A New Low For Reporting In The BC Media
Why all the angst for the tunnel and why do the Liberals still want a bridge?
So much for BC being Green!
Established choke points, reduce traffic and encourage people to take transit, which is a good thing and standard transit planning practice.
The alternative facts and fake news spewed by the BC Liberals, especially sitting MLA and still Delta Councillor, Ian Paton, Delta Mayor, Lois Jackson and the hoi polloi of car and truck drivers wanting a new $3.5 billion to over $5 billion mega bridge to replace the perfectly good George Massey Tunnel, have been shown for what they are: falsehoods or grand economies of the truth.
The bridge was proposed for two reasons:
1) To allow Panama and Cape Max. colliers and tankers to travel up the Fraser River to load dirty Montana Coal; volatile Braken Oil; and LNG at Fraser Surrey Docks, with the coal and oil delivered directly by the BN&SF. By doing so, the BN&SF railway would not have to pay wheelage charges for unit trains to BC Rail, which owns and operated the rail line to the Delta Superport.
2) To divert billions of taxpayer’s monies to political friends via multi billion dollar mega projects. This is called “Pay to Play”.
The new American Trump administration doesn’t care for environmental concerns, thus the American coal and oil will be loaded in the USA and LNG and the BC’s new NDP Government, hopefully will stop “Pay to Play” mega projects.
The proposed Fraser River mega bridge was never about traffic and transportation, it was all about political deals, cut by the BC Liberals with big business.
- George Massey Tunnel under construction – 1959
Meeting with ministry gave former Liberal government tunnel options
Delta Optimist January 10, 2018
Much has been said by the former Liberal government and its representatives about getting the facts for the replacement of the George Massey Tunnel.
Transportation and Tunnel Engineering Consultants (TEC) of the Netherlands to update the ministry on the state of the art of immersed tunneling.
The content of the 60-page presentation included introduction of TEC worldwide tunnel projects both recent and proposed, and cost effective options for the George Massey Tunnel. Special attention was given to tunnel safety, earthquake resistance design and comparison with bridge solutions.
The following are quotes taken from that presentation:
1.Tunnels are more suited for various and poor soil conditions.
2. Tunnels are shorter in length than a bridge and have a smaller footprint.
3.Tunnels can be built parallel and close to existing tunnels.
4.Tunnel construction is capable of dealing with severe seismic conditions.
5.Tunnel construction where 80 to 90 per cent of the work could be done by local contractors.
6.Tunnels can be built safer than an open highway.
The last 14 pages of the presentation dealt with TEC’s selection of appropriate options, possible cross sections, layouts and options for future use of the George Massey Tunnel.
TEC recommended the following:
1. To assess the structural integrity and durability of the present tunnel.
2. Increase river depth by replacing riprap with an asphalt mattress.
3.Introduction of longitudinal ventilation and use current ventilation ducts as escape cell and for passage of pedestrians and cyclists.
4.Move ballast concrete to ventilation ducts and increase internal height of the tunnel.
The entire report is available, on request, from me.
The report from TEC was not made available to the public and was not appropriately considered by the former Liberal government. A freedom of information request (FOI) to the Liberals yielded a response of no records. A recent FOI request has released the buried report which reveals viable, safe, cost effective options of upgrading the existing tunnel and adding a second tunnel beside it.
This report has now been made available, by the public, to new Transportation Minister Claire Trevena.
So, you see, the former Liberal government never revealed the true facts or alternatives to the public. Instead, it followed the demands of the Port of Vancouver and wrote fear mongering reports that suited its agenda of removing the George Massey Tunnel and deepening the lower Fraser River to suit present and future industrial interests.
This would destroy not only a perfectly good river crossing, but a bog land and a marshland, known the world over as vital component for a continued healthy ecosystem that supports a migratory food source for all marine and wildfowl life from the headwaters of the Fraser River along migratory routes of the Pacific Coast.
May the true facts be known.
Douglas George Massey
I share your frustration with the local press and its complete lack of knowledge or interest in actually wanting to help produce better cities.
A certain local council member here in Ottawa notorious for supporting automobile oriented development in her own suburban ward, going out of her way to stop any project or program that smells of anything that doesn’t scream, this is the suburbs. Yet complains that a certain downtown location is “going straight to hell”, referring to the Byward Market area of downtown, which has become increasingly unfriendly to tourists and pedestrians.
Her complaint about the traffic and the lack of pedestrian safety is more than just ironic, considering she has voted for every improvement to the number and access to high quality suburban style parking spaces inside the Byward Market Neighborhood. This is one of the oldest neighborhoods in Ottawa and dates to the late 1820’s and early 1830’s, which was the construction period of the Rideau Cannal. Being car friendly just isn’t in this neighborhood’s DNA.
Yet nobody in the press will point out to her that she is part of the problem. Does she want a quaint very old authentic downtown neighbourhood yes, she does, but do anything else than surrounding the place with thousands of parking spots like, force people to take transit and reduce the amount of parking around the neighborhood, there by actually improving the local pedestrian environment, not a chance. The neighborhood by the way, even has its own entrance to the bellow grade Rideau LRT Station.
Zwei replies: There is much more, but labeling the tunnel as a debacle and supported by the commentator and news journalist, really is a new low. Over the past few month, the BC Liberals say that a SkyTraijn can easily be added to the bridge and not the tunnel.
I was told by a retired engineer some time ago, that if the bridge is not designed for rail at the onset, there is no way in hell a railway could be added to a cable stayed bridge.
When they were designing the new Jacques Cartier Bridge in Montreal (south shore to downtown Montreal) the designers almost didn’t include a rail transit option, they were ready to add bus only lanes but told the public it would cost too much to add the support for rail rapid transit. The public and federal government freaked out that rail was going to be excluded from the design. The REM is using this bridge and rail right of way, to cross the St. Lawrence into downtown Montreal, naturally.
The tunnel is not even that old. It opened in 1959. Lions gate bridge is 25 years older and refurbished recently. Patullo is same age as Lions Gate but not refurbished and going to replaced.
The tunnel could be refurbished and last much longer. It would do nothing to relieve congestion during peak hours.
A new bridge would create a shadow over the regional park. A new wider tunnel would take away land from the park. Neither is perfect.
Another option is to extend the Canada line to south delta but the line with short trains need a capacity upgrade.
They could build a new transit line down Arbutus to Steveston and across the river to Ladner.
All options cost money but what is best value for the region.