A sunken plane and a controversial safety report are the latest aspects of the ongoing battle over a $22 million Coal Harbour float-plane terminal.
Last month, construction giant Ledcor Group published an alleged independent safety review of operations at the new Vancouver Harbour Flight Centre (VHFC).
The report, which relied on marine engineering firm the Glosten Associates and aviation expert Gord Stevens, determined that concerns about safety at the concrete dock were unfounded.
The report’s findings were published 18 days after a Harbour Air plane partially sunk while moored at the east end of the dock.
Greg McDougall, CEO of the Harbour Air Group and chief opponent of the VHFC, said the November 5 incident was proof the dock is unsafe and improperly built.
Paul McElligott, president and COO of Ledcor Transportation and Resources, which has been trying to drum up tenants for the new dock, disagreed.
“Concerns raised regarding the ability of VHFC to provide safe, efficient and effective services for float-plane operators at its facility in Coal Harbour are absolutely false,” McElligott said. “It was important to VHFC to cut through the rhetoric of our detractors … and present a factual and independent assessment of the facility that can help bring this impasse to a close.”
The battle over the VHFC, critics argue, is all about money. (See “Float-plane dogfight drags on in standoff over Coal Harbour terminal fees, safety” – issue 1144; September 20-26.) On the one side, McDougall, whose companies handle more than 90% of the 300,000 passengers who fly in and out of Coal Harbour every year, believes the new facility was poorly designed and too expensive.
Specifically, he’s pointed out that customers will have to pay added fees if he moves his planes into the VHFC from his temporary wooden dock nearby, and that will ultimately strip away the Harbour Air Group’s competitive advantage.
On the other side, Ledcor, which helped build the dock, claims it has been designed to meet the needs of seaplane operators and fits the Vancouver Convention Centre’s “contemporary esthetic.”
But McDougall also raised concerns that the dock was built too high to safely accommodate planes, noting that the wake from a passing ship can smash a plane’s tail fin against the dock.
The situation, McDougall alleged, has already damaged one of his competitor’s planes (Tofino Air) and is especially evident at the east end of the dock, which is exposed to the largest waves.
The report from aviation expert Stevens concludes that the dock’s length, width and height appeared “very conducive” to safety and general usability. Yet Ledcor’s so-called independent study had communication officials in the Ministry of Jobs in a tizzy last week.
The ministry is responsible for BC Pavilion Corp., which is the operator of the Vancouver Convention Centre and VHFC, and is busy working on its own independent engineering study regarding safety at VHFC.
Communications officials were concerned the public might mistake Ledcor’s report for the provincial study, which is not yet complete.
That report, which ministry officials originally said would be ready two months ago, was expected to land on Jobs Minister Pat Bell’s desk last week. A ministry spokesman said Bell would need time to review the report before he could comment on it publicly.
Meantime, McDougall said a third study, also allegedly independent, is underway to determine why his plane sunk.
Although he and Ledcor acknowledged a leak in one of the plane’s floats likely caused the incident, they don’t agree on which float leaked.
McDougall argued the portside float sprung a hole after rubbing against the concrete dock; Ledcor claimed it likely had to do with a leaking starboard float and the plane being docked at full load capacity for more than 36 hours.
McDougall said the plane had to be loaded to capacity for the province’s engineering study at VHFC and shot down questions that the plane was intentionally made to sink.
“Absolutely categorically not; it is not in our DNA [to do that],” said McDougall. “We’re not going to put a $1.6 million plane out there to prove any kind of point. That’s absolutely ridiculous.” •
