First off, the Province still seems pretty resolute at building the Massey Bridge despite mounting concerns about how the project is being handled. MLA Vicki Huntington has written asking for information from the Province about gaps and assumptions about impacts on traffic, agriculture, wildlife and the community. The governments’ current application for an environmental certificate shows traffic estimates for a tolled new crossing would be approximately 40,000 vehicles less than one with no toll.
Ms. Huntington notes, “Many of my concerns centre around both the government’s traffic projections, and the lack of progress on a regional tolling policy review that was promised three years ago. I have repeatedly pressed the transportation minister to honour his promise to undertake that review, only to hear the same response: “There is plenty of time to talk about regional tolling.” I disagree. And Metro Vancouver mayors disagree. A Massey bridge toll could cost South Delta commuters more than $1,000 annually. It will affect not only how much traffic there is at the new bridge, but how much of it diverts to the heavily congested Alex Fraser.
This is especially concerning because many businesses on Annacis Island are already affected by traffic congestion, and some are considering packing up shop in search of greener pastures. With the proposed Massey bridge in place, the government’s own application says we can expect an extra 33,000 vehicles a day at the Alex Fraser by 2045. So the situation is set to get much worse.”
Dermod Travis has written a compelling article in Business in Vancouver regarding the financial costs of building the tunnel replacement. The Executive Director of Integrity BC, Travis notes that on the Massey Bridge’s website:
” …accounting firm KPMG – it has been advising on the project – says it’ll be in the neighbourhood of “$2 billion to $3 billion.” What’s $1 billion between friends? The government says $3.4997 billion (you read that right).Given the precision of the government’s estimate, it’s a tad worrisome that the Transportation Ministry was out doing test pile drives this spring.”
“It might be interesting to see how the geotechnical data used for the $3.5 billion estimate compares with the latest results. No one is chomping at the bit to release them. After cost comes performance. Three teams made it to the requests-for-proposals stage. Flatiron Canada is a member of the Gateway Mobility Solutions team and Kiewit Canada is part of the Lower Mainland Connectors team.”
“Together they’re responsible for the new Port Mann Bridge. They overshot the $2.4 billion fixed-price contract by $424 million…FSNC-Lavalin, Kiewit and Flatiron have completed five transportation projects in B.C. with a combined initial estimate of $3.8 billion. Final price tag? $6.5 billion.
With Metro Vancouver and all but one of its mayors giving a thumbs-down to the Massey project, there’s not much public buy-in for it. So here’s an idea: hit pause.
B.C.’s auditor general, Carol Bellringer, announced last year that her office would conduct a performance audit “to evaluate the quality of evidence to support the decision to replace the George Massey Tunnel.” If the government’s numbers are all on the up and up, what could it possibly fear from taking a few months to let the auditor general do her thing and report back?
Better a cost overrun avoided than a cost overrun paid out.”
The full text of Dermod’s article is available here.
Clearly this bridge is not about the numbers. It is telling that leading up to an election year even the NDP’s position on it has been relatively muted. This bridge has support south of the Fraser, at least in theory. At least until tolls are brought up.
Should the NDP win next May, will they find religion and put the kibosh on this thing? Or will they acquiesce to the amount of money that’s already been spent, their fragile support in Surrey/Delta, and keep it on track? I’m curious.
NDP is unelectable anywhere in Canada. Even Alberta will turf them next. Maybe we even get a conservative government in BC one day but Liberals are OK enough as they care about jobs and economic growth actually, the #1 priority of any electable party.
Funny! I’m sure you thought it wasn’t possible the NDP ever be elected in Alberta.
How do you square continuous economic growth on a finite planet? Yet another one of your convenient half equations?
It’s ‘squared’ by way of not-all-economic-growth-coming-from-extensive-use-of-natural resources
Yes. The results of the Alberta by election on Monday will show us how viable the NDP is now Rachel Notley has shown just what the NDP can do when in power.
The percentage of the vote is the thing to look for.
The NDP was not elected in Alberta in 2015. The PC party was de-elected and through an unfortunate set of events – specifically Danielle Smith and 9 members of the WR party defecting – the right vote was split in half allowing the NDP a majority with 60% of voters voting either WR or PC.
No other province has an NDP party and the federal numbers were a disaster the last election.
A party that focuses on high unemployment, higher taxes and bigger government is not electable, unless you are a civil servant. Jobs matter to most voters and until the NDP can deliver a decent economic growth story they will not be elected here in BC either.
We are so lucky here in Vancouver to have all these highly experienced academics and world travellers and undergrads and social sciences proffs to tell us, just about everything we need to know to run our modern technological society and some of them even instantly become experts on international infrastructure financing and civil engineering. Take Dermod Travis. What doesn’t he know?
“Dermod Travis, Executive Director
Mr. Travis served as the Executive Director of the Canada Tibet Committee from 2007 to 2011, and is the founder of PIRA Communications.
He is a former member of Quebec’s Estates General on the Situation and the Future of the French Language and its Comité d’examen sur la langue d’enseignement.
He has given guest lectures at the Université de Montréal, Columbia University, Concordia University, Carleton University and McGill University. His political commentaries have been published in the Montreal Gazette, Le Devoir, La Presse, the Ottawa Citizen, the Victoria Times Colonist, the Georgia Straight and The Tyee.
As well his views have been sought by a variety of Canadian and international media, including Japan’s Asahi Shimbum, the Washington Times, the Christian Science Monitor, Al Jazeera, The Congressional Record, Toronto Star, Globe & Mail, La Presse, CTV, CBC and Radio- Canada.
At IntegrityBC, he is responsible for managing the office and the organization’s strategic direction.”
Yeah! Shoot the messenger good! Ignore the content.
Dermod is fresh off the boat from Montreal and now hangs his, Tibetan, hat in Victoria.
http://www.hathorizons.com/graphics/asian_hats/Tibet_fur.jpg
He probably knows more about the $5 billion Champlain Bridge in Montreal that Justin Trudeau is kindly building and maintaining at no charge whatsoever to Quebec.
http://www.roadtraffic-technology.com/projects/10642/images/241773/large/5l-image.jpg
What does Dermod really think about our tunnel?
http://www.vancitybuzz.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Massey-Tunnel-Congestion.png
Yeah! Deflect and ignore the point some more, you’re doing great!
Eliminate the SOVs – eliminate the congestions: poof!
So, all these lines of experience nullify the author’s ability to read, research and punch calculator keys?
Let’s wait for the auditor general’s report to confirm what is widely suspected, shall we?
This Mr. Travis seems to annoys you. But is his article incorrect or misleading?
This PR guy’s article, called a Commentary which means he donated the article, is primarily critical of various projects the possible contractors have undertaken. The he strangely says, “there’s not much public buy-in for it.” Meaning the new bridge, Yet, we all know that there was an opinion poll done that showed overwhelming public support for the new crossing. The only place there’s not much buy-in is where? How about the first nations. The Tsawwassen First Nation, are they up for it? Has anyone asked them?
So his article is incorrect. There is majority support for the bridge, so says Mario Canseco of InSights West. Does Travis have anything to support his allegation or is it, as we can all clearly see, just incorrect and misleading political spin?
Of course car-driving commuters will support this project as long as there are no alternatives, or until tolls are enacted and mass toll-avoidance commuting insanity belies their glib answers to Insight’s question, or fuel spikes again.
But where’s the poll nuance? The question between preferring 6, 8, 10 or 12 lanes, solid single-occupant traffic, or allowing a marked improvement to SoF transit service? The preferred allowable cost overruns? The allowable environmental impact?
Yeah! Shoot the messenger good! Ignore the content.
Thanks, Don. Saved me typing.
There are a few differences between Champlain and Massey.
Champlain:
– owner: federal government, which pays for replacement
– 50 million vehicles a year (137,000 a day)
– six vehicular lanes, two separated transit lanes pre-engineered for light rail
– reason for replacement: severe corrosion resulting in weakening of structural integrity, possibly a sop to federal Liberal voters, though that argument is weak given five NDP ridings are very close to the north and south approaches
– cost as per construction cost estimates: ~$5 billion
Massey:
– owner: BC government, which pays for replacement
– 80,000 vehicles a day
– 10 vehicle lanes, two of which are promised transit lanes with no separation or firm commitment
– reason for replacement: seismic limitations of existing tunnel, blockage of deep draft ships, possibly as a sop to suburban SoF BC Liberal voters, or a combination of all of the above
– cost as per ministry PR: ~$3 billion; given the scope of this project, that number is bound to rise; given past MoTH / political practice, the final cost at construction completion will be kept hidden from the public (e.g. Coquihalla) until it is politically expedient to reveal it, and there will be little surprise when it exceeds $4 billion.
I’m no expert, but my back-of-napkin calculation of the aggregate cost of Port Mann, Massey and Sunshine Coast road projects (bridges + freeways) just went from $17 billion to $20 billion to account for cost overruns. That may also cover a small slice of financing costs, but as always does not address operating budgets.
So Vicki Huntington is worried that a new Massey bridge will cost SoF commuters an extra $1,000 a year. Poor things. But that is such a weak argument because taking transit (the only alternative short of telecommuting) for that same year will cost significantly more. Three-zone fares — $2,500; 2-zones — $1,800; 1-zone — $1,125.
And induced demand will create an additional load 33,000 cars on the Alex Fraser by 2049? Lord save us from Carmaggeddon. Who can predict the price of fuel next year, let alone 29 years hence? One thing is for sure, once it hits $2 / litre tens of thousands of people with long commutes will be demanding more transit and switching to subcompacts and EVs. The tolls will continue to be a thin icing on the car ownership cake with respect to family budgets.
Careful what you wish for. Check out the cost of a yearlong commuter rail pass in the UK if you want to know what happens if riders have to make a substantial contribution to cost recovery.
A Tesla uses roughly 85kwh per 400 km. A kwh today in BC is 10 cents so $2/100 km or roughly 2 liters (using $1/liter). Cheap !
But, using European electricity prices we will soon hit too at 50 cents per kwh that is now like $10 or 10 liters per 100 km .. not so cheap anymore.
Missing are bridge upgrades to Lionsgate, Second Narrows, Oak, Patullo and Knight Street bridge, too ! A priority over Sunshine Coast bridge I’d say.
That’s not going to happen. For starters, a good portion of the cost of power in Europe is tax.
CO2 taxes and new power plants incl solar will push electricity prices up here too but hopefully not to the insane European levels but certainly to twice to today’s rates only.
So e-cars will make economic sense and will be used more, especially as second cars, once price points come down, more charge stations are built and ranges are well above current ranges.
I can’t believe the BC Liberals are barrelling ahead with this ridiculously expensive bridge. Especially when the Port Mann continues to lose $100 million a year. Gah. Can’t wait to vote them out.
Wait for a while. Users love the PM bridge. Missing are six lane road widening east of Surrey to Abbotsford, as well as widening of Oak, Patullo, Knight, Lionsgate and Second Narrows bridges. And yes, subway to UBC, to E-Van too and new ones to S-Richmond, Langley, north shore.
Many bottlenecks in a growing region need removing !! Road tolls, new 15% foreign & 3% over $2M property taxes and clamping down on real estate tax cheats on the provincial and federal level will help here too to fund it.
Thomas, I can see how road pricing and improved transit will improve motor vehicle congestion, but you still have not explained how wider roads and bridges are going to accomplish this. For example, suppose we widen Lions Gate, Oak and Knight bridges, where is all this traffic going to go once it enters Vancouver? Wouldn’t this cause complete gridlock? Also, note that traffic entering Vancouver and also downtown Vancouver has been declining for decades. So you want to reverse this trend? Please explain.
It’s extremely relevant to note that downtown Vancouver experienced this marked decrease in traffic at the same time the population doubled, and while the number of new road lanes added was zero.
Thomas et al need to ask, How was that accomplished without freeways?
Vancouver especially downtown Vancouver is far far different than Surrey, Delta or Langley.
We need more goods and people movement infrastructure !!
That includes roads, bridges and tunnels but also park-and-ride stations, subways, BRTs or LRTs.
It is already congested and if we add 1/3-1/2 more people over the next 25-45 years and more port capacity then we need far more people and goods movement infrastructure.
And yes, more bike lanes too but all them trucks and planes coming in and leaving need trucks, big and small, and people operating them.
The myopic view espoused here by far too many that lack of road investment will make things somehow magically better is beyond belief !
We need investments into ALL people & goods moving modes.
Thomas, I am not being myopic but am trying to be practical. You still haven’t mentioned what you expect will happen to all those cars that are traveling over the widened bridges and extra crossings into Vancouver. They either magically disappear or they increase congestion to the point of gridlock. Please explain what will happen to all these cars?
Downtown Vancouver is not Surrey or Delta. Cars will go along Marine Drive, for example. Or Granville, or Knight or Oak. Or across to N-Shore which lacks both road and transit capacity because inept politicians allowed condos but spent ZIP on new infrastructure.
Yes we need more density around transit station and TOD (transit oriented development) but we have known that along Broadway FOR YEARS. Where is it ? In the absence of that people vote with their feet and cars and move further out.
Where are the townhouses / row houses with yards for kids ?
Thomas, with inept politicians I assume you refer to the provincial government and its head-in-the-sand approach to transit.
As with flow of any organism, a smooth flow is interrupted with narrowing of passages which causes congestion. Congestion can lead to many problems and is best relieved. Widening of bridges can accomplish this.
Eric, are you trying to use nature as an example? Funny to hear that from you.
In nature, everything grows to its ideal size and then stops growing. That goes for individual organisms and populations. If populations exceed their ideal size it ain’t pretty what happens next.
Vancouver is the third largest city in Canada and still one of the smaller cities of North America and the world. There’s along way to grow yet.
Changing the transportation diet to healthier, more affordable alternatives will avoid congestion in the first place. SOV traffic Congestion is a sign of automobile gluttony and has cost society far too much already.
@Anonymous. No doubt Vancouver can still grow. We can grow wisely and benefit from that growth or sprawl and degrade. At some point, though, growth of any kind will become undesirable and some time after that, unlivable.
Certainly a city like Vienna is a different species than a city like Houston and therefore the ideal size differs. But both will reach a point where there is no benefit if growth were to continue.
How do you think these cities compare in quality of life, cost of transportation, greenhouse gas emissions and other pollution and energy demand? Which is better to use as a model for development in a world that no longer performs under the economic or environmental conditions of the 1950s?