As per Todd Stone's comments, the Port Mann Bridge alone was ~7-800 million dollars. So it's definitely within the realm of possibility ... but yeah, they probably left something out.

[officedweller]

See how traffic settles before we talk about Massey Tunnel replacement: transportation minister
http://www.news1130.com/2018/03/16/t...tion-minister/

ie... settles after removal of Port Mann tolls - but potentially after construction of Patullo (?)