The Mufford Crescent Debate.

The Mufford Crescent overpass debate has implications for the proposed Rail for the Valley/Leewood TramTrain. The question Zwei asks is: “Why is a hugely expensive overpass being planned for Mufford Crescent at all, yet the far heavier used Langley Bypass/ Glover Road/Rail intersection/level-crossing remains almost unchanged.

Would it not be better to move the overpass to the Langley bypass/Glover road alignment and then take out the Mufford Road level-crossing altogether? Is it time to be rationalizing local railway level-crossings, when new highway overpasses are built?

More and more the Mufford Road debate looks like a bureaucratic boondoggle, where the planners will force the issue, just to sate their bureaucratic prestige and let common sense and the taxpayer be damned!

Editor;26 Sep 2011

After years of discussion and changes the Mufford Cres. Glover Road

overpass and intersection are still not finalized. Looking back on the

problem it is obvious the problems being experienced are caused by

inappropriate planning and trying to do things that would not be

needed if were doing it right in the first place.

First; we need a Long Range Master Transportation Plan for the Lower

Mainland and all work must fit and be properly coordinated. Second;

as part of the Plan we need to realize that Light Rail up the valley

using the old BCE Right of Way. Third; heavy rail traffic from Delta

Port needs to be rerouted to connect with the main CN double tracked

line up the valley along the Fraser River. Fourth; the development of

a positive Liveable Region Strategy for the Lower Mainland. We must

preserve farmland for food and green space. We do not need another

Los Angeles in the Fraser Valley.

All our present problems have been caused by poor short range planning

that ensures lots of work in the future and waste of tax dollars. For

example if we built light rail overpasses at the Fraser Highway, 200 St

and the Bypass at Glover Road it would really solve the traffic probems

there and would cut the cost in half. Further, most secondary roads would

only require gates, 10 seconds and the train is gone and vehicle traffic

is able to move. The money saved could be used to relocate the heavy

rail and build a new rail bridge over the Fraser at New Westminster. The

railways would save money. And they would not need the nine road

overpasses that are proposed or the double tracking needed on the present

route through Langley City.

One could write a book on the poor and inappropriate planning to date but

the powers that be just do not want to listen to common sense. The main

problem is the Provincial Government who will only agree to wasting our

money and doing things that ensure the railroads do not spend theirs.

A past example of poor planning was the SPI built at 200 St. and the

Freeway about 10 years ago. We told them it would not work and it was

the wrong place to build one but the transportation staff would not listen

and insisted the $15 million they would get from land sales was a good

thing. It now takes up to 20 minutes to get through the intersection during

rush hours and is now going to cost up to $1 billion to improve and allow

for bus service to Vancouver.

We need good leadership, planning and common sense. Everything should

be put on hold until we get it. Solutions to our problem have been solved

in other parts of the world. There is no need to reinvent the wheel when we

could learn from the mistakes and success stories of others. We can have

a wonderful valley with the needed transportation systems. We must insist

that our leaders and managers do what is right.

Eric J Bysouth, Langley CityAi??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??