For me, the Massey Tunnel Replacement Project problems, such as defiled estuary, misused billions and traffic constipation, multiply and merge like a nightmare interchange.
We can thank Richmond staff and council — and Metro Vancouver, too — for addressing the mega-problem. We can thank the project and MLA John Yap for illustrating it.
The photo of the project’s 3-D model (right) looks south where Steveston Highway meets Highway 99 in 2022, a few billion dollars from now.
Years ago, ahead of its time, the province came up with a much simpler Steveston Interchange redesign than that. I liked it and featured it in an April 2013 “Digging Deep” column. It would have quickly paid off in traffic safety and commuter time saved.
That brings us to Mr. Yap’s precept in this space last week: “To do less than replace the tunnel would shamefully and irresponsibly risk the safety of daily commuters.” He unwittingly implies that Premier Christy Clark is shameful and irresponsible.
How’s that? As late as November 2012, Mr. Yap applauded the premier’s announcement of “the start of work to twin or increase the capacity of the George Massey Tunnel.” (That’s from his “Constituency Report,” a Shaw TV service to let MLAs showcase themselves.) His comments conveyed that Ms. Clark was not set on removing the tunnel.
Strangely, he didn’t call her irresponsible for that.
Later, he stayed silent when the project’s “Exploring the Options” phase offered four options that are “shameful” by his suspect standards. (All four require seismic upgrades, which he calls “not possible without the risk of damaging the tunnel.”)
Three years ago, the premier announced her choice. To no one’s surprise, it was the fifth option, a big bridge. A few months ago, she began listing safety above congestion as the top reason for the choice, with lots of hype and not much substance.
Looking back, I keep wondering why Mr. Yap didn’t act years earlier to spare us from “irresponsible” thoughts about keeping the tunnel.
He was already an MLA when a 2007 report supposedly indicated “serious concerns the tunnel could shift during the required in-stream excavation and stone columns installation” to enhance the tunnel.
Why “supposedly?” When I checked the 2007 report, it said “low risk of accidental damage” (low, not serious) and offered ways to manage it.
I mentioned that weeks ago in a column that debunked the safety-scare tactics. As I said then, “we need an independent, wide-reaching and fast-acting analysis of the safety aspect of the Massey options.”
And the project continues to need a federal environmental assessment by a review panel.
It’s vital for conserving our vibrant Fraser estuary. I mention it now because we’re being distracted from seeking it.
To end on the bright side, let’s be glad our Richmond and Metro leaders are acting with real vision.
Jim Wright is a longtime Richmond activist
