Skip to content

Those south of river aware they must deal with tunnel

Editor: Re: Christmas letter to Santa asks for a new bridge, letter to the editor, Dec. 1 It is telling in that the author admits he has “missed meetings and deadlines” due to the bridge.

Editor:

Re: Christmas letter to Santa asks for a new bridge, letter to the editor, Dec. 1

It is telling in that the author admits he has “missed meetings and deadlines” due to the bridge. You would think that as a “lifelong resident of Delta,” Dylan Kruger would have better time management skills for the George Massey Tunnel.

Everyone is aware of the limitations the tunnel brings to our lives; if you continue to live south of the Fraser you make adjustments. However, I would like to point out a few glaring issues in Kruger’s appeal to Santa’s busy office.

Most of the 90,000 commuters that use the tunnel knew of the tunnel when choosing to live south of the Fraser. We make choices and live with the consequences.

To suggest the tunnel is the worst bottleneck in the province means Kruger seems to be unaware of the bottlenecks at the Oak Street Bridge, the Knight Street Bridge or the Alex Fraser Bridge, all bottlenecks that will only get worse with construction of the bridge.

If this environmental issue causes “13,000 tons of greenhouse gas every year” why would Kruger and his boss, Delta South MLA Ian Paton, just move that environmental issue to Richmond?

The 14,000 pages of information on this bridge deal poorly with these issues. Some of these documents have been written by proponents with contracts for the bridge and can hardly be called “independent reports.”

It is telling that Kruger brings up the safety issue. Safety was never an issue with the tunnel until a bridge was proposed.

Why would the Liberals not have done the appropriate repairs in 2006 when $20 million was spent in the first phase of upgrading? The plan then was to twin the tunnel.

Since then the Liberals have triple erased any mention of that plan and denied its existence. Hence, comments made by Nicholas Wong in a recent column are less than “extreme.” These issues have been exposed through FOI requests and shouldn’t need more proof.

The “redundant (NDP) study” will show the bridge was really only needed by the Port of Vancouver. There are other options for traffic infrastructure and Paton and Delta council have agreed to and supported a further review of these options and facts.

If this takes more time, so be it. Good planning always takes time.

Peter van der Velden