Massey Crossing: Bridge Planned for 2022, Tunnel Targeted for 2031 as BC Conservatives Propose Another Change

DCC Now | November 1, 2026
News analysis

Thirteen years after Christy Clark announced a bridge to replace the George Massey Tunnel, commuters still have no replacement crossing.

The original bridge was scheduled to open in 2022. Had that schedule been achieved, residents would already have been using it for approximately four years. Instead, the BC NDP cancelled procurement in 2017, a new planning process followed, and the replacement tunnel’s published completion estimate is now September 2031.

The Conservative Party of British Columbia has committed to returning to a 10-lane bridge. The proposal brings renewed attention to the original cancellation, subsequent planning, and the financial consequences of changing direction again.

The available records trace an approved bridge project through cancellation, a replacement tunnel announcement, and a new political commitment to return to a bridge.

How the bridge project developed

On September 20, 2013, Premier Christy Clark, whose BC Liberal Party formed the provincial government, announced that B.C. would proceed with a bridge along the existing Highway 99 corridor, with construction intended to begin in 2017. Detailed scope development, a business case, technical studies, and consultation followed. [1]

In December 2015, the government released a $3.5-billion plan. It included a 10-lane bridge, replacement interchanges, highway widening, walking and cycling facilities, and provision for future rapid transit. The crossing would have four general traffic lanes and one transit/HOV lane in each direction. User tolls were intended to recover project costs. [2]

These were plans for a corridor project, rather than the bridge structure alone—a distinction that matters when comparing costs.

Approvals, contracts, and physical work existed

The project received its provincial environmental assessment certificate on February 9, 2017. The approval covered the bridge, interchange replacements, Highway 99 widening, and decommissioning the existing tunnel. [3]

On April 5, 2017, the Province announced awarded preparation contracts of $11.5 million to Hall Constructors and $5.8 million to B&B Heavy Civil Construction. Work included drainage improvements and placing material to compress soft ground before major construction.

The government said major approvals were in place, but procurement for the main construction contract was still underway. It maintained a planned bridge opening in 2022. [4]

Both parts of that record matter: this was an approved project with awarded preparation contracts and work underway; it was also a project whose main construction contract had not been finalized.

September 2017: the BC NDP cancelled procurement

After taking office, the British Columbia New Democratic Party (BC NDP) government announced an independent review on September 6, 2017, and cancelled the procurement process.

Its announcement still described an estimated $3.5-billion project. It reported approximately $66 million in provincial expenditure and approximately $25 million spent by BC Hydro on transmission relocation. It also said some acquired property, preparation work, and technical information were expected to remain useful. [5]

That means the full amount spent cannot automatically be described as money with no remaining value.

However, cancellation had financial consequences. The procurement terms provided for payments of up to $2 million to each of the two final bidding teams. The September 2017 budget separately recorded a $52-million write-off of early capital expenditure. [5][6]

These are different accounting categories. Bidder compensation is not the same as a breach-of-contract settlement, and the write-off should not be added to earlier spending as though it were another construction payment.

The spending totals, write-off, bidder compensation, and retained assets measure different aspects of the original project and its cancellation.

Why the government said a different project was needed

The independent review released in December 2018 criticized the consideration of alternatives and regional priorities behind the original plan.

The Province’s summary reported that a smaller bridge could accommodate most forecast traffic to 2045, an immersed tunnel could be feasible, and improvements elsewhere on the highway were important. Further engagement and engineering were to inform a new business case. [7]

Those findings explain the government’s stated case for changing direction. They do not establish that the replacement ultimately delivered better value. That judgment must also consider the subsequent price, schedule, capacity, and continuing delay.

2019: warnings about restarting were already public

In July 2019, Richmond–Queensborough MLA Jas Johal criticized the cancellation and renewed planning. He questioned why the Province had abandoned the earlier bridge while considering another bridge among the alternatives. [8]

His argument was about wasted time and the consequences of restarting. That concern remains relevant today, regardless of which party proposes the next change.

2021: a new tunnel, a new budget, and a later opening

On August 18, 2021, the Province announced an eight-lane, toll-free immersed tunnel, estimated at $4.15 billion and intended to operate in 2030. It included dedicated transit lanes and walking and cycling connections. [9]

The difference between the crossing plans is specific:

Sources: original project announcement, tunnel announcement, and current project information. [2][4][9][11][12]

The tunnel provides two fewer general traffic lanes overall than the original bridge proposal. Whether that capacity is appropriate requires current traffic modelling, including transit demand, goods movement, and bottlenecks elsewhere along Highway 99.

An old estimate and a current estimate also cannot be treated as equivalent bids: price years, project scope, financing, contingency, and market conditions must be aligned.

2026: another procurement change and an $8.5-billion budget

On June 15, 2026, the Province announced it had not reached agreement with Cross Fraser Partnership on commercial terms for final tunnel construction. It exercised a termination option and moved toward retendering the remaining work.

The government described this as a change in procurement approach, with design and early works already completed—not abandonment of the tunnel design. [10]

On July 6, the Province published an updated project budget of $8.5 billion and a revised estimated completion of September 2031. It attributed the estimate to market conditions, scope, inflation, and delivery requirements, and said it had received independent validation. [11]

The updated estimate is approximately $4.35 billion higher than the amount announced in 2021, more than double that earlier figure.

A union perspective on the procurement change

In a June 23, 2026 opinion article published by The Tyee, Bryan Railton, business manager of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 115, supported dividing the tunnel project into smaller contracts. He argued that this approach could give Canadian contractors more opportunities and retain more economic benefits locally.

Railton’s contribution presents a union perspective on procurement. It does not independently establish the tunnel’s final cost or show that it would be cheaper than a bridge. [19]

Work is underway—but no replacement is open

It would be inaccurate to say no work has occurred.

The Province identifies early construction beginning in January 2026, including utilities, casting-basin preparation, access roads, jetties, and temporary infrastructure. Its project website lists major construction as expected in 2027, subject to the remaining process. [10][12]

Nevertheless, early works do not provide commuters with a usable replacement crossing. Nine years after the original procurement cancellation, residents continue to use the existing tunnel.

The 2022 bridge date was a target, not a guaranteed outcome. We cannot know with certainty when an uncancelled bridge would have opened. But comparing the original target with the tunnel’s September 2031 estimate shows a nine-year gap between the published schedules.

The schedule comparison does not establish that all nine years resulted from cancellation alone. It does show how much later the currently published tunnel completion date falls than the original bridge target. No quantified estimate of wider congestion costs is asserted here.

Federal funding: confirmed commitments and unresolved questions

Ottawa committed up to $3 billion for the replacement tunnel in July 2026. [13]

For the original bridge, records show that federal assistance was pursued. Delta’s March 2017 Council record described possible assistance through the proposed federal infrastructure bank, rather than an approved project contribution. [14]

The records reviewed for this article do not establish a specific federal bridge funding commitment before the 2017 cancellation.

Whether the current tunnel contribution could transfer to a bridge remains unresolved in the records reviewed.

The BC Conservatives’ bridge commitment

On October 15, 2026, the Conservative Party of British Columbia committed to a 10-lane Massey Bridge and claimed it would improve commute times and goods movement. [15]

On October 30, CityNews reported Ian Paton’s claim that a bridge could be completed in five years and would cost $5 billion less than the tunnel. He also expressed confidence about securing federal funding. Those are attributed political claims; they require current supporting documentation. [16]

A bridge commitment does not itself demonstrate that the tunnel has already been formally cancelled, that old approvals remain sufficient, or that procurement can resume without further work.

The BC NDP’s campaign response

During the October campaign, the BC NDP opposed another change. Its October 14 release warned of further delay and risk to the federal contribution. Eby also argued publicly that abandoning work already underway would create additional expense and disruption. [17][18]

Those objections place the consequences of restarting at the center of the current dispute—the same issue raised by bridge supporters after the 2017 cancellation.

What remains unresolved

The proposed return to a bridge leaves several details unresolved in the material reviewed for this article: a current independently supported construction estimate, the treatment of existing tunnel contracts, the availability of federal funding, and any additional consultation or approvals.

The 2017 environmental assessment establishes that the earlier bridge received approval. It does not, by itself, establish that a revived proposal could proceed today without further regulatory steps.

Those details will determine whether changing direction can deliver the savings and earlier opening claimed by its supporters. Meanwhile, commuters continue using the existing George Massey Tunnel.

Editorial note: This article distinguishes official project records from political claims and DCC Now’s analysis. Estimates and schedules are the published figures reviewed as of November 1, 2026; future decisions may change them.