Read on Twitter
Since the Liberals dug up the 10-lane Massey-replacement bridge, it's a great time to remind everyone why this was a bad idea
the current tunnel is operated 3-and-1, or a rough capacity of ~6,000 vehicles per hour in the peak direction. A new 10 lane bridge will be 5-and-5, or 4-and-4 general lanes. This a 1/3 capacity increase
GMT traffic counts have been at 80-90k per day for decades, since the tunnel has been at-capacity. This has formed a de-facto lid on the volume of commuters, has ensured that people avoid structuring their lives around the need for free-flowing Massey Tunnel Traffic
Society could control traffic volumes in other ways - tolls, parking controls, congestion pricing, but for the most part we have abandoned methods more enlightened then choke-point congestion.
what this all suggests is that a toll free, higher volume crossing would encourage people to move to areas served by it. initially lured by lower prices in that direction, and sustained by a gradual re-orientation of the population towards that commute pattern
This is where I have to protest that I do not begrudge South Surrey and Delta residents their mobility. But that mobility in the form of single-occupancy cars isn't costless for everyone else. For instance, where does the additional traffic all go?
Have you ever thought to yourself, "Man, Richmond sure does have light traffic. And the Knight Street Bridge, it really could be busier"
No, no you have not. All those people coming over the bridge are going to places already served by quite congested road networks
No, no you have not. All those people coming over the bridge are going to places already served by quite congested road networks
Now you could be saying to yourself, "but, surely 2000 cars an hour can't be that much" and you'd be right! 2000 cars isn't that many cars, but it's still going to tip lots of places into congestion. It's a key problem here that cars don't scale
What about business? Business is important, after all. Well, is business served by further congesting the road networks this side of the South Arm? And is yet further encouraging business to organize itself around highway transportation a good idea as we adapt for climate?
I'm not exactly fond of the 8-lane NDP proposal, but it's not nearly as big traffic increase, and crucially, the additional peak period lane is supposed to be transit only. there are already peak-transit lanes on either side of the tunnel
such a scheme would considerably increase the reliability and peak speed of the tunnel buses, of which there are already ~550 tunnel buses per day, accounting for 11% of the passenger volume while only accounting for less than a hundredth of the vehicle volume
