It’s not clear yet whether this motion from the Greater Vancouver Regional District on elements of the Gateway Project – widening Highway 1 and twinning the Port Mann Bridge – constitutes a turning point in the debate, but it was certainly a big boost of support for those opposing the project as currently planned. (For the motion, see below.)
So far as I know, there has been no response from Kevin Falcon, the Minister of Transportation. No doubt we’ll get more of the same: decision made, we’re laying asphalt. Nor have we heard from the Premier – which is increasingly mysterious.
The GVRD’s main point is that the expansion of general-purpose traffic into the Valley undermines the direction of regional plan – of which Gordon Campbell was an author. It looks like his legacy will not be a more sustainable region, but just the opposite: a web of freeways from Squamish to Hope to South Surrey that will lock a generation into wasteful transportation modes and urban development at exactly the wrong moment in history. The fact that he has nothing of consequence to say about climate change is another indication of, perhaps, denial, more likely a fear of the risk involved in changing direction. Sad.
Here’s the motion that will go into the minutes to be approved at a subsequent board meeting. The last paragraph, which “strongly opposes the freeway expansion project and twinning of the Port Mann Bridge” was the part added by Vancouver Councillor Suzanne Anton. That’s the part that counts.
a) That the GVRD Board advise the Minister of Transportation:
1. That the Board wishes to work cooperatively with the Minister to ensure that provincial and regional interests are aligned in the further planning and implementation of the provincial Gateway Program;
2. That the Gateway Program as currently proposed, in particular the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge and widening of Highway 1 west of the Bridge, provides for increases in general purpose traffic capacity without the necessary corollary measures which would ensure the Program contributes positively to the orderly and sustainable development of Greater Vancouver;
3. That the following measures should be approved or adopted by the province prior to any final decision on the construction of the new Port Mann Bridge and the widening of Highway 1 west of the Bridge, in order for these projects to support the orderly and sustainable development of Greater Vancouver:
i. A regional goods movement strategy which includes priority measures for the movement of goods along Highway 1 and the new Port Mann Bridge;
ii. A comprehensive transportation demand management strategy for Greater Vancouver which includes lane allocations and priority access for transit and high occupancy vehicles on Gateway Program facilities, together with a region-wide road pricing strategy which includes tolls on the twinned Port Mann Bridge and other measures that will ensure the Pattullo Bridge is not the “free alternative” to the twinned Port Mann Bridge;
iii. A provincial commitment to adequately cost share the complementary transit improvements required to maintain an effectively balanced transportation system, including the Evergreen Line and the infrastructure for a bus rapid transit system along Highway 1;
iv. A provincial commitment to adequately cost-share the necessary upgrades to critical links to Gateway Program facilities which fall under GVTA jurisdiction; the New Westminster portion of the North Fraser Perimeter Road, and, in particular, the Pattullo Bridge;
v. A provincial commitment to provide adequate mitigation and compensation for the impacts of the Port Mann Bridge and Highway 1 projects on agricultural lands, regional parks and ecologically sensitive areas;
vi. A provincial commitment to cooperate with and support the GVRD Board in developing and effectively implementing an appropriate regional growth strategy which ensures the Gateway Program has minimal negative impacts on the desired pattern of land use in Greater Vancouver;
b) That the GVRD Board urge the Minister of Transportation to convene a meeting with representatives of the Board and other key stakeholders in order to initiate a cooperative and consensus-based process to resolve the aforementioned issues, including consideration of a Gateway Program Steering Group and discussion of the traffic implications for the Fraser Valley.
c) That the GVRD Board advise the Minister that the Gateway program proposals to expand general purpose traffic capacity through the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge and widening of Highway 1 west of the bridge are inconsistent with the Livable Region Strategic Plan, and therefore the GVRD Board strongly opposes the freeway expansion project and twinning of the Port Mann Bridge and urges the Minister to accept the foregoing measures as constructive proposals to attempt to accommodate the Minister’s program within the spirit of the Livable Region Strategic Plan (LRSP) and the Sustainable Region Initiative (SRI) and align regional and provincial perspectives and interests.
The Falcon has spoken: he responded that it doesn’t matter what the GVRD says, the highway expansion/PM2 is “a done deal”.
What jaw-dropping arrogance! The highway expansion is so far from a “done deal” it’s not even funny — it has zero commitment of federal funding, none of the necessary environmental assessments etc. have been done, and even Campbell isn’t waving the flag for it…because it’s “slated” (in Falcon’s dream) to start construction in 2008, the BC Election is in 2009, and with anxiety and awareness around climate change escalating this could easily become a hot potato.
The project is way less of a “done deal” than the Strathcona Highway was in the ’60’s — they even got as far as building the Georgia Viaduct before public opposition reared up and that highway got scotched.
I believe we can stop this thing, or at the very least, have a couple of great parties and public demos in the attempt. Falcon’s megalomaniac dream doesn’t mesh with the reality that every thinking person recognizes: more roads simply result in more cars.
this side-step of issues for moving freight and people are as far reaching as our northern prince rupert container ports. get some trains into the picture. move mass, en mass!
to whom does one submit ideas towards a workable plan for transportation improvement? like, some left-turn lanes on knight street would greatly help the 57 ave and 49 ave intersections as well as twinning the oak street and knight street bridges. albeit then what do we do with the volume of traffic plodding through vancouver side streets? if planning to expand our highways, we need to double our bridges for two-way passage, widen secondary feeder routes and divert main volumes for migratory bypass of local traffic zones.
the gvrd gateway project alone is projected to drive up greenhouse gases past present levels. what good are more plugged highways? how about some decent rapid transit corridors to move masses from center to center, akin to the british tube system in london?
get rail moving containers out of shipping ports and into out of the way secondary loading locations for local and continental distribution.
i think mr. campbell and his cronies haven’t been spending enough time in the lower mainland gridlock traffic behind an idling train of cars and semi-trucks, sucking noxious fumes, to gain a clear perspective on this. i guess our authorities intend to continue to export the resulting pollution into the fraser valley? the southern bne train route dawdles through some of the fastest growing housing development in the lower mainland. where’s the logic in that?
as far as i can see, our authorities have only sited bits and pieces of problem areas for upgrade, under separate public and private jurisdictions. there is not a collective authority trying to form a co-operative consensus approach to unifying the effort.
change is needed or further regression and waste of public resources is imminent, isn’t it?
incentives rather than penalties can create real change.
http://www.gatewayprogram.bc.ca/
i find the whole thing tiresome, as in i need some new tires…
i agree, that megalomania is a great description of government and corporate behaviour around this. we’re in this together, or else, we’re not…
on the other hand, just forget the whole thing. let’s all go to the bahamas.