Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinion
Same thing happened with Lions Gate in the 90s. Wider bridge options were on the table and were the obvious choice but we got a refurb instead because we were solid Liberal at the time.
|
Sorry Pinion, that's incorrect. The NDP hardcore base in Van City ... esp. in the West End screamed at the top of their lungs opposing any increase in capacity on the LGB into "their neighbourhoods" and the "enviro effects".
Moreover, the BC NDP hardcore base also opposed removal of just trees along the Stanley park Causeway for its widening. (Never mind all trees blown down during wind storms) If ya know the 1990's BC NDP, they always shy away/get spooked at the loudest protest voices - no matter how minor they may be. Nature of the beast.
Now look at current BC NDP MoTI minister Trevena - a well known SJW/hardcore enviro. Today, in the media, Trevena stated the following:
Quote:
|
"We want to look at the different options. There was a sense that not all options were thoroughly examined," said Trevena.
|
All BS. Off the bat, MoTI has a very professional internal highway design team - all non-partisan. These folk also out-source to highway civil engineers. Moreover, the body of evidence surrounding the proposed GMB and all options is massive:
https://engage.gov.bc.ca/masseytunnel/documentlibrary/
Obvious that the entire matter has been examined beyond what one would rationally/reasonably expect.
Quote:
|
Trevena: "We want one that will get the approval of not just the engineers, but people that live and work in the region."
|
I mean FFS. The Angus Reid opinion poll of Metro Vancouver residents confirms 75% support for the proposed GMB.
Just 1990's BC NDP redux catering to their ideological hardcore base with the loudest voices. Damn everyone else. Bottom line. Seen same 1990's movie played out before numerous times.
PS. Just wanted to add... obvious that Van Sun's Vaughn Palmer is also apparently calling out BC NDP's decision today as a cluster$@##on the proposed GMB:
Quote:
Vaughn Palmer: Massey Bridge project sent into limbo
Cast into limbo is the work already done, including $66 million spent by the transportation ministry on planning, engineering and site preparation, and a further $25 million outlay by B.C. Hydro to begin relocating the transmission lines flanking the existing tunnel.
Still, Transportation Minister Claire Trevena insisted that the almost $100 million spent to date was not necessarily wasted nor were the New Democrats starting over on fixing admitted problems of safety and congestion at the aging crossing of the Fraser.
“We’re not going back to square one,” she told reporters, never mind that the New Democrats appeared to be doing just that after their earlier decision to cancel tolls on the Port Mann and Golden Ears bridges.
“We’re going back to a thorough consultation with the community,” the rookie transportation minister continued. “We haven’t made any decision on what is the best way forward, we need to be open to any recommendations provided by the review.”
The transportation ministry “is in the process of recruiting the individual to lead the technical review, and will support the review with expertise in highway infrastructure construction, transportation planning and traffic engineering,” according to the accompanying press release.
Judging from the evidence posted on the ministry website, much technical work has already been done. The document library for tunnel replacement project includes more than 150 project reports, analyses, traffic forecasts, seismic and geotechnical studies, fact sheets, and other findings.
The project has already cleared a review by the provincial environmental assessment office. Separate studies covered everything from the impact of the new bridge on barn owls, raptors, herons, small mammals, amphibians and at-risk plants to concerns about water quality, hydrogeology, contaminated sites and heritage preservation.
Earlier this year, the Massey replacement also cleared a review by the Agricultural Land Commission, which green-lighted a swap that was projected to increase the regional stock of agricultural land once the bridge were completed.
The ministry also presided over three rounds of public consultations going back five years and separate exchanges with 13 First Nations and other Indigenous groups. Plus it claimed almost 700 meetings with others with an interest in the project.
With all that effort and documentation in hand, Trevena nevertheless insisted that the cabinet was not expressing non-confidence in the transportation ministry by ordering further review.
The ministry had done “some good work” she maintained in grudging tribute to senior staff. But that still wasn’t enough to satisfy her and her colleagues at the cabinet table.
“There was a sense that not all options were thoroughly examined,” she told reporters. “The feedback on the 10-lane bridge I heard was very strong opposition from many, many quarters.”
To be sure. And if she gets around to reading the material on her own ministry’s website, she will discover that many of the common place objections have already been analyzed and dismissed in the various engineering studies and reports.
Take the suggestion that the ministry could get away with building a second tunnel alongside the first and then upgrading the existing 60-year-old tunnel to modern-day seismic standards.
“Bringing the existing tunnel to modern day seismic standards is not practical due to the risk of damage and the limitations of densifying soils under the tunnel,” according to one of the technical studies quoted on the ministry site.
“The tunnel’s height and width are below modern day standards. Many trucks have been stuck in the tunnel and several fires have occurred…..
“The tunnel cannot be made wider, higher or meet current seismic codes. A new structure built to modern day standards will reduce crashes and other incidents and provide a safer facility in the event of an earthquake.”
Would an independent review, conducted with the same level of technical expertise, reach a different conclusion? If not, the bridge might end up back on the table as the preferred choice.
But Trevena may well reach a different conclusion on the timing of the replacement from the political consultations she herself with be conducting to obtain “buy in” from mayors in the Metro Vancouver region.
|
http://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/vaughn-palmer-bridge-project-sent-into-limbo
Prev
Linear Mode
