Dear Editor,
On February 4 you published an article that was headlined “Richmond chamber supports bridge proposal.”
I must admit that this surprised me. I thought that these were business people. If someone approached them with a huge deal but refused to reveal any data while producing a business case with all the figures blacked out, would they actually be reaching for their cheque book?
Are they really ready to sign up for a $3.5 billion project where there is no information, no publicly available records of how that decision was reached? Can they actually trust a project which replicates two similar projects — big bridges across the same river, built and run by a P3 and paid for by tolls — where the revenues have never yet covered the operating costs let alone the debt service?
Neither the Golden Ears nor the Port Mann have got anywhere near their forecast traffic projections, yet the Massey Tunnel replacement bridge is going to be different?
There is nowhere that has actually solved traffic congestion by building wider roads.
And in this case, even the proponents admit that there will be much more traffic coming into Richmond with no plan how to accommodate that, and increased congestion at the Oak Street bridge. Does this new, huge bridge achieve anything more than more traffic?
And how does shifting a line-up of idling cars from Delta to Richmond actually reduce greenhouse gases? How does removing the existing tunnel have absolutely zero impact on the sensitive Fraser River ecosystem?
Are the members of the Richmond Chamber of Commerce so gullible that they will actually buy a bridge from a con artist?
Stephen Rees
Retired transportation planner
Richmond
