Stephen Rees's blog

Thoughts about the relationships between transport and the urban area it serves

Carole James Caves to Blacktop Politics

with 6 comments

Perhaps it is not a safe assumption that readers of this blog also read the Livable Region blog. If that is not the case go there now and read what David Fields has to say about the way that Carole James seems to have accepted the “done deal” on Gateway.

It is by no means certain that the deal can be done. And it most certinaly should not be. It is one reason why I cannot support the NDP and one single very good reason that BC readers of this blog to consider voting Green next time.

Written by Stephen Rees

February 27, 2009 at 11:43 am

Posted in Gateway

Tagged with ,

6 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I just cam’t believe it.

    Yeah, I’m really disappointed that the NDP has now decided to flip-flop in favour of mega-freeways.

    I’m also going to now seriously look at the Greens myself.

    Scott

    February 27, 2009 at 2:29 pm

  2. If you really want change you must support the electoral reform referendum and register a vote for a party that isn’t in the current legislature. Depending on your personal politics choose BC Conservative, Green or one of the other parties.

    We must send a strong message to both the Liberals and NDP that we will not stand for any more freeways or overpriced rapid transit lines. Their decisions have cost us billions in debt servicing costs, traffic congestion, air pollution and urban sprawl that threatens what little is left of our ability to feed ourselves.

    David

    February 27, 2009 at 5:28 pm

  3. Carole James is doing a very good job snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Luckily where I live, Delta South, we have a viable independent to vote for, Vicki Huntington.

    The NDP have always been weak on transit and used massive highway and transit public works as vote getters.

    If Carole just supported the ‘valley rail scheme’, it could have secured some of the electorate; but as in BC, as they say, politics is all rubber on asphalt!

    D. M. Johnston

    February 28, 2009 at 7:38 am

  4. A good angle of attack for the NDP, given their current position, is to criticize replacement instead the twinning. It’s adding hundreds of millions to the cost when the old span is perfectly sound.

    Sungsu

    March 2, 2009 at 8:07 am

  5. The main benefit for the mega bridge is the efficiency of suspending the new lanes off of the new tower and providing new lanes beyond the life of the existing span, assuming that the existing span has 40-50 years left (i.e. similar age to Patullo).

    The $350 million increase in price for the megaspan should be valued against not only the $180 million in maintenance costs but also the added lifespan of the new lanes. Even if you ignore the maintenance cost savings, you wouldn’t be able to build a span to replace the existing Port Mann at the end of its life (in 40-50 years) for that $350 million – it would probably be over $1 billion. That’s where the savings is – avoiding the cost of another twinning exercise in 40-50 years.

    Ron C.

    March 2, 2009 at 12:07 pm

  6. Ron C.,

    By that argument, every bridge over a certain age should be replaced instead of maintained because it’s cheaper to do now that 40-50 years later.

    Sungsu

    March 2, 2009 at 12:27 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 973 other followers

%d bloggers like this: