George Massey Crossing Project Phase 2: Crossing Options Mayors - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
george massey crossing project
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

George Massey Crossing Project Phase 2: Crossing Options Mayors - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Mar 01, 2023 383 likes •654 views

George Massey Crossing Project Phase 2: Crossing Options Mayors Task Force October 2, 2019 2019-09-18 GMC Phase 2 Confidential Draft for Discussion 1 Agenda Process and schedule What we heard Options analysis Request to

slide-1
SLIDE 1

George Massey Crossing Project

Phase 2: Crossing Options

Mayors’ Task Force

October 2, 2019

2019-09-18 GMC Phase 2 Confidential Draft for Discussion 1

slide-2
SLIDE 2
  • Process and schedule
  • What we heard
  • Options analysis
  • Request to select preferred option

Agenda

2 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Phase 1

  • Confirm

principles, goals and

  • bjectives

June 27

  • Confirm long-list
  • f options and

evaluation framework

July 24

  • Confirm short-

list of options

Oct 2

  • Select Task

Force’s preferred option to proceed to public engagement

Nov 27

  • Recommend

preferred solution to MV Board for approval and recommendation to Minister

Task Force Engagement Process

3 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

WE ARE HERE

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Success Milestones To Date

4

Consensus on:

  • Principles, goals and objectives
  • The number of lanes for the crossing
  • 18 long-list options and evaluation framework
  • 6 short-list options

2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Endorsed Options Short-list

All options include 2 lanes dedicated for transit and cycling/pedestrian paths

  • 8-lane deep bored tunnel (DBT)
  • 8-lane immersed tube tunnel (ITT)
  • 8-lane bridge
  • 6-lane DBT + transit lanes in existing tunnel
  • 6-lane ITT + transit lanes in existing tunnel
  • 6-lane bridge + transit lanes in existing tunnel

5 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-6
SLIDE 6

What we’ve heard so far

6

  • Urgency to move forward quickly
  • Promoting transit use is imperative
  • Concern about lifespan of existing tunnel
  • Desire to manage risk and cost

2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Existing Tunnel

Options using the existing tunnel have greater impacts than all-new options due to:

  • In-river ground densification
  • Environmental Assessment extended timeline
  • Up to 5 minutes longer for transit trips
  • Shorter lifespan
  • Additional cost (hundreds of millions)

7 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-8
SLIDE 8

2019-09-18 GMC Phase 2 Confidential Draft for Discussion 8

GLACIAL TILL DEPTH -300m+ STEVESTON HWY HWY 17A Pan Pacific 81m New DBT (-78.5m)

Comparative Height/Depth of Options

New bridge (+57m) New ITT (-29.5m)

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Benchmark Comparisons for Costing

Deep Bored Tunnel:

  • 8 recent projects in the U.S., Italy, Hong Kong and Australia
  • None with our soil or seismic conditions

Immersed Tube Tunnel:

  • 7 projects in the U.S. and northern Europe

9 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Deep Bored Tunnel Concept Design

10 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Deep Bored Tunnel Size Reference

11 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

SR99 (Bertha)

Slightly smaller than would be required

Evergreen Line Canada Line

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Deep Bored Tunnel Cross Section

12 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Deep Bored Tunnel

  • Significant risk of multiple sinkholes
  • Longest timeframe to completion
  • Extends beyond Steveston and Hwy 17A I/C
  • Increased transit trip times
  • Existing tunnel must be retained for

pedestrians and cyclists

  • ALR impacts – up to 200 acres
  • Approx. 3 times cost of ITT/bridge

13 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Deep Bored Tunnel Interchange Footprint

14 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Immersed Tube Tunnel Concept Design

15 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Immersed Tube Tunnel Concept Planview

16 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Immersed Tube Tunnel Portal

17 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Immersed Tube Tunnel

  • Temporary environmental impact during construction;

lowest long term impact

  • Greatest potential for environmental enhancements
  • Medium timeframe to completion
  • Low property impact
  • Comparable order of magnitude cost to bridge

18 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Long Span Bridge Concept Planview

19 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Long Span Bridge Concept Design

20 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Long Span Bridge

  • Long term noise, visual and shading impacts
  • Land-side property impacts
  • No in-river disturbance
  • Shortest timeframe to completion
  • Comparable order of magnitude cost to ITT
  • Local construction expertise

21 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Technology Summary

2019-09-18 GMC Phase 2 Confidential Draft for Discussion 22

Option Bore Tunnel Immersed Tube Long-span Bridge Environment Impacts

  • Sinkhole potential
  • ALR
  • Ground

densification

  • In-river

construction

  • Noise, visual

and shade

  • Est. Schedule
  • EA
  • Construction
  • 3 yr
  • 7 yr
  • 3 yr
  • 5 yr
  • 2 yr
  • 5 yr

Construction Risk

  • High
  • Medium
  • Low

High level cost estimate

  • Approx. 3 times

cost of ITT/bridge

  • Comparable

cost to bridge

  • Comparable

cost to ITT

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Goals Summary

Key differences by goal area:

  • Goal 1: ALR impact, timeline
  • Goal 2: Transit, cycling + pedestrian experience
  • Goal 3: Goods and service reliability, industrial land impact
  • Goal 4: In-river impact, community livability

23

Not aligned Aligned Somewhat aligned

2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Goal Achievement Analysis Summary

24

Goal Bored Tunnel Immersed Tube Bridge Goal 1: Support community sustainability Goal 2: Increase share of sustainable modes Goal 3: Enhance regional goods movement Goal 4: Support healthy environment

2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

Not aligned Aligned Somewhat aligned

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Request to Task Force

  • Select preferred option(s) to endorse for Metro Vancouver

Board recommendation to take to public engagement

25 2019-10-02 GMC Phase 2 Task Force

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Thank You