new-bridge-conceptual-design

.

One of the great things about the readership of Price Tags is that the readers are a well-educated bunch who readily share information. Here is  some of the dialogue regarding the Massey Tunnel debacle that is by informed readers concerned about this multi billion dollar overbuilding of a simple conveyance that could be easily handled by a direct twinning of the tunnel.

It has been suggested in this letter to the Delta Optimist and documented in the thorough blog written by Stephen Rees that there are other underlying factors that make the Massey Bridge look like a very expensive concept that needs to be rethought. From the letter to the Optimist written by Frank Suto:

I have some reservations about the proposed new bridge to be built atop the George Massey Tunnel. As a part of the planning process boreholes were drilled to depths over 1,000 feet on both sides of the river. It turns out the boreholes, as reported about three years ago, revealed nothing but sand and silt. At some depths it was so mushy that cores could not be retrieved.
 .
massey-twin
 .
The plan, as I understand, is to build two concrete towers, 500 feet or more high, to support a bridge deck 10 lanes wide on nothing more than waterlogged sand and silt. One can’t help but think about the possibility of two leaning and sinking towers.
.
I suspect another tunnel with four (possibly six) new lanes while retaining the proposed Highway 99 roadway/transit improvements could be designed and built in less time and at less cost versus the proposed bridge.”
 .
11072959
 .
As Stephen Rees notes on his blog and picked up by Price Tags reader Alex Botta:
.
“Stephen also posted information previously on the ground conditions below the bridge site. There are apparently no firm bearing soils even 330 m below the surface, which was one of the top considerations that led to building a tunnel decades ago. In addition to the above issues, this bridge could literally and figuratively sink.”
 .
georgemasseytunnel
 .
Price Tags reader Clark Lim further notes:
I cannot see how such a large bridge built on questionable soil requiring so much height leading into one of the most dense networks of signalized roads can be a good thing…
.
If we want to keep things simple and much more cost-effective, then there is a solution that can solve congestion not only at this water-challenged part of Hwy 99 but all through into downtown and all other destinations using the tunnel. And it would cost only a fraction of the +$3.5 billion. It is called transit and carpooling … in this case the numbers show evidence of possible latent demand for these modes. And eventually if needed, more tubes can be added, but we may not need them if we can max out existing infrastructure with more cost-effective “first-principle” solutions.”
 .
“First-Principle solutions”. How do we even have this conversation if this ten lane 3.5 million dollar bridged boondoggle is a so-called “done deal” with little transparent process and no way for the public to learn more or influence this sinking decision?