The Provincial Government asked the public for input on
replacement of the Massey Tunnel. The result of this consultation and final report
is an eight lane bridge. The value of this bridge is marginalized by
manipulation of the public input. The real reason for the choice of a bridge
appears to be dictated by Port Metro Vancouver’s need to get bigger ships up
the Fraser River.
A number of options
were presented to the public. Several of these options were presented so that
it was almost a given what would be chosen.
One of those options was the retention of the tunnel. As
presented this option had no additional means of obtaining the desired results
to “support objectives for regional people movement”, to “relieve congestion”
or to “improve safety”. As a result, retaining the tunnel was not heavily
supported by the public. This is not a surprise as this is exactly what the process
was meant to do; pave the way for the removal of the tunnel.
This tunnel will be useful for many more years, a point
proven by a similar tunnel in Rotterdam (the Netherlands). So why dismantle it?
If we add the additional tunnel or bridge components necessary for public
transport to take traffic off the road, the tunnel will remain effective. This will cost a fraction of the current proposal
and will better achieve the desired goals set out by both Government and the
public.
The second option to have the bridge “placed in a different
location” was equally set up to fail. The new location merely rerouted traffic back
to Highway 99 and the Oak Street corridor. This option served neither of the
two objectives to “relieve congestion” nor to apply “a visionary long term
solution”.
The report allows that “most of the traffic through the
tunnel goes to Richmond”. What the numbers fail to factor in is the growth from
border traffic and from the “Urban Sprawl” that will be created by a large
bridge. Building the bridge will encourage residential and industrial development
South of the Fraser. This will put more traffic on the road, not less. This development will also put more pressure
on our dwindling farmlands. With less farmland we will need more produce
shipped in, putting more trucks on the road. The dismantling of the tunnel will
allow more shipping through, creating more
truck traffic. All of this will only add to the “people movement” problem.
This means that this bridge will soon create a need for an additional
traffic corridor to deal with this future growth. Therefore, this bridge is not
a “visionary long term solution”. A long term solution can not be reached by
putting more cars on the road and adding traffic to the Oak Street corridor. If
a bridge is chosen, it should be smaller, augment the tunnel, be placed in a
different location and handle public transportation. This would be far more
economical, effective and “visionary”.
More importantly, building the bridge where the tunnel is
will turn this major traffic corridor into a nightmare for a period of 3-5
years (judging by the Alex Fraser Bridge and the #1 highway upgrades). This
will not only affect Delta residents. It will affect South Surrey residents,
tourism, ferry traffic and truck and commercial traffic. For some strange
reason this does not appear to be a major consideration.
The less discussed and more contentious issue to BC
residents is the expansion of the Federal entity, Port Metro, and its need to
remove the tunnel to allow larger ships up the Fraser. At the public consultation
sessions no mention was made of the issue to “support trade and commerce”. These
consultations were strictly focused on traffic logistics and infrastructure.
How then did ‘transportation alternatives’ get rated lower than ‘Economic Growth’ in the final report?
Certainly ‘Economic growth’ is important. However, if the
desire to remove the tunnel and build a bridge is strictly for the benefit of
Port Metro, then why are we paying the cost? Port Metro’s requirements should
not be confused with the issue of transportation infrastructure.
At $3 billion the cost of this undertaking is a serious
issue. This amount of money could be
spent more effectively to serve the “objectives for regional people movement”. And, this price is being given to you by the
same people who missed the South Fraser Perimeter Road budget by more than
100%. How much will this project really cost?
Lastly, a Media Freedom of Information request for the
“business case for replacing the Massey Tunnel” turned up a 14 page response
that is “almost entirely whited out” due among other things to “disclosures
harmful to the financial interests of public bodies”.
With this amount of money going into the project, it is
doubtful that any money will be available to deal with the real issues to
“support objectives for regional people movement” or to “relieve congestion”.
That cost will be handed down to you in a separate tax on top of the cost for
this project. All of BC will pay if this project is allowed to go ahead. Not
just those who took their time to respond to this issue.
Peter van
der Velden
Facilities
Management Consultant
Tsawwassen
August 6,
2014
The
following is a link to the virtual bridge created and paid for by the BC
Provincial Government
No comments:
Post a Comment