Skip to main content

New 10-lane bridge in Vancouver

Is it an election year? The Port Mann bridge has been a notorious bottleneck for Vancouverites as the City grew around it, now the Province is planning to build a new bridge rather than twin it…

The provincial government has scrapped its plan to twin the Port Mann Bridge in favour of building a new 10-lane crossing over the Fraser River, at a cost of $3.3 billion.

Premier Gordon Campbell said the new bridge, which will be built to accommodate rapid bus service, expanded cycling and pedestrian lanes and a possible light rail line, will ease congestion clogging the crossing and commuter delays by about one-third.

New 10-lane bridge to replace Port Mann

I’m all for progress, where it’s needed, and in moderation. At a cost of $3.3 billion dollars, that’s a lot of trips, (1.1 billion vehicle trips). Considering that traffic counts from 2005 show around 4,000 vehicles per hour in peak hour, it could be estimated (gross estimate!) that about 45,000 vehicles use the bridge per day this bridge would pay itself off in 200 years.

Has anyone told Premier Gordon Campbell about Peak Oil?

Mike Thomas

Mike Thomas P.Eng. ENV SP, is the author of UrbanWorkbench.com and Director of Engineering at the City of Revelstoke in the Interior of British Columbia, Canada. If I post something here that you find helpful as you navigate the world of engineering, planning and building communities, that’s wonderful. But when push comes to shove: This is my personal blog. The views expressed on these pages are mine alone and not those of my employer.

4 thoughts on “New 10-lane bridge in Vancouver

  1. 3.3 billion is an obscene amount of money in these times for a fracking bridge. I agree this is not a solution. And besides, once more the interior gets the shaft in terms of money allocation.

  2. I'm sure it will be a beautiful "fracking" bridge though – and all of us in the interior will love to spend $3 to cross it, helping to pay off this ridiculous debt bit by bit.

  3. Its a lot of money but there is also the maintenance costs to consider if they build a second bridge and have to maintain the first older bridge along with the second. Im sure they draw up a graph and after adding all the facts and figures its shown more profitable to build the more expensive option than to maintain 2. Either that of the wrong person is making the decision. lets hope not.

  4. The bridge is an important link, but does it need to be so big? 10 lanes might be what they think they need, but have they factored in declining oil reserves?

Comments are closed.