In the “we just hoped this would go away” department, the Province’s ten lane bridge replacing the Massey Tunnel now has a short list of firms eager to spend their man years building it.
The bridge is to replace the Massey Tunnel for a bunch of reasons that keeps changing like the seasons. First we were told the tunnel was redundant because of the deeper drafts of ocean going ships that needed to access the reaches of the Fraser River to the east. Then we heard that the Massey Tunnel would fall apart in an earthquake and was unsound, a claim refuted by the son of George Massey who had championed the creation of the tunnel. The latest reason and the one I enjoy the most, is that the bridge will cut pollution by decreasing the idling times of vehicles waiting to go through the tunnel. There has been no comment from the Province about what happens when all that traffic going northbound hits the Oak Street Bridge, and whether the peak hour tunnel congestion idling might will just transfer to another place.
But onward to the short list of bridge builders. As reported by Business in Vancouver three consortiums have come forward to bid on this 3.5 billion dollar bridge, including a group called Pacific Skyway Partners which includes SNC-Lavalin Capital Inc., Fluor Canada Ltd. and John Laing Investment Ltd.
As stated by Business in Vancouver “The World Bank debarred SNC-Lavalin Inc. and more than 100 of its affiliated companies in April 2013 for 10 years over bribery related to the World Bank-funded Padma Multipurpose Bridge Project in Bangladesh and a power project in Cambodia. SNC-Lavalin Inc. is a subsidiary of SNC-Lavalin Group, and, at the time, represented more than 60% of its business…SNC-Lavalin is facing several criminal and civil court actions inside and outside Canada. A federal preliminary court hearing about corruption charges related to its contracts in Libya is scheduled for September 2018.”
Business in Vancouver also reports that Gwyn Morgan, who was chair of SNC-Lavalin and just retired advised Premier Christy Clark when she won the BC Liberal leadership in 2011. Clark named him to chair the Industry Training Authority Crown corporation in 2014. SNC-Lavalin was the firm that did the design build of the Evergreen Line SkyTrain extension, and also is building a BC Hydro generating station close to Campbell River.
The other two consortiums are Gateway Mobility Solutions and Lower Mainland Connectors, and their involved companies can be found on the Business in Vancouver link. This new ten lane bridge should have its ribbon cutting opening in 2022, reducing idling on either side of the bridge.
“This new ten lane bridge should have its ribbon cutting opening in 2022, reducing idling on either side of the bridge.”
Said sarcastically?
If the NDP win the provincial election, is it possible for them to stop this project?
I hope not. That would be foolish.
We need more roads/bridges AND more rapid transit in a region that is already congested, expects another 1M people in the next 25 years and is the only major port to Asia in a growing country !
Where is the debate about Oak Street bridge widening, Knight Street bridge widening, another bride extending Boundary Rd south to connect to Hwy 91 in Richmond, Lionsgate widening, a third crossing to north shore and more subways out of downtown south, east and north, and along the north shore ? Most car users would be happy to contribute via road tolls to get from A to B faster. Where is this debate ? What is the NDP view on that besides “no” ? What is the Liberal view on that ?
Thomas ok lets go down this road for fun, assuming we widen the oak street bridge, what happens to oak street?? Tunnel underneath or a double deck road.
Granville could be a one way road out of town (going sought, say 4 lanes) and Oak street into town, going north, 4 lanes too. Lowered decks for reduced noise. Connecting to new third crossing or 10 lane Lionsgate bridge (incl. train). All below ground, incl W-Georgia with pedestrian area above.
Thomas just because Oak and Granville become one way streets the total capacity is the same. Not sure how this would fix the bottle neck if the Oak street bridge was expanded after the Massey bridge.
Thomas, Don’t forget widening 16th Ave to 10 lanes too. And UBC Boulevard. And while they’re at it the road in front of your place too.
Why would they widen 16th Ave if they have a Broadway subway ?
16th Ave should be UPZONED to 6-8 stories. THAT is the real issue in Vancouver: far too little density along wide arterial, like 16th, Hastings, Fraser, 76 Ave, etc ..
SFH along 4 lane roads make no sense whatsoever !
Where is the subway under Hastings through E-Van to N-Van in the 2040 plan ?
Or yeah: build first .. then blame province and feds for lack of infrastructure money on congested roads !
This is a foolish project and I hope it is scrapped, but I doubt it will be; even if the NDP are voted in. Who’s going to vote against it in Delta and Surrey? Nobody. Who’s going to antagonize voters in those ridings when the NDP need them to win? Nobody. The Liberals have done a good job at making the bridge a ‘must have’ in the eyes of the electorate. It’s become too big to fail.
They could say the liberal estimates for costs were wrong and an additional cheaper tunnel or expanded transit is a better solution.
You’re thinking too rationally. For supporters, this is about wanting a faster commute, not the truth. Considering another tunnel is just a way of stalling the job.
Cad Line extension to delta would be faster and cheaper
As stated elsewhere repeatedly: we need BOTH. More roads/bridges AND more rapid transit. MetroVan seems to not understand that. Why not ? People vote with their feet (or cars, I guess) and buy further out. Planners seems to be disconnected from reality.
They only buy further out because the transportation of the car is so subsidized.
They buy further out because the product wanted is not available closer to town. Nowadays that product is row-houses.
Show me one fee simple rowhouse anywhere, Eric.
The row house does not need to be fee simple to satisfy the market.
There are some in Vancouver though. Are you looking?
yes there needs to be something. cdn line extention.
who in delta is going to pay the $5 each way for new bridge? thats like $2000 per yr per family member. Some families might end up with a $6000 extra tax for going to work.
Those same people voted no to the transit referendum that would have cost them a lot less…
PAUL ,, If a bridge toll is tax for going to work then the bus fare must be be a tax for going to work .Transit fare cheats can now be called tax fighters
A choice plus 100’s of hours in time saved.
@N, It would be interesting if the NDP were to oppose the bridge because a massive majority of the voters polled support it.
John Horgan just came out with a promise to build 4 lanes over 600km, all the way from Kamloops to Alberta.
Where in Delta would you see a transit line running to? What would the route be? Transit to Delta via a new tunnel or a different bridge? If Broadway is $2 billion, how much is crossing the river and a much longer line?
Eric, we should not compare the costs to Broadway since the comparison is with this new bridge which I understand has a budget of 3.5 billion. For 3.5 billion we could extend the Cad Line to Delta. Most of it could be above ground and it would need fewer stations per KM. So yes 3.5 billion would definitely be more than enough.
If you think it is a metro to nowhere, then you could argue the bridge is also a bridge to nowhere.
@N, About one third of the tunnel traffic is heading to and from Delta and Tsawwassen. Why has extending the Canada Line rail line not been mentioned by Metro Vancouver? It was not in the plan that was voted on last year.
I’m still curious as to whether the rail crossing would be by a new bridge or a new tunnel.
If Metro Vancouver want’s to consider a rail extension to Delta the new bridge is being designed to support this capacity.
If Metro Vancouver were to move in this direction, with an official request for funding from the federal government it would give the Trudeau Liberals high profile promotional possibilities for joining the consortium. The majority of the citizens want the new bridge and the expansion of the highly successful Canada Line would be welcomed by just about everyone.
It’s a no brainer.
Why on Earth would you extend the Canada Line to Delta, unless you were planning to get rid of the ALR? With so much farmland that would be a complete boondoggle.
I honestly think both extending the Cad Line and this new bridge are wrong, I would prefer to just see proper road pricing and an expansion of buses. That will suffice. We can use the road pricing to reduce our income taxes.
The reason I advocate Cad Line extension is because of the BC liberals forcing this bridge to delta so now we have to consider alternatives to that for anything to be politically feasible
If the congestion just moves to the Oak Street bridge this guarantees them more work in the future as they can then show the need for a new bridge there.
These guys have been at this a long time and are good at what they do.
Author
Reblogged this on Sandy James Planner.
The irony here is that the toll will be approximately the cost of commuting by express bus / Canada Line so the bridge may move people out of their cars and into transit.
Kinda doubt that, considering what people pay on top of tolls to operate their personal cushions of steel — at great cost to society.
I wonder how many weeks we will have to wait for the mainstream media to compare this list with the list of donors to the BC Libs, and the guest list at Lunch With Christy where $20,000 filet of salmon is served?
Should the NDP win the next election, you can be sure PostMedia and the Fraser Institute will scrutinize every loonie donated to the party, and every project with triple the intensity no matter how feasible, affordable in the long run or relevant.
As much fun as conspiracy theories are, the thing about this one is that the three consortiums here are just the usual bidders on all infrastructure projects in Canada, so you’d find them here no matter who they contributed to politically (which they no doubt do.) A friend of mine is a senior person in a lead firm in one of the consortiums so I’ve had years and years of tales of how these things operate. There are very few projects like this tendered every year so every firm has to be on the good side of every political party and bureaucratic agency.
I think that it’s just old fashioned thinking road builders doing what they’ve always done and unaware of modern thinking. They see a need and are using old ways (that once worked) to satisfy that need.
As an engineer, it’s frustrating to me to see the statement “refuted by the son of George Massey”. Doug Massey is just an interested party, he has an opinion that’s in conflict with actual engineering reports, and he quotes no evidence that says that the tunnel is seismically sound to the standards in place today. Being the son of the politician after whom the bridge is named does NOT make him an expert on seismically sound construction.
You can choose to take his side or not, but it’s absolutely incorrect to say that the claims of the tunnel being unsound are refuted. They aren’t.
I don’t believe that Doug Massey was basing his position on his own seismic expertise. I believe he was quoting Kevin Falcon, who was Minister of Transportation, and who stated that the tunnel was good for 50 years, based on the Ministry’s own investigation. Massey was just pointing out the flip flop.
Well, actually no, he quoted a bunch of sources in his submission to Richmond, not including Kevin Falcon. And Kevin Falcon is no engineer either. My point stands anyway.
There are enough things to like or not like, be for or against, it’s just nice to not encourage misleading statements.
What a sexy picture. A suburban commuter’s wet dream. Engineers and planners will be happy to fulfill the fantasy – at a world class cost.
Build it and they will come is the mantra. Induced demand.
The graphic indicates a nearly empty bridge / freeway deck of ~100,000 m2 leading to open fields, ocean and mountains. No city. That encapsulates the attitude of the government proponents more than words can.
If they put a traffic jam ahead where the oak street bridge is it would be more accurate.
And no trucks shown on the bridge deck. Even in the crawler lane.
No people on bikes or walking, either. Maybe the MUP is dropped down a level, and partly sheltered from the weather, similar to the Canada Line Bridge, as was suggested. That would be good.
Beautiful British Columbia.