Richmond Mayor Malcolm Brodie and Richmond City Council seem to have had a bit of inside information when they sent a letter to the Province regarding the review of the multi billion dollar proposed Massey Bridge. As reported in the Richmond News the letter reiterated that Richmond ” as council, think the best option is to upgrade the existing tunnel and to twin the tunnel.”
And as MSN.com reports, it turns out that Claire Trevena the Provincial Minister of Transportation has already met with the Richmond mayor and staff on November 14th. On November 26 the following memo was sent to Council which stated:
Given that the previous project was cancelled, the Minister advised that any future crossing improvement option would not include a 10-lane bridge. The Ministry recognizes the significant negative impacts that the scale of such a project would have on the host communities, particularly for Richmond (e.g., proposed 3-level Steveston Highway-Highway 99 Interchange). With the release of the Review, the Ministry will undertake technical briefings with stakeholders (e.g., Richmond, Delta, TransLink, Metro Vancouver) and engagement with the community. The goal is to work collaboratively to develop a solution to address corridor-wide issues regarding transit connections, impacts to local roadways, the scale of the interchanges, and the interface at the Oak Street Bridge.
So there you have it~despite what the pro bridge Mayor of Delta is saying, the Massey Bridge is nixed, and in a very badly kept secret options such as twinning the existing tunnels will now be discussed with the Metro Mayors. Perhaps this is a soft landing for the report that will be released to the public by the end of the year.
There was no funding for this bridge that was unanimously rejected by the previous Metro Mayors’ Council, with only the Mayor of Delta thinking this bridge was a priority. That mayor spent $40,000 of Delta taxpayer funding for a junket to Ottawa and to Quebec ostensibly to plead federally for the overbuilt bridge in the wrong place.
In regard to the complaint of congestion at the tunnel, that can be temporarily remediated by improving public transit connections and insisting that Port Vancouver operate on a 24 hour schedule like every other port in North America. By insisting that trucks not use the tunnel at peak periods would assist with timing and scheduling for trucking.
Kudos to the Province for rethinking this crossing, and now over to the Mayors’ Council to ponder the best alternative to a massively overbuilt bridge, one more in keeping with accessibility and sustainability for the entire region.
Image: Bayvilleny.gov
In short
we will have the same doubling of road capacity as promised by the BC liberals, except under the previous policy, the crossing could have been tolled. Under the NDP/Green government, it will under a “no toll policy”.
when partisan ideology put blind on people mind: you get that: “Kudos to the Province for rethinking this crossing”
Not necessarily if two lanes are dedicated exclusively to transit from Day One, unlike every other bridge and freeway complex built so far which “reserved” them in theory but not practice. Also, a twinned Massey tunnel could be limited to eight lanes in total, six for cars & trucks, two for transit vehicles.
Why do they need 2 additional bus tunnels when buses & HOV can Que jump instead???—- A ( load controlled) skytrain bridge would cost much less to build.——Hidden agenda to convert ( redundant) bus tunnels to S O V after skytrain extension & bridge is built
It’s almost impossible to imagine justification for SkyTrain in that corridor. LRT? Now you’re talking.
An 8k the canada line extension to a south fraser park & ride is justified— with density & skytrain value capture
If you’re correct then the tunnel should not be expanded nor any new MV bridge. However, I think it better to get people out of their cars right from home.
White rock & Delta transit could be improved with a bus only on-off ramp connecting the highway to a new Canada line station under the Oak street bridge—— This would eliminate the milk run from the highway to Bridgeport station
A third tube is a total no-brainer .. with 4 + 2 lanes at rush hour .. or 3 + 3 at normal times ..
This is THE north-south highway to USA.
New tube ought to have a bike / ped lane on either side .. say 1 m as not much volume .. and perhaps 3 car/truck lanes even ..
Tolls on every bridge or tunnel, of course .. by time of time .. that would be real green actually. No cabbies to appease here either as in the Surrey swing riding !
With a bike/ped lane as narrow as suggested, it is needed on both sides not on either side.