The Massey bridge BC cancelled would be done by now

The George Massey Tunnel opened in 1959. Its replacement has now been cancelled once, redesigned twice, and priced three times.^⁠[1]

In September 2017 the new NDP government killed the 10-lane bridge it had inherited, a funded and procured project with site preparation underway, and wrote off about $100 million in sunk costs.^⁠[2] Major construction was to start that fall. The bridge was due to open in 2022.^⁠[3]

The whole bridge project, with 24 km of highway widening and three interchanges, was estimated at $3.5 billion. Its main construction contract drew a bid as low as $2.6 billion.^⁠[4] The tunnel that replaced it on paper now costs $8.5 billion.^⁠[1]

Four years later the government announced its alternative: an eight-lane tunnel at $4.15 billion, promised "in operation in 2030."^⁠[5] Only the announcement arrived.

It is not in operation. It is not even under construction.^⁠[6]

In June 2026 the province ended its deal with its design-build contractor after the two sides could not agree on commercial terms, and began re-tendering the work in packages.^⁠[6] Three weeks later came the new estimate. The tunnel now costs $8.5 billion, more than double the promise, with major construction starting in 2027 and opening pushed to September 2031.^⁠[1]

So what did nine years buy the people who sit in that queue every morning? One interchange, opened December 2025.^⁠[7] The bridge the NDP cancelled would have been carrying traffic since 2022. Columnists in Delta, Surrey, and White Rock keep a running tally of what the delay costs.^⁠[8]

The case against the bridge, and why it fails

The strongest argument against the bridge came from the region. In 2016 Metro Vancouver's mayors rejected it collectively. "History has demonstrated the world over, you can't reduce congestion by simply building more roads," said board chair Greg Moore.^⁠[9] Richmond worried the extra lanes would add congestion at the Oak Street Bridge.^⁠[10]

The NDP's own independent review added that 10 lanes was more than needed: 6 or 8 would carry most of the traffic forecast for 2045. It also said what that would mean, "delays in the peak direction in 2045 similar to today."^⁠[10] In other words, a smaller crossing locks in today's rush hour for another generation.

But the NDP's own answer adds lanes too. Today's tunnel has four lanes, three in the rush-hour direction and one the other way.^⁠[11] The tunnel it chose has three general traffic lanes and a transit lane in each direction.^⁠[12] The 10-lane bridge would have had 4 general lanes each way plus 2 transit and carpool lanes.^⁠[10] At rush hour, the difference is one lane.

The Oak Street argument does not survive the government's own business case either. It found the extra capacity would send "limited additional traffic to Oak Street Bridge," because 80% to 85% of drivers leave Highway 99 before they reach it.^⁠[11] By the ministry's count, 59% of northbound tunnel traffic ends in Richmond, not Vancouver.^⁠[13]

That traffic comes from everywhere south of the river. The ministry's origin data shows northbound drivers starting at the US border, White Rock, and South Surrey, in Tsawwassen, North Delta, Surrey, Ladner, and Tilbury, and at the Deltaport container terminal.^⁠[13] About 80,000 vehicles a day squeeze through one four-lane tunnel.^⁠[10]

By 2021 the real choice was between an eight-lane tunnel and an eight-lane bridge. The government's business case found their costs "comparable" and the bridge could open about a year and a half sooner.^⁠[11] The tunnel won on looks, noise, farmland, and river navigation, not on traffic.^⁠[5]

A crossing like this is built for a century. The cancelled bridge had a 125-year design life.^⁠[10] It also backs up the rest of the network. When falling ice closed the Alex Fraser Bridge for more than six hours in December 2016, cars "inched their way through the southbound Massey Tunnel."^⁠[14] The Alex Fraser closed for falling ice again in December 2022.^⁠[15]

Nobody disputes that the old tunnel has to go. It is rated for an earthquake with a 240-year return period, against 2,475 years for either new option.^⁠[11] The only question was what to build. The NDP chose the option that would take longest, and it is still not built.

Cancel what is built, promise what is cheaper, and deliver neither. Infrastructure is where ideology gets measured, in years added to your commute.