Editor:
The fixed link study is out – for linkers armed with “simple arithmetic,” it’s cherry picking season.
Read the Planning Study? The Consultation Summary? The Executive Summary? The conclusion is as stated in the Coast Reporter headline – compared to costs, the benefits of a fixed link are negligible.
Yes, a non-scientific sample of 900 self-selected respondents (45 per cent) supported one particular alternative – hardly headline worthy. Furthermore, “most” indicated cost expectations of “$10 to $60” round trip for car and two passengers – thus the “better” headline would be: “Across province, only 900 people voice support for fixed link – and then only if it’s cheaper than ferry!”
Table 6-1 anyone? The link definitely has a significant opex, only 40 per cent less than the ferry. And its capex is $2.2 billion greater.
Estimated completion cost is now $3.5 billion (already 40 per cent over 2016’s $2.5-billion estimate). At current rates the total payout on a 25-year $3.5-billion bond is $5.5 billion. On a 50-year $3.5-billion bond, its $8.3 billion! The potential for full cost recovery through tolling is noted as “very low,” and that’s putting it kindly – an immediate tripling (from 1,700) to 5,655 (not 4,000) daily round trips, plus another doubling over time, is required.
Consider, value-wise, the Port Mann cost $3 billion – it handles 50,000 to 75,000 round trips daily; $3.5 billion for 5,655 daily round trips to the Coast? Ridiculous.
The study notes Highway 101 near Gibsons already handles 5,000 vehicle round trips daily; assessment of the financial/infrastructure impact of the 4,000 net new ferry round trips is explicitly excluded. Are proponents lining (linking?) up to propose a highway study?
Ultimately, Vancouver is the second most traffic-congested city in North America. Link to that congestion and it almost certainly arrives here. Tragically, there appears to be no fix (quick or otherwise) for a fixed-link fixation.
Alan Donenfeld, Gibsons
