We’re FINALLY Replacing this 65-Year-Old Tunnel! - The Fraser River Tunnel Project

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

PROJECT UPDATE: The Highway 99 Tunnel Program announced in their newsletter today that they will be replacing the HOV lane headed Southbound between Westminster Hwy and Steveston Hwy with a Bus-On-Shoulder lane while adding an extra lane in the process! This means two things: 1) Richmond will now have bus lanes along ALL of Hwy 99 in BOTH directions!! This is huge for transit riders in the area! 2) There will still be 3 travel lanes for cars in this space. All this is doing for drivers is maintaining the same number of lanes heading into the tunnel. Preliminary construction work is underway.

[@EyeSpyFocus]

the soil was no good to carry a bridge, it was scrapped. tunnel is only option at that location on fraser river.

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

@ exactly! This point is often overlooked

[@TheDominator2004]

You missed the fact that the old bridge project had much better transit infrastructure than the current tunnel plan does. Take a look at the Steveston interchange where busses would stop in the median, and an elevator would be used to transport passengers to the bus stop.

[@Boalmighty]

Keep up the great work!

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

Look forward to more sooner rather than later! Massive thank you for the Super Thanks!!

[@Glencairns]

Back in the early sixties, when I was a kid, driving through the Massey Tunnel with my grandfather, he told me that he had dug the tunnel, all by himself, with a teaspoon. I was never sure whether to believe him or not.

[@onthewater4020]

It was true, you were a fool to doubt it.

[@derekcourt425]

Digging a new tunnel with a teaspoon will be faster than the current political bureaucratic process

[@EmanuelBorsboom77]

This is a fantastic and impressive video; you really cover everything. Truly excellent work! For almost 30 years I've used a bicycle to get between the Tsawwassen ferry terminal and Richmond/Vancouver. Now I'm usually on a cargo bike (since I go over for errands and shopping) that can't be carried on the buses. The tunnel shuttle's schedule is next to useless unless you plan your day around it; it's actually much worse than you say in the video, especially in winter when it only does six round-trips per weekday and none on weekends (and my schedule is dictated by the twice-daily Gulf Islands ferries). It's also up to the discretion of the driver whether to take cargo bikes (official policy is that they're not permitted), and you have to unload everything from the bike when they do accept it. So I either end up taking a 20km detour via the Alex Fraser bridge, or I ride to Scott Rd Station and take my bike on Skytrain the rest of the way (but lately Skytrain has been so busy at all hours that I feel bad about using all that space for my big cargo bike). As I'm sure you can imagine, I've been wishing for a bike crossing through the tunnel for a long time, so I'm extremely happy that it's finally going to happen! It's unfortunate that it has to come along with a bunch of car infrastructure, although the bus lanes mitigate that. From a cycling perspective, I liked the bridge plan better since it had bike lanes on both sides (and also I love the view from bridges), although a downside of the bridge is that it would require more climbing (without the benefit of momentum you get with a tunnel). I really don't like those switchbacks in the new plan for entering and exiting the tunnel. First, they mean you have to climb further. Second, the turn looks extremely sharp. Bike switchbacks should be rounded and wide, especially to support cargo bikes (which are harder to maneuver when loaded). It seems like it should be possible to have underpasses beneath the car lanes that then go directly into the bike/pedestrian part of the tunnel where it descends without any extra climbing (this also means there would be no part where you're exposed to traffic noise and pollution from both car directions). Thanks again for this great video. I've been following the tunnel project with great interest and have nowhere else seen such a complete summary and valid critiques.

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

This is my favourite comment here! I greatly appreciate you sharing this personal take on this. These points of view are extremely valuable for projects like these. I hope this video can serve as the go-to video on this project. Hopefully it gets spread around even more!

[@bcinspectorman]

One of the reasons or objectives of building a bridge and getting rid of the tunnel was to deepen the Fraser River channel so larger bulk cargo ships (Panamax) could travel up the river to the Fraser River docks. One of the objectives of the Fraser Surrey Docks was to develop another coal terminal, however, the tunnel and the ballast on top prevented coal (bulk cargo) ships from leaving the port loaded due to the ship's draft. Older Panama draft while loaded is 12.4 meters and newer Panamax ship's have a draft of 15 meters. The natural depth of the river is 5 metres. The river is now dredged to a depth of 11.5 metres. Here's something from Richmond News in 2017: "Port Metro Vancouver and Fraser Surrey Docks have expressed the desire to dredge to about 13.2 metres in depth, while the Richmond Chamber of Commerce has noted ships may require 18 metres in the future.” The conclusion, the bridge idea wasn't just for motorists it was also to deepen the channel so as to increase the ability of shipping US thermal coal out of Metro Vancouver ports since Washington and Oregon nixed having coal terminals in their states.

[@jameshansenbc]

Fantastic video! And really appreciated the anti-sliplane segment, I agree 100%!

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

Hopefully this will bring those concerns to the attention of more people! Just gotta hope it keeps being spread around!

[@FirstLastOne]

Should have been a built a bridge with super deep towers and when the first M7.0 or greater earthquake hits, you'll quickly understand why a tunnel was just a mass grave waiting to happen.

[@smallstudiodesign]

Wrong. Tunnels perform better in earthquakes. Clearly you know nothing about seismic nor engineering …

[@avimakkar]

That center bike lane most probably is also an emergency escape for people in case of an accident in the tunnels. There will definitely be doors from the tunnels to the the center bike/pedistrian lane. That's why it's in the middle

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

Yeah that makes the most sense, seeing the “EXIT” signs in the renders along the pathway. Just a shame the pedestrian/cycling experience will be hindered because of it

[@chapmanlam4128]

This is the reason. It's to allow an emergency exit and crossover in case there is ever a vehicle fire in either tunnel portal.

[@FirstLastOne]

It will also make a great place for people to camp while being out of the weather. That will make those tunnels extra safe...

[@mystica-subs]

@@TheGreaterDiscussions I can't see how the majority experience will be hindered, unless you expect there to be an emergency every single day in the tunnel... I doubt the exits will be used much at all, but when they are needed, the peds/cyclists shouldn't really mind evacuating people in a fire or other emergency, and may actually be able to offer aid if needed. Unless you expect them to all be uncaring heartless sad souls riding their bikes and walking to nowhere fast and angry about being slowed down?

[@onthewater4020]

@@FirstLastOne So what you are saying is that you will happily fund better inclusive shelters for unhoused people?

[@de_stroyed]

Amazing journalism! Almost finished watching this video and decided to quickly see how many subs you had and surprised to learn that you only got 1.9K. You deserve a lot more.

[@briancollier5145]

As a former resident of Vancouver and regular visitor, most frequently by bike in recent years, I am glad that you pointed out the problems of cyclists / walkers contending with the car sewer (highway 99). Would also love to have seen rapid transit run right out to the ferry terminal (or at least the tsawwassen mall. Won't miss the horrible bike shuttle through the tunnel (free and overpriced).

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

Thank you for sharing! I've entertained the idea of a Canada Line extension to Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal in a previous video before, but I've kinda backpedaled on that idea. Firstly, because it would be far more cost-effective to build a pedestrian-only style ferry at YVR than it would to extend an existing line all the way out there. The other main issue though is simply that South Delta does not currently have the population, nor the density, to warrant rail rapid transit and it isn't projected to hit such a level for several decades. HOWEVER, I believe in the meantime, with these excellent transit additions to the tunnel crossing, Delta is being given a fantastic opportunity to fight to increase bus service between the two municipalities!

[@wyldhowl2821]

@@TheGreaterDiscussions I look at the Skytrain (Canada line included, not matter the corporate branding) as being beset by short sighted under-planning. Crossing of river choke points made the Expo line a huge success once it was able to reach Surrey (even just Scott Road). Ditto that the Canada Line was able to cross to Richmond and YVR - instant huge success, and only restrained by their lack of foresight in having stations that are too small in terms of capacity. Why did they terminate at Brighouse? I'd have preserved a future right of way all the way down to Steveston, or yes, perhaps to aim at crossing the south Fraser near the Massey Tunnel. (Indeed what a use for the old tunnel, if it would be kept in modified form for a Skytrain link to Ladner + putting the Pedestrian & bike crossing there). Indeed, I have said the same about the Evergreen Line (north was a mistake - they should have aimed east to cross the Coquitlam and eventually Pitt River. Finally, the decision to turn the Expo line east towards Langley rather than south towards Newton / south Surrey, I would have chosen the latter. However, I'd have also created a long range commuter rail service, on real rail tracks, akin to the RER, Go Train, etc., both north and south of the Fraser. Not just the West Coast Express which is just a novelty for rush hour commuters from the northeast, who follow the old 20th century pattern of suburb-downtown behavior. Long term planning versus the total lack thereof. This is the difference between Europe versus our transportation culture. It's not cars vs. transit, it is long term needs versus short term whims / fashions.

[@soakupthesunman]

So you want a bicycle sewer too? 🤣

[@ronmcleod4717]

Great video-really enjoyed it! I agree with you about getting around in Richmond - whether by foot, bike, or car, travel in Richmond sucks now.

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

Glad you enjoyed it! Thank you for the super thanks!

[@owinstan]

By foot, bike, car, or bus. Why is travel by bus in Richmond left out? That sucks too! I doubt this project will help much with getting around Richmond.

[@bigcheif23]

My grandpa was the first person to go though the tunnel on his horse. even back then he was one of the people who where saying that two lanes each way was too small. and now here I am tell the people who are working on it that we need more then three lanes each way, what a waste of money

[@frogsmoker714]

Exactly! No ability to plan wisely for the inevitable future needs. Poor governing by those we elect to spend our money on themselves.

[@arnehermann3417]

According to several sources, $16 million in 1956 would be about 160-170 million today, but the Massey Tunnel would no doubt cost many *billions* to build today. I predict the budget on the new tunnel to double or worse before it's finished.

[@onthewater4020]

Nothing like the great 21st century infrastructure grift to increase wealth disparity and drain government coffers.

[@skiingrooster9808]

A good friend of mine is a senior engineer for the main contractor who constructed the Port Mann Bridge and now works on mega infrastructure projects in the United States (big time projects). Ten years ago, I asked him about a tunnel replacement for the George Massey. His main concern was that the required grade for the ramps would require the tunnel to be excessively long and hence the tunnel to be extremely costly. Also, great video; very informative for the public!

[@saskshark]

I used to be a long distance. Truck driver in Canada, from coast to coast and Vancouver was the most hardest cities to get around in, especially in a Big. semi.. Vancouver is always gridlocked and I learned to arrived arrive at in Vancouver after midnight. Would unload and get my load? Then I would leave after midnight to avoid the traffic.!!!

[@saskshark]

All I had to do was make it to hope BC and have a good sleep after all of Vancouver chaos.

[@tinyzx]

Amazing video TGD! Keep up the good work.

[@patallen5095]

Nice job! An objective discussion of a new infrastructure project without the politics or hate! Your reporting was fantastic!! 👍

[@A_Certain_Point_of_View]

Love seeing a good Canadian kid making good content 👍 keep it up Chico

[@Sebbby98]

One thing to note about the upgrades done in the early 2000s was that the following phases that were never completed were because they couldnt guarantee that the tunnel would actually survive them. I believe these upgrades included reinforcing the soil surrounding the tunnel. As it is now, while the modern versions of submersed tube tunnels are great in earthquakes, the current massey tunnel is not seismically safe whatsoever and in my opinion is why it needs to be replaced ASAP. Great video and I cant wait to be able to bike to work without needing a ride for a short bit.

[@daheinz27]

I believe the tunnel is also past its planned life expectancy so that's part of the reason it needs to go. I believe that's why the old tunnel is being remove or you would just keep it no? It also extremely dangerous it has high accident rate due to the counter flow lanes. I used to use the bike shuttle a lot and having to wait for the shuttle for an hour when you missed it by one min sucked cant wait to bike through the tunnel

[@czarcitizen6881]

One thing that can't come soon enough is for HOV lanes to shift back to actual high-occupancy vehicles instead of single drivers behind huge EVs.

[@pacificcoltrane7652]

This is an excellent summary of an important infrastructure improvement in Metro Van. - very well done!

[@williamlloyd3769]

Although this improvement was mentioned, the new seismic design will be a huge risk mitigation upgrade.

[@superiorbean7932]

I honestly loved this video so much, my guy is going places with this stuff, I mean it was perfect, it was informative super well edited and constructed. I’m really exited to see what’s next. You got my subscription 😆

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

Glad you enjoyed it! Spreading the word of this project is the ultimate goal! Hope more people will get the chance to check this out

[@robertpatric6652]

Well put together video. One thing I’d like to mention is the middle cyclist/pedestrian lane is separated from traffic by full height walls and thus minimizing the sound levels. They will also no doubt have separate fan systems to constantly refresh the air so way less pollution. I’m figuring the placement in the middle allows for drivers to escape a bad fire in the traffic lanes if needed, thus utilizing a middle tunnel can be accessed by people in either north or southbound traffic lanes in a disaster. You addressed multiple points I hadn’t thought about and give you a big thumbs up for your diligent compilation!

[@xdn22]

just 1 more lane bro

[@eugenetswong]

This should be the most highly rated comment.

[@PaulFisher]

90% of civil engineers stop 1 lane before they fix traffic. this is so sad 1 like = 1 more lane

[@DerekRawlings]

Came here hoping to see this. Happy it's way up there...

[@ryosukeli9047]

Stupid.... Bridge is better. It will be congested after it's built

[@PrimeEchoes]

It has BRT lanes and pedestrian pathways. It’s a significantly more thought out solution than just adding another lane and calling it a day.

[@agnesw9540]

My father helped build the Dease tunnel and when I drive through it, I honk my honk in celebration of this underwater mode of transportation!!!

[@bcinspectorman]

Thanks for the overview of the tunnel project. One hopes it will be too far ahead to change if another party is government.

[@steverollins752]

Great vid, however not everyone wants to take the bus. There should be another lane for cars.

[@Ben71246]

I miss the nostalgic old orange lights, I don’t go in the tunnel much cause I live in downtown, but a few years I passed through on my way to tsawwassen and I was like, where the hell are the orange lights?

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

Threw me for a loop the first time too!

[@dorkusmaximus3033]

Thanks!

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

Thank you for the Super Thanks!

[@dudeomondo]

Who is this well spoken , intelligent young man? Thanks for a really great video...I live in Ladner and have been wondering about, well, all of this...(how did KZbin know??)

[@pacificcoltrane7652]

I agree that re-designing the pedestrian / cycling pathway alignment to one side of the tunnel needs to be added to the project. It should never have been located at the middle of the highway.

[@MelioraCogito]

The middle tunnel is/was primarily intended for emergency access/escape in the event of a vehicle accident in either vehicle tunnel. Using it for cyclists and pedestrians, when not needed for emergency use, was a cheap and simple solution for cyclists and pedestrians to pass through the tunnel (I honestly doubt many pedestrians will be walking through that tunnel IMHO). They _should_ add a cyclist/pedestrian tunnel to the west side of the tunnel as suggested to make access easier and leave the middle emergency exit tunnel in place (though narrowed to 2 m width) for the emergence/maintenance purpose intended.

[@jens_le_benz]

@@MelioraCogito This is the same principle for why Bergen, Norway built a 3km long bicycle and walking tunnel. They have a light-rail service running in a parallel tunnel that requires an evacuation path due to its length.

[@christianperspective9527]

it looks like the center bike lane is an integral part of the structure of the tunnel. The center narrow lane is actually a center brace of the extra wide tunnel.

[@samuel-0927]

Great video! Thanks!

[@jamesgjt]

we need a bridge connect Burnaby (boundary rd) to richmond/delta, we need so much more of these infrastructures!!!!!!

[@rjfday123]

Yay more lanes! It's so well established that adding lanes to a highway never results in those lanes just getting filled up quickly.

[@CFIREytb]

At least they are just matching the lanes from both sides of the freeway and not expanding freeway capacity. While more lanes does not fix traffic, minimizing lane merges does help negate car accidents and bottlenecks. If you have the current 3 > 1 > 3 lane setup, you are spending the maintenance cost of a 3 lane road for the benefit of less than 1 lane capacity. So we either burn money maintaining a 3 unusable lanes, destroy the additional lanes on both sides or we fix the lane merge bottleneck in the middle by building a new tunnel. All options suck, but at least this one significantly increases non-car capacity, thus inducing some amount of positive demand.

[@ght33]

@@rjfday123 the actual data says that it normally takes 7 years to reach the same congestion. Example…. Port Mann bridge expansion has justified hundreds of new housing developments around 200 Street in Langley. At first the bridge moved congestion from the bridge to Burnaby, that congestion will now go from Burnaby and back over the bridge. There was so little effort to increase anykind of mass transit. Big fail, but sure gets voters talking about ebrm more lanes.

[@jens_le_benz]

I think the idea here is to remove some of those god awful merge points and resolve the whole counterflow debacle. Every time I visit my aunts in Delta, there has always been a slowdown at the westbound on-ramp regardless of the volume within the tunnel.

[@donnapanusa2573]

Great presentation Arden! thank you.

[@xlbolt]

Great video! I guess I haven't spent enough time looking through the documents to find the plan view for the upcoming works, glad to finally see them. Happy about the recent transit upgrades, long overdue especially with the soil along Ladner Trunk piled up for preloading being untouched for maybe 5-6 years? I do hope they get extended southbound to eventually avoid the congestion at 99/91 during the PM peak.

[@edman50]

Amazingly made video!

[@nasteegolf7]

We need another tunnel at the Lions gate!!!! Hastings to Northvan .

[@glenw-xm5zf]

Dream on. In 1966 Swan Wooster presented a package that was a 6 lane tunnel I saw the model and it made sense. . it dropped traffic downtown, and routed some to south side of false creek. COST OF TUNNEL was $25 Million. City couldn't decide tunnel or a bridge. W>A.C Bennet said' If you don't build it now, it will never get done'. RIP Wacky Bennet.

[@chrisvickers7928]

I wonder if building a tunnel at first narrows wouldn't cause a problem with the Aframax tankers transiting to Burnaby. The second narrows already cause tankers to transit out at 85% full.

[@glenw-xm5zf]

@@chrisvickers7928 At high tide, the water under the LG Bridge is like 25 feet deep. SoI don't know what is quarter mile East of it, cuz did't read the map.. but they might have to dredge out 1-15 feet, and if so. just get it done.Preferably before the end of the century. In 1966 they could have done the whole thing, tunnel access routs and 3 dumps into downtown and one spur to south Van, and one out to 2 narrows. indecision cost us HUGE. If I remember right, the East west way would have dumped onto Clarke, nanaimo St and I think Ranfrew.. nut at 79, m,y memory is a bit foggy on that. The WHOLE project was under $125 mill and the Tunnel $25 mill.. Which means maybe $ 150 because, well, it is a government sponsored project. maybe Swan Wooster still have the model and crawings.

[@chrisvickers7928]

@@glenw-xm5zf I hope you meant 25 m because the largest aframax tankers draw 16m unloaded and they managed to get the USS Nimitz under it, barely, at high tide with its mast folded down. I remember watching it. You'd better start dredging now to fit a tunnel in because you're going to have to dredge another 10 m.

[@glenw-xm5zf]

@@chrisvickers7928 In 1964, the US Coral Sea docked in Vancouver. it needed 36 ft of water. So at low tide was 32 feet deep. They needed 220 feet to clear the bridge. SO they had not much wiggle room; and they removed the top 4 foot of mast to just make in under the Lion's Gate Bridge.. The numbers i give here are maybe not totally spot on, but very close. That ling cod on the bottom had a big problem, squeezed to bits. At mid, tide the dist to water is 220 feet. Wish I had written that all down, cuz I might be the only guy in town who knows the numbers that close.

[@ght33]

This is the best, most concise explanation of the reality of transportation infrastructure. We are long past just adding more lanes! I got tired of reading the comments of so many folks that only count cars and not people. You see them on the road all the time. They are those single passenger drivers that are getting so frustrated with each other. Thank you for this fun and great production Sir!

[@stevejones924]

I love how 7 lanes filter down into just the two heading north. Such a joy.....once took me an hour to get beyond that. Sigh.

[@penntano]

This was a much appreciated, highly detailed look at one of the projects that has frustrated me and several locals for years. From working adjacent to major contractors involved with the 2012 project, a major reason the bridge failed was due to piling companies being unable to find solid, viable foundations for the bridge support. This became a primary controversy as the surveying, which was apparently carried out prior to the project's proposition, confirmed that solid bedrock could be reached. The Pattullo bridge replacement project needs one of these in-depth looks. Spending upwards of $2 billion dollars to replace a 4-lane bridge with a wider 4-lane bridge is insane. It's locally understood that New Westminster doesn't want increased vehicle traffic through the city but, I have had council members tell me that the decision for a larger bridge was "not justified" despite there being 3 new high-rises being built at the quay.

[@frogsmoker714]

Driving thru New West is a 65 year old nightmare. BC is SO decrepit and out-dated when it comes to roads.

[@wyldhowl2821]

People need to remember that Translink had already wanted the replacement to be a tunnel, not bridge, because it is the superior option in almost every respect. However, the BC United / Liberal / Conservative (those guys) government under Christy Clark abruptly switched to a bridge because the COAL industry wanted them to. The coal industry & some port operators was planning to start a new coal port at the Fraser Surrey docks (even though Roberts Bank and North Vancouver each have a coal port already), and they felt a tunnel did not allow enough draught for the presumably huge bulk coal carriers they wanted to bring upriver. Well Christy Clark and her ilk are always pro-fossil fuel, so even as the world has been trying to rid itself of thermal coal usage, they wanted to expand the capacity to exports. This is why they wanted such a tall bridge with huge towers rather than a flat and short bridge - they wanted room for those ships both below and above the water. So when the NDP took power in 2017, all they did was switch the Massey replacement project back to what it was originally supposed to be (a tunnel). Frankly, this is a big relief, especially considering that the extremely flat land would be unsuitable for a bridge as wide as the Port Mann but twice as long. Not to mention that this would create a hazard for Boundary bay airport. Also let me just say - to hell with all counterflow lanes ! Honestly, I hate them but then again I grew up in North Van where we have the Lions Gate Bridge one. The only flaw people have noted (especially Delta council) but which does not appear in this video is the lack of a crossing over the highway for River Road, that can bypass the inevitable traffic tie-ups that will happen on the tunnel approaches during rush hour.

[@tim656]

Interesting. But the part about the coal industry and river depth is incorrect.

[@daheinz27]

I think the new tunnel will be lower allowing ships to pass aswell. Also tunnels are much more expensive to build NDP made it political so they changed it to a tunnel. They had canceled the bridge so it would be weird to build a bridge after that.

[@wyldhowl2821]

@@daheinz27 You have it backwards. Christy Clark made it political when she abruptly decided to announce it would be a bridge, when Translink had wanted a tunnel the whole time, because a tunnel is the better option. The NDP should not be blamed for having to un-fuck that fuck up once they took office. Though if you want to blame them for taking so long to get it done, by all means do so.

[@MrAronymous]

Uhhhh, pretty sure the active transport tunnel is closed off from the traffic by concrete walls and also doubles as emergency exit through emergency doors, hence why it needs to be located in the middle. If you want to make the path ramps more pleasant then install glass sound screens. They do wonders, and don't limit visibility or social safety either.

[@klopsjoker3928]

I absolutely love the urbanism expension going on over here in BC. Keep it up :D

[@michaelmains6785]

For information, the tunnel is being built using a progressive-design-build contract. This means that the $4.3B price tag is based on a 10% level concept design. This price was also estimated before COVID... construction has had about 10% cost escalation per year since then. Expect this to cost several billion dollars more.

[@owinstan]

Notice the video made no mention of the cost of the tunnel project .. Only gave the 3.5B cost of the bridge, which sounds like a better deal in every way.

[@ght33]

@@owinstanexcept it solves nothing and moves the blockage to the oak and knight bridges. They are already a problem. It would create even more problems.

[@bradwilles5152]

@@owinstan that price would go up too

[@jimimmler9110]

Great report! I should mention, nobody is going to want to go through that pedestrian tunnel. With the length that this one is going to be it'll be creepy, smelly and dangerous. Historically this has always been the problem. I agree it should be on one side. They should plan ahead in the center for the future counterflow lane that will be necessary about a decade after the new tunnel is finished.

[@nickolasgallo]

I think we should start thinking of a brand new crossing, with the growing population we should have more crossings on top of making the current ones better.

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

Where would we put it though? The Fraser River in Metro Vancouver already has the Golden Ears, Port Mann, Patullo, SkyBridge, Queensborough, Alex Fraser, Knight St, Canada Line Bikeway, Oak St, Arthur Lang bridges as well as the Massey tunnel. That’s an awful lot haha

[@nickolasgallo]

@@TheGreaterDiscussions I would suggest putting one between golden ears and mission Bridge, maybe Aldergrove. Because a lot of people are moving out this way give them another option to cross to get around traffic out here in valley.

[@TheDominator2004]

@@TheGreaterDiscussionsa boundary road bridge would be perfect imo

[@itsy523]

23:35 as someone who lives in Richmond, that's so true.

[@jetstream6389]

70 years ago my family lived in South Burnaby and during the summer we used to go swimming at Deas Island -- actually there was a sand bridge connecting the island so it was not really an island. There was a secluded sandy beach at the east end of the Deas slough which was never crowded. In those days Richmond was known as "Lulu Island" bascially rural and agricultural with few inhabitants. I think the Steveson to Ladner ferry still operated in the 1950s. There was also a ferry service between Steveson and Sidney on Vancouver Island.

[@calderart]

There is congestion in the GVA. Let's widen all roads into the GVA to invite MORE vehicles. What a great idea. 😂 RAIL FOR THE VALLEY! From Chilliwack to Vancouver!

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

Sounds like you'll be interested in my next video 👀

[@calderart]

@@TheGreaterDiscussions Sure. Where is it?

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

@@calderart just uploaded!

[@timtwoface]

Great video. Live in Richmond and was raised in Tsawwassen so I know the George Massey Tunnel really well. This upgrade is great but I wish it also would be able to accommodate a rapid transit connection (Canada Line south to Delta?) as well. That would get even fewer cars off the road.

[@bobsch-gd6ze]

Well, how much are the cost over runs going to be? Reason I ask, is the recent cost over runs of major capital projects in the lower mainland such as the rapid transit issues and the waste water treatment plant on the North end of the Lions Gate bridge

[@hilldoggydogg635]

When I was driving bus we chose the if we did the HOV detour on 17A or not. Typically if it was rush hour, it would save me time using it, so I did it. Outside of Rush, I didn't use it.

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

That makes sense, and I saw this in action along the Richmond stretch. But even still, when you have bus lanes the whole way along the crossing, why would you have any reason to detour to an intersection with no stop rather than have a bus lane to go straight like every other lane into the tunnel. And that northbound stretch is 5 lanes already. They could make the 4th a straight bus-on-shoulder lane and leave the exit lane for general traffic. Not a perfect solution but it’s an easy one at least!

[@justinmelao3434]

@@TheGreaterDiscussions One reason I can think of is to avoid conflicts and traffic build up from the on ramp. By having the bus detour, it remains in the right most lane at all times.

[@ParallelRentals1987]

Great video. I was really excited about the bridge. I hope they clean up the terrible merges on the East side of the tunnel. Those are terrible.

[@AbsolutePixelMaster]

It makes me so happy to see you go into detail about how the bus lanes will do far more to improve traffic flow than an additional car lane! We want to induce our demand into efficient modes, which benefits everyone! And giving that right-away to transit improves the driver's experiences just as much as it improves the transit rider's experience. I wish more people understood this concept, so thank you! Also, fuck slip lanes. It is so hard to cross them without having to stare down drivers and pray that they aren't in GTA brain-mode. One more thing though, I would have loved to see you talk more about tire particulate. Whenever emissions get brought up, a lot of people seem to think electric cars will solve this, but they won't. All I can think about when being on a bike lane in a tunnel is the literal cloud of tire particulate I will be breathing in... and also, driver's really need to be more aware of how much they are breathing in too. That shit comes right in through the filters.

[@onthewater4020]

This is brilliant - so happy I ran into your channel. We need an infrastructure channel in Vancouver and you have done it really well. I'll add that the Ladner interchange USED TO have a bus stop and they removed it. Why? Who knows.

[@HistoryOfBritishColumbia]

Great job on your video!

[@wyldhowl2821]

You are right about the weirdness of having a cycle / pedestrian lane in the middle, but keep this in mind: the engineers probably decided that the middle box allows two things: 1 - It allows service crews (and possibly emergency vehicles) to access all the parts of the tunnel without stopping a service vehicle in a running lane of traffic.They would temporarily take over the middle portion as needed. It also allows emergency pedestrian exits from the tunnel 2 - It is perhaps better / more efficient than having separated "cells" on either outside edge of the tunnel, for pedestrians & cyclists. Obviously you cannot have people on the edge of a tunnel but not separated; just the noise & turbulence from the traffic would be insane. Perhaps if they had decided to keep the old tunnel, at least partially, and make that just for cyclists, buses, emergency vehicles, etc. that would have been nice, but people forget the maintenance costs. I have heard their plans are just to use it for Hydro lines, or to fill it with sand, which seems a terrible waste. Strange that nobody ever mentions the possibility of a rail tunnel alongside it either. I am absolutely dead set against any of this "ban right turns" bullshit. I have never had much trouble as a pedestrian with slip lanes, but putting yellow flashers on this crossings can alert drivers to someone wanting to cross. I know that *cyclists* are often too lazy to stop and press a button though, and that is a global problem; they do not like to stop & look & lose momentum - well, neither do the drivers, but we all got licenses and learn to live within the rules.

[@onthewater4020]

When's the last time you had to get out of your car and press a button to get permission to literally just cross an intersection? That's right, you haven't. Much like asking cyclists to get off and push their bikes (I invite you to get out of your car and push at every intersection), it's just another microaggression dissuading active transportation. And maybe you personally haven't had issues with sliplanes, but by your logic, we don't need seatbelts, crumple zones, or airbags either. Just drive safely! Sorry, but speaking purely from evidence, sliplanes are deadly and cost many lives.

[@frogsmoker714]

I grew up in a bygone era when cyclists were not considered to be pedestrians and had to obey and practice road rules like all other wheeled vehicles. Now cyclists are a pain in the butt.

[@wyldhowl2821]

@@onthewater4020 I have gotten out of my car to press a button that changes the light. We drivers actually stop at stop signs and red lights, because dealing with times when you have to stop is just part of driving around without colliding with others. So it goes with seatbelts, crumple zones, putting your lights on at night. All those measures are still not not going to save those oblivious wankers who have no grasp of how to pay attention to their surroundings. You can't nerf the whole world, but I guess Vision Zero will still try. Slip lanes, my ass. It's called "vehicles turn right" and making the cars wait until the same time when pedestrians are crossing on the green or cyclists crossing at the same time is fucking stupid. It says "everyone else has the right to go, but you get no chance at all. You are clearly just wanting to run the red going straight and cars turning right ruins that for you. But hey poor you, your inconvenience is a "microaggression", and I guess you pushing your bike a few steps and getting your feelings hurt is on par with me pushing a 1000 kg car.

[@swisscheesecrackers]

Great video!

[@adamwithers]

I love and agree with almost everything you say, except Slip-lanes! Can you explain WAY more why we are UNmaking them? I love them, but could be convinced!

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

It's true that slip lanes are convenient and drivers love them. That's kinda the issue actually. Slip lanes only prioritize vehicle movement at a complete disregard for pedestrian and cyclist safety. Is the time lost waiting one more light cycle for a right turn arrow worth a potential life changing injury? In this context most would say no.

[@behonestwithyourself3718]

Can we bet on how many billions this will go over budget?

[@KevinZucht]

City planners need to see how well other cities have handled traffic/highway issues. Vancouver/Fraser Valley are about 50 years behind. TWO lanes in or out......the same as 50 years ago!!!

[@frogsmoker714]

How absolutely true! After the Sacred years BC governments have been lax on providing updated roads and highways. Horse trails still abound in BC.

[@smavtmb2196]

They must be planning 10 times more buses. Otherwise the bus lanes will be empty most of the time. Which would be stupid. So using them for HOV aswell makes sense.

[@Weshax]

13:50 “HOV lane for some reason” !!!???? Are you kidding me? Without that HOV lane I would have to wait another 30 minutes in traffic whereas now I carpool with 3 others in an electric car every day… what were you thinking when you said that? That HOV lane is completely valid and needed. Not to mention this tunnel will already be congested when it opens. 4 lanes for passenger cars MINIMUM. Another failure by the NDP

[@jamesb9780]

Another great vid! Well done.

[@AnimilesYT]

3:30 You could've phrased that a bit better. "Congestion creeped up faster than anticipated *due to induced demand*, and by ..." ;-)

[@WeirdAwesomeGeography]

Great video! Subscribed, keep up the great work!

[@mikedrozdowski3092]

well done your a very well spoken young man 👍

[@YahWay.]

I'm glad you got to the issue of the center bike and pedestrian Lane, I mentioned elsewhere that there is a perfect example of an excellent tunnel in Niigata Japan. Niigata minato tunnel On the outside of both Lanes is where there is a pedestrian and biking Lane, you can go either way on it. It's actually turned into somewhat of a recreation location as the temperature is perfect in a humid area, 24/7 all year. This is what you talked about. Again, pull up that tunnel in Japan as an example of what you're talking about

[@YahWay.]

Oh you're wrong about breathing in and hearing the sounds of the traffic in The pedestrian cycle lane, I believe That people zone serves as the ventilation for the tunnel, meaning fresh air is coming in through those walkways and going into the tunnel and out through a stack and fans I too was surprised when they moved it to the middle, kind of crazy. I'd love to hear the reason for that

[@robjohnston8632]

When you talk about the Bus lanes moving so many more people, that is a great point, but from what I have seen, we don’t have the infrastructure and buses routes to support that many people to get to south Surrey park and ride to utilize the capacity you talk about. If you want to go from Coverdale to Vancouver, You have to take a bus to newton and then to South Surrey. I believe this is short sighted by the government to not have a pre designated space in the new tunnel for rapid transit in the future that will eventually go to ladner, delta and south Surrey.

[@tylercousins7779]

The reason the bike lane is in the middle is because our government is extremely stupid. Which is also why the bridge was scrapped. The bridge that would have been completed already. And they haven’t solved very much of the traffic issue. It still is going to come to a dead end when it Hits Oak St., Bridge. There’s still no way for the 10,000 cars a day to get to the airport without going through the city. And was assessed growing lower mainland. The six lanes will be jampacked five years after this tunnel opens again. Our government is very very very stupid and this is a horrible design.

[@wyldhowl2821]

A bridge is worse than a new tunnel. They could keep the old tunnel for a bike & pedestrian & emergency vehicle way if they wanted. From what I hear they might use it for BC Hydro HV power lines, or just fill it with sand which is absurd.

[@ght33]

WTF Did you listen to the video?

[@IanForsythWestCoast]

It’s not stupid, people don’t just pull plans out of their ass. A lot of study and projections are considered, as well as cost. There’s so much involved in these decisions that I can’t pretend to vaguely understand, and I would think you too.

[@CCitis]

Hey Brother, you should do one on the new OCPs in the province. Tons of small communities (Delta) may be getting large towers up to 26 stories in previously suburban areas. People are not pleased!

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

As a resident of White Rock, I've definitely heard a healthy handful of political and local opposition to the Provincial housing bills. I'd be interested in making a video on it in the future, but we'll have to wait and see how they play out first. They were only just passed the other month.

[@IIII2IIII]

A totally brilliant video! Thank you for your hard work in creating it. Your many suggestions for improvement are all spot on. Now if we can only get escooters and cyclists off the sidewalks.

[@robn02]

I'd say this is a great project, but a little short-sighted in that a SkyTrain Line was not included. Have the Skytrain run down the middle with the pedestrian lanes at either ends of the tunnel. Extending the Skytrain to Ladner and Tsawwassen is a future-proofing no-brainer. But if the design is final, then an option would be to repurpose the Massey tunnel for Skytrain use.

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

There’s two things to consider with this. 1) the bridge proposals both had the ability to support SkyTrain in the future. As far as I’ve been told, the tunnel’s grade will be too steep for Canada Line rolling stock to make it, but I’ve also been told it wouldn’t be impossible so I’m at a bit of a loss 🫤 2) TransLink estimates that south delta won’t warrant rail rapid transit like SkyTrain for several decades into the future. Now while it would’ve been great to have had the structural compatibility already there, that doesn’t mean we can’t build a bridge similar to the SkyBridge or the Canada Line Bridge that would be far lighter and wouldn’t face the same structural concerns as the 2012 bridge!

[@FirstLastOne]

@@TheGreaterDiscussions Missing Link also built the Canada with platforms underground for two car trainsets thinking they wouldn't need the capacity for decades and we all know how that went after less than a decade. If you build it right, they will come.

[@frogsmoker714]

No need to plan realistically. Forget about rapid transit to anywhere south of the Fraser for now. In ten years they can add it on and pay billions for new infrastructure and say "O my, maybe we should've included all this when we built the tunnel (or bridge). O well, we've got lots of money -- we'll just add it to the provincial debt."

[@MrYoshiJL]

Agreed with you about the odd choice of the multi-use path. However, I think that path is being used as an emergency escape tunnel for both sides (you can see the exit signs at 18:01)

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

That’s something I noticed a bit late into production haha. I agree that’s likely the case, I just think it’s a shame it comes at the cost of a worse cycling experience.

[@sladeross2338]

Any idea what the reasoning was for shifting the multiuse pathway to the center?

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

My best guess would be that it could act as an emergency escape route for both directions of travel.

[@andrewpoon9167]

@@TheGreaterDiscussions I think you are right about the shared emergency exit for either direction but also, the multiuse pedestrian and cycle lanes are directly below the utility tunnel which would likely need access to both sides. If it needed separate utility tunnels per side, then the entire structure might need to be even wider and more expensive? I hope the multiuse pedestrian and cycle lanes are sealed for noise and air quality but I also question how many people would use it, hopefully it not a waste.

[@jfmezei]

@@andrewpoon9167 If the middle tunnel is the emergency escape tunnel, it has to be sealed from the road tunnels with airtight and firerpoof doors in betteen the two at regular intervals. So you will have huge layer of concrete to shield from the noise and polution.

[@TheBinko1]

Very detailed well done thank you. 👍

[@js-bz4ko]

The new tunnel is the same capacity as we have today at rush hour on the counter flow side although opposite the counterflow you do get 2 extra lanes and a bus lane. All in all, it really doesnt seem like its building for the future. Hell, for drivers at rush hour it will be hard to feel a difference.

[@NL2500]

I suspect that the center path also provides an immediate escape route in the event of a fire on one of the two halves of the highway.

[@noelgenoway9360]

What about the Oak Street Bridge when you get to Vancouver?

[@awkwardmonkee]

Excellent video!

[@WayneCarrigan]

All the crossings of the Frazer are being upgraded in support of The Pacific Gateway Transportation Strategy. First industry decides it needs bigger tankers further up the Fraser (past New West) and then the people transit folks add their needs on top of that.

[@djayjp]

It's actually still referred to as Lulu island as it's not just Richmond but part of New Westminster as well (Queensborough).

[@LoganLavery]

I moved to Richmond with my family in 1979 (from a place far, far away) People still referred to it at the Deas Tunnel often, by memory until the counterflow lanes were created in ‘81 - and yes, a very unusual arrangement, but it works (for what we have to work with). I went away back to that place far far away for 26 years and came back in 2017 thinking there was finally going to be a beautiful bridge crossing. Think again. By the time this current project, with one additional lane is completed it will be redundant. I think it’s quaint that when I drive downtown I still drive the exact same route over the Oak Street bridge until I turn left on 16th, which becomes Wolfe Avenue, then becomes 15th and I turn right onto Hemlock. The same route I took when I first got my licence in 1981! “Richmond, Island by Nature” - with really bad drivers - they need to add that bit 😏 😅! ! I unfortunately work at the airport and now live in White Rock, therefore yes I’m am one of of those single occupancy vehicles commuting via the tunnel or HW91 each work day. Great video, I thoroughly enjoyed it. We are bound by the topography of the region of course; our North and West routes terminate abruptly once we hit Vancouver.

[@frogsmoker714]

You're right about the redundancy of BC road building. BC governments have no clue about planning or building for future needs. The freeway east has always been 50 years behind the times and is still stop and go, stop and go traffic problems even with the new "improvements".

[@bcbigfoot112]

Great video. Well done

[@johnreed6607]

Good job on this video !!!

[@2bittesla]

The centre bike/pedestrian lane also serves as an emergency exit for north and south vehicle traffic.

[@Coyotehello]

Another great video, as usual. But wow YT is becoming crazy, there were five (5) interruptions with publicity during your video. Here is what I was hoping for: One side of the Massey tunnel would be used for busses the other side for commercial traffic (trucks) and the new tunnel for everything else. I can only hope that the center lane for bicycles and pedestrians will be isolated from the car traffic. Finally yes, trees please.

[@TheGreaterDiscussions]

Thank you! That’s interesting to hear about the interruptions. I don’t recall seeing KZbin setting that many. I’ll take a look into that, thanks for the heads up!

[@Coyotehello]

@@TheGreaterDiscussions Hi, yeah look at it in terms of % of time I am suppose to watch ads I do not care about in order to watch what I clicked on to watch. They have increase this from 2 to 3 to 5 and five is in the past few days. Cheers, a.

[@GarH56]

You may not know that Kevin Falcon had twining the tunnel ready to go when he was Hwy Minister. He included it in the long term plan until Premier Clark out of the blue pulled the rug out from under him with the 10 lane bridge. She did this because Surrey Fraser Docks wanted to construct a coal transfer operation in Surrey across from New West.

[@wiltaylor]

Nicely done. Great info.

[@ryan_m_k]

Amazing video, thank you!

[@robertwieczorek5838]

Interesting facts, port mann bridge is the widest bridge in the world, also the pitt river just down the way, is the world's largest tidal river/lake!

[@desertzombie]

Next they will need to expand the Oak St Bridge( 6 Lanes) and to make it easy, the the far lane in each can be for the Marine drive for the north and ( forget the street for Richmond)

[@douglasoverbeck9620]

Ok just watched this. Hey pay attention to your own models. If you noticed the centre space for the cyclists and walkers is enclosed so you have a concrete wall on either side between the pedestrians and traffic and a concrete ceiling separating the service tunnel and pedestrian tunnel so car/truck fumes should not be an issue or noise. Also the service tunnel and the cyclist/pedestrian tunnel will be the strongest support area of the tunnel. Moving the walkway and cyclists to a lane on the side instead of in the centre will take up a lane. If the existing tunnel could be retained make that the pedestrian and cyclists tunnel but I am assuming it has or will reach its end of life soon. My two cents, thank-you

[@badappel27]

cool vid idea biking culture and how we can learn to improve our biking infrastructure/culture from countries in europe like Holland where 45% of their population bikes to work.

[@odess4sd4d]

I like it when bike lanes don't go as deep as vehicle lanes so i don't have to pedal up as much of a grade leaving the tunnel.

[@SeasideGuitars]

The money wasted on this project is criminal and someone should have to answer for it. The new tunnel capacity will already be obsolete before it’s even finished.

[@aliquida7132]

How will it be obsolete? Very simple concept - there is a highway on either side of the tunnel that is six lanes wide... having a tunnel wider than the six lane highway connecting to it will accomplish nothing.

[@SeasideGuitars]

@@aliquida7132 will it be easier to widen the highway in the future to match a wider tunnel or when needed widen the highway AND the tunnel? Cheaper to overbuild now. The current tunnel is 3 lanes in the direction of rush hour, the new tunnel will be 3 lanes in each direction. The current counter flow set up gets backed up to Westminster highway regularly so after the new tunnel comes that traffic jam will continue. Nothing solved.

[@aliquida7132]

@@SeasideGuitars Countless studies over decades have repeatedly shown that adding more lanes to a highway doesn't reduce traffic jams. Build more lanes, and more cars show up, creating congestion once again. This will not be solved with more lanes. It is never solved with more lanes. At no time in the history of expanding highways has "adding more lanes" worked.

[@CaribooSawyer]

So what's your idea then? Population controls? Maybe. Or just more inconvenient mass transit where you're tied to schedules and stations, and shoved into buses and trains alongside all manner of humanity like sardines? No thanks.

[@aliquida7132]

@@CaribooSawyer I don't need an "idea" to tell you that something won't work. Your like or dislike of busses and trains has zero impact on the repeatedly proven fact that adding more lanes doesn't solve traffic congestion issues. Even doing nothing would have the same result as expanding the highway... and doing nothing would be a lot cheaper.