Hwy 99 Fraser River Tunnel (George Massey Replacement) | Proposed

[SFUVancouver]

Feds just announced $3 billion for the tunnel.

[mcj]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Feds just announced $3 billion for the tunnel.

Is that part of the pipeline deal?

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by mcj

Is that part of the pipeline deal?

In the same announcement that funded the Massey replacement, there's money for mining, forestry and $10bn for upgrading the Port of Vancouver's Roberts Bank terminal. There's also funding for the ports in Stewart, and Prince Rupert, and a number of other projects.

In terms of an oil pipeline, Eby said he acknowledges he can't stop one being built, but Mark Carney said the government will uphold a tanker ban off B.C.’s North Coast, so a northern route would seem to be off the table.

Here's the Government announcement.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Says who? If it's true that it would have to be buried/bored tunnel for engineering safety, the river depth is 22m, the industry standard TBM for a 8 lane tunnel seems to be 17m and the ceiling of the tunnel will have to be some depth below the river bottom. Who's to say it wouldn't be 60 metres below surface level?

No one is saying bored tunnel. That would be a completely new project starting from square one.

The post you quoted is specially referring to the current proposed immersed tube tunnel.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Changing City

The article linked above says "Under the new re-tendering process, the project will be broken into five different parcels and Requests for Qualifications have been issued to identify qualified proponents for phases of the project, according to the BC transportation ministry.

The five key contracts are: the immersed tube tunnel and the south portal on Deas Island; the north portal in Richmond; finishing works for the tunnel (paving, mechanical, electrical and plumbing); the new Deas Slough Bridge; and highways and civil works."

The plan seems to be to keep the project unchanged overall, but split it into separate contracts that Canadian contractors can more easily bid for. The previous contractor was a mix of French, Spanish and Canadian businesses. The Canadian business, Pomerleau, are still planning to be involved.

Five different contractors, what could go wrong?

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Five different contractors, what could go wrong?

They're building the Langley SkyTrain extension with multiple contracts. Seems to be working so far.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Five different contractors, what could go wrong?

Hopefully not one working from the north and one working from the south 😅

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Hopefully not one working from the north and one working from the south 😅

That's how the Chunnel was built, except it was ten construction companies between the two countries.

[s211]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Five different contractors, what could go wrong?

Might I add the following? "Community Benefits" (i.e. mandatory union bribes): what could go wrong?

[craner]

Just read the last 10 pages of this thread and wow - what a complete and utter boondoggle this is.
I don’t understand why a tunnel option would be selected in the first place when it involves so many additional layers of complexity (water tightness, ventilation, emergency measures, harder to expand and on and on). Not to mention a tunnel basically requires the involvement of overseas contractors.
Extra painful when a superior bridge project had already begun construction and was cancelled.

Random but related question:
Are there any plans to expand Highway 99 to 6 lanes ?
Seems like this is something that had merrit 40 years ago.

[VanRise]

Politics, politics, and some more politics

[madog222]

Originally Posted by craner

Extra painful when a superior bridge project had already begun construction

[Citation Needed]

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by craner

Just read the last 10 pages of this thread and wow - what a complete and utter boondoggle this is.
I don’t understand why a tunnel option would be selected in the first place when it involves so many additional layers of complexity (water tightness, ventilation, emergency measures, harder to expand and on and on). Not to mention a tunnel basically requires the involvement of overseas contractors.
Extra painful when a superior bridge project had already begun construction and was cancelled.

Random but related question:
Are there any plans to expand Highway 99 to 6 lanes ?
Seems like this is something that had merrit 40 years ago.

To be fair, there was already the existing tunnel as an example. That said they should have gone with the bridge.