Letter-writer D. Schellenberg questions the effect on 152 Street traffic by adding hundreds of more potential drivers to the area. (Aaron Hinks photo)

Letter-writer D. Schellenberg questions the effect on 152 Street traffic by adding hundreds of more potential drivers to the area. (Aaron Hinks photo)

LETTERS: Surrey needs to ease our gridlock

Editor: Re: City urged to help commuters reroute, June 21.

Editor:

Re: City urged to help commuters reroute, June 21.

Just got back from Switzerland. Used their amazing network of bus and train.

No stress commuting miles, instead lots of smiles. No traffic gridlock, and lots of room for emergency services to deploy.

Only a matter of time before some poor resident here will pass because there was no way through 32 or 40 avenues for the EMTs to reach. So Sad.

Ed Pereira, Surrey

• • •

Whenever I get the Peace Arch News, I always like sitting down and reading the letters to the editor. To me, it’s the voice of the people, one of the few we have as citizens.

I am hoping that Surrey council reads them.

I read one news article June 21 talking about rerouting traffic because of yet another big development on 152 Street north of 32 Avenue – 269 townhomes, 23 family homes. I drive down 24 Avenue and see how many hundreds more townhomes are coming in, and just recently drove down 64 Avenue by King George Boulevard – hundreds more.

We do need infrastructure to deal with all this, but who should pay?

I would like to see a forensic accounting of the deal worked out with developers and the council members. Has there ever been one provided?

How much of their application fees goes towards the adding of 269 or 600 more potential cars to an area already impossible to navigate from 3 to 6 p.m.

I recently had a weekday meeting in Guildford for 5 p.m. I had to leave South Surrey at 3:30 to make sure I could get there on time. The intersection of 152 Street and Highway 10 is a mess, 64th and 152nd a mess… Need I continue?

I barely made it. On any given Sunday, it might take 30 minutes.

By putting a large portion of the infrastructure cost on developers, we just might see growth at a reasonable rate rather than a rate that I hope will get this current council voted out next election.

Are you reading, Surrey council?

D. Schellenberg, Surrey