What else could the $4 billion for the Massey Bridge buy?
There are many reasons why so many people and 20 out of 21 area mayors oppose the proposed $3.5-billion bridge. The fact that the project is certain to worsen traffic jams on the bridges between Richmond and Vancouver is one, the cost of the project is another and the loss of farmland is a third.
But perhaps the biggest reason is that investing billions in an unnecessary bridge deepens our dependency on car travel at a time when many would rather take public transit — if only it were available where we live and work.
The more we deepen that dependency, the greater our collective losses will be. We lose quality of life and affordability in a region that is already grotesquely unaffordable. We lose more of our depleted farmland base and we lose down the road as greenhouse gases rise and we are forced to spend billions more on future public infrastructure projects, such as raising the dykes to counter rising sea levels.
The protest that caused Stone to scramble for cover underscored that encouraging more car travel in a region already beset with so many traffic jams is bad policy.
Which brings us to the crux of the issue. If we are to spend $4 billion of public funds (don’t for a moment think that the projected cost of the Massey Tunnel replacement bridge won’t increase — such costs invariably do) what else might we do?
Here’s one suite of investment options that would not only address traffic congestion but also improve our quality of life.
For a relatively modest $1.32 billion, we could expand our fleet of buses in the Lower Mainland or across B.C. by a whopping 750 vehicles. Assuming a 35-per-cent recovery in operating costs from transit fares, we could operate that expanded fleet for 10 years.
This estimate is based on spending an average of $750,000 each for state-of-the-art hybrid buses of various sizes. The largest hybrid buses cost more, and smaller community shuttles and HandyDart buses less.
For another $1.3-billion we could upgrade or replace all 152 schools that pose the highest danger to students in an earthquake.
And, in a region crying out for massive increases in available cheaper housing, we could build another 5,520 affordable housing units for a projected $1.38 billion.
As you can see, we have split the pie into three roughly equal slices, with close to the same amount of money spent on three priority areas.
Yet it is easy to see that if we chose to divide up that pie somewhat differently, we could achieve even more spectacular growth in bus fleets while still putting more money into schools and affordable housing.
As we said at the outset, there are numerous problems associated with the provincial government’s surprise announcement that it is going ahead with a bridge that many Lower Mainland residents do not want.
But perhaps the biggest problem with that decision is that members of the public never got the opportunity to have a discussion to which they are so richly entitled.
What should the priorities for public investments be, particularly in major urban regions where a multitude of challenges are faced? Where do we get the best public return for public dollars spent?
What is critically important at this juncture is that the Massey Tunnel replacement bridge is far from a done deal. The major contracts to build it won’t be ready for signing until at least the summer.
The time is long overdue to have a fulsome discussion about what the alternatives are, alternatives that could improve the livability of our region on so many fronts.
Bob Chitrenky is president of Amalgamated Transit Union local 1724, which represents HandyDart workers in Metro Vancouver. Eric Doherty is a Victoria-based transportation consultant. Peter McCartney is the Wilderness Committee’s climate campaigner. Harold Steves is a farmer and longtime Richmond councillor.
Photo Credit: The Province - Read the original article here