A submission from a reader:
No one could quite understand how the Province decided a ten lane bridge was more effective than a reboot and twinning of the Massey Tunnel. It would take up less land area and have less of an ecological impact.
More on this in today’s Vancouver Sun.
The tunnel was said to have a fifty year life span, and there has been a lot of press from the son of Geoff Massey, who is suggesting that the reason the tunnel is being abandoned is to provide a deeper draft for future ships to navigate up this arm of the Fraser River.
More on Geoff Massey in the The Province today
It was Harold Steeves, a councillor for the City of Richmond that put in a Freedom of Information Request to find out how a ten lane bridge, which would take out ALR land on both sides of the bridge approaches, got approved. It turns out that Port Metro Vancouver and Fraser Surrey Docks had lobbied in favor of the bridge, exchanging memos in 2012 and 2013 noting “the sensitivity to premature disclosure of their choice…Replacing the tunnel with a new bridge at the same location. Not publicly confirmed yet, but this is (Port Metro’s) preference”.
This is curious as the documentation from the new Massey Bridge project states that the bridge is NOT being built to assist the navigation of ships. Except, this latest disclosure of FOI information says that is the reason for the bridge option, not the tunnel.
OOPS.
I didn’t see anything in the article that said that increasing the dredging depth was the reason for the decision to build the bridge; only that staff noted that that a bridge would permit deeper dredging (and bigger container ships). Does the FOI request demonstrate that this was in fact lobbying and not a statement of fact from staff?
So Anonymous, why are you afraid to reveal your identity? We can guess!
I agree with ‘Anonymous’. The fact is Vancouver is a port. A very large port. In fact, Vancouver is the largest and busiest port in the country. As well as the largest in the North West of the American continent. The port is under federal authority and it is their job to monitor the size of ships being built around the world and plan for the suitability of the port infrastructure to accommodate those ships. This is business for the country, we are a trading nation, as Justin Trudeau said today in Washington, DC.
Since the opening of the Panama Canal a century ago the Port of Vancouver has been an integral part of business for the prairies of Canada and this continues to grow with products being now shipped quickly by rail to and from all points across North America. Business between Asia and North America continues to grow. Vancouver is perfectly equipped to handle these goods.
The port naturally sees larger ships under construction and naturally sees where the suitability for docking is within the Vancouver ports system.
The airport does the same thing. This is why the large Airbus 380 is now coming to YVR this year. Plans have been made to accommodate the larger aircraft and plans need to be made for the vessels that are being constructed. Is councillor Harold Steeves of Richmond also upset that new and larger aircraft are about to land at his airport? What’s Steeves’ max size limit?
Any idea that we, or anyone, should stop trading and shipping of goods is ridiculous. Trading and shipping of goods is one of the foundations of our civilized planet.
We are constantly reminded that we must build more transit infrastructure because another million people are coming to Vancouver, soon. Concurrently, we must build infrastructure for all the modes of transport, including bridges and transit.
Even the latest opinion poll showed that a majority approve of the new bridge being built.
Remember too that the Justin Trudeau government has promised to pay the $5 + billion cost as well as all the maintenance costs for the new Champlain Bridge that is just one of many that go across on the south side of Montréal, with far less complexities than the Richmond/Tsawwassen/Delta/Surrey links that the Massey Bridge will have.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/news-video/take-a-virtual-flyby-tour-of-montreals-new-champlain-bridge/article24256672/
The reason is simple. You can’t take anything that counts as dangerous goods though the tunnel because of fire risk. The port and trucks aren’t keen on that.