Editor: I am writing in response to an editorial in the Jan. 21 Times entitled “Reckless truck drivers.”
Distasteful and insensitive is all I can say, in regards to the author using the tragic death in a horrific crash on 16 Avenue to further questionable efforts to open Zero Avenue up to high speed traffic. Suggesting that the traffic controls on Zero Avenue were somehow responsible for the tragedy and calling for the removal of the speed “humps” on the Langley section of Zero Avenue is a real headshaker.
In my estimation and experience, those humps are not doing a good enough job of moving traffic over to 16 Avenue, a TransLink road that was designated for expansion to four lanes over 30 years ago.
Those speed humps on Zero Avenue were partially paid for by ICBC to reduce speed and accidents. Why would anyone suggest going back to the carnage that existed before their installation?
The author, instead of pushing TransLink, the City of Surrey, the Township of Langley and the City of Abbotsford to expand the capacity of 16 Avenue in order to deal with heavy regional traffic, continues to push for moving that traffic southward to Zero Avenue.
An editorial is an opinion, but in this case, it raises more questions than providing reasoned arguments. What’s the story here? Is it defending 16 Avenue property interests, and whose?
Why the push for Zero Avenue, a rural road which is designated a Township cycling route, and at one time part of a horse trail network?
That road should really only be serving local traffic, and not become a high speed expressway. Is this suggestion to alleviate the frustration of self-important commuters from Abbotsford and Chilliwack, at the expense of residents and other users of Zero Avenue? I’m just asking.
J. Evanochko,
Langley
