In less than a year, a new 10-lane Port Mann Bridge will be in full operation. Once completed, B.C.’s newest piece of public infrastructure will help dramatically reduce traffic congestion for everyone living and working south of the Fraser River.
Sporting a yellow hardhat, former premier Gordon Campbell made it all official on Feb 4, 2009 when he announced at a news conference that a new Port Mann bridge would finally become a reality. After years of lobbying for a new Fraser River crossing, local politicians and citizens heralded the $820 million investment as a godsend.
Similar to the Golden Ears Bridge, the new Port Mann would be constructed as part of an innovative public-private partnership. Campbell was very clear that Metro Vancouver taxpayers would not be on the hook to finance this costly project.
“The toll for the bridge will be exactly as we said it would be. Three dollars on opening day,” said Campbell. “That’s in the contract and that’s what we’ll be having.”
However, as we near opening day for the bridge, an ever-increasing number of politicians from places like Surrey and Langley is voicing concerns. It seems they finally crunched the numbers and discovered that a new toll will end up costing some of their residents $1500 per year.
What I find most interesting about the growing chorus of politicians upset about the $3 toll is the fact it took them so long to pipe up. If they didn’t like the funding model for the new bridge, why didn’t they squawk to the media back in 2009?
Instead of hearing about residents simply paying the modest toll and reaping the benefits of lower fuel costs, we can expect in coming months to hear complaints about the unfairness of our tolling policy.
In fact, the lobbying has already begun to lower the Port Mann toll by implementing a new charge to cross the Lions Gate and Ironworkers Memorial bridges. It’s a proposal that will likely fall on deaf ears on both sides of the legislature in Victoria.
Residents south of the Fraser would garner more sympathy if the provincial government had suddenly sprung a new toll on them from out of the blue. However, in this case, we know this is not how the toll unfolded.
You can’t accuse Gordon Campbell of not being open and transparent on this one – unlike his stance on HST. But that won’t stop people from trying.
- post by Daniel. Read his column each Thursday in 24 Hours.
Print 
PDF
Yellow hard hat?
My bad. I must have seen another photo of him with a yellow hard hat…but clearly he wore a white one. Thanks for setting the record straight!
Let’s have a general conversation on how much of our infrastructure should be paid for through fees – tolls on bridges and highways, congestion pricing, bike lanes, use of water, etc. We need to find the right balance between investment in public goods, taxation, user pay fees, social issues. There is a lot of room to disagree on this, but a shared framework for conversations would help.
I look forward to cycling over the bridge and doing some nice long rides on flat land! And wouldn’t it be great to have a few destination restaurants in farm country.
“In fact, the lobbying has already begun to lower the Port Mann toll by implementing a new charge to cross the Lions Gate and Ironworkers Memorial bridges. It’s a proposal that will likely fall on deaf ears on both sides of the legislature in Victoria.”
I am in favour of all bridges being tolled. Make it $1 and gov will raise more money than a single toll at $3
I do agree though, what took them so long to realize the funding model?
*full disclaimer, my daily commute does not include a bridge crossing
The Lions Gate *was* tolled… when it was new! Let’s not look past the fact that the Port Mann toll is buying a new bridge! It’s not as if they’re being asked to pay tolls on the old, crumbling span.
So, fine, north shore bridge users won’t be tolled, must be an outrage, right? BUT they also aren’t getting a new bridge! So why would they be tolled? Similarly, when the Ironworkers needs to be replaced or expanded (possible in mid-term future given the highway expansion), I would fully expect that a toll be put in place.
It also bears mentioning that we all make choices in life. Some choose to live more centrally, and in a smaller dwelling (say, a townhome or 2 bedroom condo, or myriad rental options). For some, the single detached dwelling with a yard is essential and they are willing to trade-off ease of commute to achieve this.
To simply say that one has to live in Surrey or Langley because that is where the cheaper houses are is a bit of 1950s thinking. What a statement like that does do is remove personal responsibility and choice from the equation. You *chose* to value house and yard size over location, no one forced this. There are reasonable options for all income levels on both sides of the Fraser.
In general I agree, but I am coming around to the idea that the tolls be distributed and the burden shared. This may generate more cash, help to route traffic more effectively and be in general a more equitable approach.
Old bridges are really expensive to maintain. A smaller toll on them would be fair to cover the cost of repairs and on-going maintenance.