George Massey Tunnel Replacement | Proposed

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

true they have. it doesn't matter though if they work with the mayors. they want NOTHING, not a compromise, but NOTHING. but one, the mayors don't give a crap about BC, they only give a crap about their 20sq kms. the mayors had the chance, they choose to write to the Federal government, to no avail. even the Feds said BC has followed the rules. when you are that far removed from reality there is no point in further working with them.

remember the mayors, Vancouver and others, have been against most projects even the Alex Fraser Bridge, the mayor of Vancouver was against it. then look at New West being against the Pattullo replacement with anything but the status quo. imagine if we didn't have the Alex Fraser Bridge or the 91 connector. the Mayors were against that. the mayors are out of touch that is why Vancouver spent 300k fighting the Kinder Morgan Pipeline which doesn't enter Vancouver and which is a Federal matter, not even a provincial one. the mayors cant be taken seriously on things like this. they have proven it over and over and over again. they just want transit. wah wah wah we want transit wah wah wah. that's all they ever say.

if this project is halted, what will happen is 5 years of consultations, design, and planning is thrown out. a new, worse plan is created, under the NDP it is 10x over budget like M-Line and Fast Ferries and we end up with something worse for much more money which took much longer to get. then in 50yrs we need to do it all over again because the 125yr lasting bridge was built as a 50yr bridge. the NDP has a history of shitty decisions. and the Greens, they just want anything pro environment anti real life.

the mayors cant even work amongst themselves, you really think they can work on a province wide scale?

so much consultation has happened on this thing. if you are against this and think most others are, then you are not seeing the whole picture. if you think it isn't necessary, then you haven't seen it in person.

The mayors have even been against rapid transit projects that don't service their own community directly (Buranby being notorious for this especially). Also, if we listened to the mayors the Canada Line and the Evergreen Line would have been at grade LRTs...

So, with the BC Liberlas we got 2 fully grade separated transit lines, and new primary highway of modern safety / designed standards, along with a few other sizable projects (such as the Pitt River Bridge) over the last decade.

If we're up to the mayors we would have gotten 2 at grade LRTs and no highway improvements...

Seriously, the tunnels need to be replaced and the highway needs to be upgraded. Going back to the drawing board, doing nothing for another 5 or so years, and then building a new bridge and upgrades to the highway anyways (likely to a lower design standard than proposed now) will likely cost the same amount of money as just building what has been proposed now.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Yeah. But ya can't even get that right. Capital cost of the new GMB crosssing + 99 Fwy corridor improvements projected at ~$3.5 billion. Obviously no notion of future feeder growth nodes feeding onto this strategic corridor. Akin to the "Tunnel to Nowhere" rhetoric the CCF said back in the mid-1950's.

And you are the same fella that states he owns a vehicle. And you are the same fella that stated herein that he drove through the existing GMT to the new mall in Tsawwassen. And I highly suspect that ya have driven through the GMT to both the Peace Arch Border Crossing as well as the Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal, among other locales, accessible through the GMT.

I have had to "live" the GMT my entire life. You don't. Instead of hypocrisy (and others on here as well)... ditch both your cars/driver's licenses. Take the bus. Will make life a bit more bearable along the 99 Fwy/GMT as well as other Metro Van strategic corridors for the rest of us.

LOL Check some news man, engineers and bidders are already saying this project will be north of $4B. They are already preparing the government for the big prices they will bid to do the work.

As for the rest of your post, I'm not sure what your point is. You have some real trouble getting things across in basic english. Yes, I have a car, I have taken many trips through the GMT, I'm familiar with it. One of the reasons I live north of the Fraser is that I hate long commutes and have always worked in Vancouver.

You have lived your whole life with it, so you've had the opportunity to move. In fact you've stated here you already have a condo in Coal Harbour, so why don't you live there?

But guess what? If the GMT is tolled, I won't be taking it anymore, I'll take the free AFB. Enjoy!

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

LOL Check some news man, engineers and bidders are already saying this project will be north of $4B. They are already preparing the government for the big prices they will bid to do the work.

Haha. Sigh. Warren... you are one of the biggest ideologues on this site. Always full of rhetoric. I know that. You know that. Case closed.

OK... now point to me a credible engineering/project bidder source that says.. to quote you "engineers and bidders are already saying this project will be north of $4B". I am all ears. Now why do I suspect that I will hear crickets?

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

As for the rest of your post, I'm not sure what your point is. You have some real trouble getting things across in basic english.

Ach mein Gott! Wie hast Du das gewusst?!

PS.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

In fact you've stated here you already have a condo in Coal Harbour, so why don't you live there?

Actually, I do reside there perhaps ~1 ... maybe 2 days a week. More importantly, my spouse - she is on a specialized OR team at VGH - inclusive of night shifts at times, which requires close residence proximity for obvious reasons. Myself? My career involves Metro Van suburbs - ergo CH is certainly not an ideal place to reside on full time basis.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Haha. Sigh. Warren... you are one of the biggest ideologues on this site. Always full of rhetoric. I know that. You know that. Case closed.

OK... now point to me a credible engineering/project bidder source that says.. to quote you "engineers and bidders are already saying this project will be north of $4B". I am all ears. Now why do I suspect that I will hear crickets?



Ach mein Gott! Wie hast Du das gewusst?!

How about $8B in interest on top?

http://www.timescolonist.com/news/b-...ent-1.18540503

I like how you name call anybody that doesn't agree with you. They are either ideologues, or loony-left, or enviro-nuts... whatever term you come up with.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

How about $8B in interest on top?

http://www.timescolonist.com/news/b-...ent-1.18540503

Haha. Come on Warren. Even I know that you are brighter than that. Take a $1 million mortgage. How much interest would one expect to pay on same over a 30-year amortized term?

Better than that... the CAPEX interest, that you refer to, is also the same CAPEX interest paid on any other CAPEX infrastructure project by the BC gov't (irrespective of political affiliation) based upon the term of its financing. Honestly, what's your point? Seriously.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

okay guys, we need to stop this. it is starting to get personal.

these points have been made, from both sides, lets leave this thread for when there is actually some news.

[libtard]

Originally Posted by jhausner

Just going to say there is a _LOT_ of misinformation on this page for example claims there is no proof of a need for 10 lanes, or that this is all politics. For starters, I suggest everyone stop listening to the headlines in your heads and actually go look for the real documents and read the studies. Here I'll help you:

https://engage.gov.bc.ca/masseytunnel/documentlibrary/

Feel free. I know many negative nancies will load that page, see how much documentation there actually is (hundreds of documents and reports over decades) and then go "OMG TOO MUCH" and come back to posting "this is a lieberal political plot and there is no need to build this or anything else."

So I'll leave it with the above. If you want to actually have an educated and fact based opinion rather than just spouting out BS that everyone has read over and over, then please click on the above link, do some bloody research, then come back and have an opinion for or against with some real facts. And quite frankly enough with the "There is something better to spend the money on" bs reasoning. There will always be something else to spend money. Spend money on school? Well why not the homeless? Spend money on the homeless? Well why not infrastructure? Spend money on infrastructure? Well why not on hospitals? Spend money on hospitals? Well why not schools? Wait... we just went in a giant circle and nothing got done.

Sometimes I wonder about people.

Had to quote this. Well said sir

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

PS. Actually, I do reside there perhaps ~1 ... maybe 2 days a week. More importantly, my spouse - she is on a specialized OR team at VGH - inclusive of night shifts at times, which requires close residence proximity for obvious reasons. Myself? My career involves Metro Van suburbs - ergo CH is certainly not an ideal place to reside on full time basis.

Well, thanks in advance for helping us CoV taxpayers with the Empty Home Tax.

[GlassCity]

I'm generally sympathetic to the the Gregor Robertson/Gordon Price view on planning, but I really don't understand how an 8 lane tunnel is any more acceptable than a 10 (or 8) lane bridge. How is it any less auto-inducing? I do want a bridge built, even just for its cycling/pedestrian connection. I agree, an 8 lane bridge would be a great compromise.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I'm generally sympathetic to the the Gregor Robertson/Gordon Price view on planning, but I really don't understand how an 8 lane tunnel is any more acceptable than a 10 (or 8) lane bridge. How is it any less auto-inducing? I do want a bridge built, even just for its cycling/pedestrian connection. I agree, an 8 lane bridge would be a great compromise.

i know one thing people have been citing is about how a bridge is very imposing on views, etc. whereas a tunnel is out of sight.

it is funny, the original vision that Massey had was an 8 lane tunnel with pedestrian and bike connections but due to cost they downgraded it to what we have today.

[waves]

From my perspective, although people may say the issue they have with it is the size/cost of the bridge, I think the real issue people might have but are not outright saying is related to the priority this project is getting. It's a general contemptuous feeling from the public that this project gets to go ahead, but transit funding and various other projects in the lower mainland do not. The prime example is the Pattullo Bridge which has burst into flames and has been literally falling apart. It still has no funding secured. The Broadway subway is an example just the same. (I don't think Surrey is an example because I think Translink may be interfering in "LRT" plans)

[Metro-One]

I can agree with the Broadway Subway (although now officially the NDP and Liberlas have offered the same amount of support, finally), and the Surrey LRT (from what I can piece together everyone involved except Surrey itself is hesitant towards that project, and for good reasons IMO), but the Pattullo is a bit of a different case. The GMT is fully within the provinces jurisdiction, so they essentially have full responsibility for its replacement, and also full control of the project. The Pattullo on the other hand, for better or worse, is within Translink's jurisdiction, and New West has been the primary cause of the countless delays over the last decade. Also, one can easily argue that the GMT serves a far more important corridor and is a much more essential link than the Pattullo. That said, I want to see all projects get funded and built ASAP, for IMO they are all needed (GMB, Pattullo Bridge, Broadway Subway, and.... Skytrain to Langley).

I don't want to switch from what some people believe is an "either or" government for another "either or"

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by waves

From my perspective, although people may say the issue they have with it is the size/cost of the bridge, I think the real issue people might have but are not outright saying is related to the priority this project is getting. It's a general contemptuous feeling from the public that this project gets to go ahead, but transit funding and various other projects in the lower mainland do not. The prime example is the Pattullo Bridge which has burst into flames and has been literally falling apart. It still has no funding secured. The Broadway subway is an example just the same. (I don't think Surrey is an example because I think Translink may be interfering in "LRT" plans)

I understand being irked by the priority thing—I am myself somewhat—but then just reject an expansion outright. Most urbanist opinions I've read on this say they should just twin the tunnel, as a bridge only promotes "motordom," etc. But how is an 8 lane tunnel any better in terms of new urbanism than an 8 lane bridge. If they were against any expansion at all, at least it would be consistent and logical.

[Stingray2004]

OK. My 2 cents. Again, what the hell is this so-called "compromise" about an "8-lane" proposed Massey bridge as opposed to a 10-lane bridge? Completely ridiculous argument IMHO.

Currently, we have 3 NB bound lanes in morning rush hour + 3 SB lanes in afternoon rush hour along with major back-ups (reversible lanes). Equates to 6-lanes at peak - a major clue right there.

BTW, the HOV lanes are barely utilized based upon what I have seen. Right there we have 8-lanes (3GP + 1 HOV). And that will last us over the next 40 years? Hell, won't even provide current/short term capacity with considerable traffic diverting over to the AFB/91 combo.

And then we move to another lane in each direction to form 10-lanes. Has anyone here ever used the AFB during rush-hour? Ever seen those major rigs, merging from Nordel Way onto the AFB NB? I always look-out for same wayyyy back. What do I look for? These rigs always place their "emergency signals" on travelling uphill on the AFB. Traffic always attempts to pass these rig impediments slowing other traffic down.

Same problem will occur with the proposed new Massey Bridge.

So basically, we are building for the short-term. Frankly, both the new PMB as well as the proposed Massey Bridge should have been/be built with at least a 12 - 14 lane cross-section. Doesn't need to be line-striped initially... but built for "future" needs. The CAPEX, per bridge lane, is reduced accordingly.

For example, when the 2nd Narrows IWM Bridge was designed/constructed in the late 1950's... they utilized a 6-lane cross-section (albeit narrow lane/median widths by today's standards). Back then ... there was no Whistler, Squamish was irrelevant, HB Ferry Terminal was irrelevant, and the North Shore was mostly wilderness.

6-lanes for NOTHING in the late 1950's folk would say back then. Today, IWM Bridge requires additional capacity.

My point? For all those here that say 8-lanes is a "compromise" for the proposed 10-lane Massey Bridge. Think again. What you are really saying is that another crossing across both the north/south arms of the Fraser River should be much sooner - rather than later - based upon Metro Van pop. forecasts. Just doesn't make any logical sense.

[Pinion]

Some people just instinctively recoil at the thought of wide bridges/roads if they don't personally use them, especially when it gets into double digit lanes. And we as a province seem to have trouble thinking about the future.

I've watched Ironworkers go from great to useless after 3pm in the 10 or so years and will never argue for fewer lanes at any of our many chokepoints.

[Trainguy]

Now that Christy's Libs are a minority or might become the official opposition, don't expect this bridge to be built anytime soon. The NDP and Greens are opposed to it. All those construction jobs will have to go elsewhere for bridge projects. Let's just see which transit projects actually see the green light with promised money materializing.

Once again politics decides transportation projects, not the true needs of Metro Van.

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Now that Christy's Libs are a minority or might become the official opposition, don't expect this bridge to be built anytime soon. The NDP and Greens are opposed to it. All those construction jobs will have to go elsewhere for bridge projects. Let's just see which transit projects actually see the green light with promised money materializing.

Once again politics decides transportation projects, not the true needs of Metro Van.

I fear you are right.

Yesterday, a single afternoon truck stall at the GMT approach paralyzed all of eastern Richmond and neighbouring areas in Delta and Vancouver for hours.

• Hwy 99 was backed up from GMT over the OSB into Vancouver (and eventually there was an accident on the OSB).
• Hwy 91 could not provide relief and was backed up to Knight (and eventually there was an accident at Nordel).
• Hwy 91A gridlocked in both directions from 91 across the QBB and along Marine Way.
• Knight backed up from 91 to Vancouver and along Marine, in both directions.
• All Richmond roads between No. 4 Road and No. 6 Road were gridlocked in all directions. Eventually a crash occurred at a key intersection. No buses were getting through.

As a local resident just trying to get through this area without taking any bridge of highway, it took me 75 minutes to travel what is usually a 15 minute drive. All started by one truck at GMT.

But no, we don't need a new bridge, we don't need 10 lanes, haven't you heard that traffic is down in the tunnel?

[M00dy]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Now that Christy's Libs are a minority or might become the official opposition, don't expect this bridge to be built anytime soon. The NDP and Greens are opposed to it. All those construction jobs will have to go elsewhere for bridge projects. Let's just see which transit projects actually see the green light with promised money materializing.

Once again politics decides transportation projects, not the true needs of Metro Van.

My expectations at the moment:

- Best case scenario (for the project) - Liberals are leading a minority gov't. Liberals open the books on the completed RFP to the other parties, and have to justify the costs, needs, rationale for going ahead with the project. In this case I'd estimate a minimum delay until 2018 even if there are no scope changes & project is approved as-is.

- Medium case scenario (for the project) - Changes are proposed to the project scope, and either a) the preferred proponent from the existing bid negotiates pricing based on the new changes, or b) the project is re-tendered based on the new scope. If b), then this thing won't be in construction until 2018 best case.

- Worst cast scenario (for the project) - the Greens/NDP vote together & reject the project, OR a Green/NDP Coalition rejects the project whole-sale. Project is shelved until a future gov't realizes the project is actually needed.

Edit: Forgot to mention - in ANY of these cases, infrastructure construction talent that was ready for/working on Site C, Transmountain, and Massey has to go elsewhere for work. Thousands of high paying, high skilled jobs.

[s211]

Originally Posted by M00dy

Edit: Forgot to mention - in ANY of these cases, infrastructure construction talent that was ready for/working on Site C, Transmountain, and Massey has to go elsewhere for work. Thousands of high paying, high skilled jobs.

If only that meant anything to the greens, or NDP anymore.

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by s211

If only that meant anything to the greens, or NDP anymore.

The NDP campaigned on NO MORE TOLLS. I guess if you don't build any new bridges, you can say you kept your promise. But wait, they campaigned on building a new Patullo bridge. That is a Translink bridge. Just how are they going to pay for that with no tolls? Money doesn't grow on trees. I wonder which pocket of Peter's they will rob to pay Paul? Stay tuned....