BC Trucking Association president
Paul Landry continues his well-reasoned support of the Gateway project with
this column in Wednesday's Surrey Leader:
In W.P. Kinsella’s “Field of Dreams”, the main character hears a voice telling him “If you build it, he will come.” In the GVRD, there are people who think you can reverse that logic and apply it to roads – “If you don’t build it, they’ll stay away.” Unfortunately, if you follow their logic you’ll not only end up without a Field of Dreams, you’ll end up with a seriously impaired region when it comes to sustainability.
The problem with the “just don’t build it” argument is that it pre-supposes that vehicles are purchased and driven because highway capacity increases – which may not be true. According to the Conference Board of Canada, the most important determinant of travel demand is population density and average wealth, not highway capacity. Our roads are clogged because of tremendous population and economic growth, because land use planning has encouraged sprawl and because investments in roads and public transit have not kept up with changes in travel patterns.
Most commuters on an average day know that our transportation infrastructure is in serious trouble.
There’s been no increase in major regional road capacity since 1986, even though the population in the area has grown by 77 per cent in that time. Commuting times have gone up by 30 per cent in the last 10 years alone. And the economic cost of the congestion is staggering – about $1.5 billion each year.
The environmental cost is also staggering. It is estimated that “stop and go” road speeds experienced during congestion cause more than two and a half times the CO2 generation as free-flowing traffic conditions do.
The outlook for the future makes the picture even grimmer. The GVRD population is expected to increase by another 50 per cent in the next 15 years.
Don’t get me wrong, building roads is not a silver bullet. Neither is public transit alone because urban sprawl makes it an unrealistic option for many citizens.
The answer is a multi-pronged approach that deals with the whole problem, both in the short term and for the future. To start with, we need to become more disciplined in our urban planning and promote population density increases along current and future road and public transit corridors. Where possible, we should divert people onto mass transit by making it cost-efficient and convenient for them to use. Public transit’s market share has to increase to better than 20 per cent from the current 11 per cent. And, we need to provide facilities for, and promote the use of, park and ride and ride sharing programs.
We also need to look at a broad range of taxation and regulatory policies that promote greener transportation choices. Making better use of the current road capacity is crucial. Businesses must be encouraged to receive shipments during non-peak hours, preferably overnight, to make use of road capacity that currently goes unused.
Even with all these measures, we still need to expand our road network.
Increased road capacity will help reduce congestion, which will reduce cost and harmful emissions now, contributing to the “livability” of the region. In the future, our road network will continue to play a vital role in moving goods throughout our region. The bulk of goods movements in the GVRD is local and will not be easily transferred to alternative modes such as rail or short-sea shipping without its own set of problems.
What is required now is strong visionary leadership to take us forward. If we undertake all of these measures, not just some, then we will start to address our short term problems as well as build for the future to ensure that all modes of transport have the least environmental impact possible.
3 Comments:
“...there are people who think you can reverse that logic and apply it to roads – “If you don’t build it, they’ll stay away.” Unfortunately, if you follow their logic you’ll not only end up without a Field of Dreams,...”
Of course this is just one man's opinion and he offers NO evidence to support that position.
In fact, the evidence suggest otherwise.
Extensive research (http://www.contextsensitivesolutions.org/content/reading/disappearing-traffic/) has found that traffic can be reduced if you “don't build it” AND give people alternatives.
Here is part of the summary of the report:
“This paper reports on two phases of research, resulting in the examination of over 70 case studies of roadspace reallocation from eleven countries, and the collation of opinions from over 200 transport professionals worldwide. ... significant reductions in overall traffic levels can occur, with people making a far wider range of behavioural responses than has traditionally been assumed.”
Why no comment on the fact GHG numbers are down in BC, Rob? I guess it doesn't fit your spin!
The 'if you build it' analogy if very appropriate.
If we build more highways they will fill up with more vehicles. Toronto expanded their highways a few years ago and now they have 10 lanes of congestion instead of 4. what we need is more transit.
Kevin Falcon said that he won't put in more transit until there is capacity ...this is backwards thinking. If I have to take transit because my vehicle is in the shop for repairs, and it is convenient and inexpensive, then I will stay with it...but because transit is inconvenient and costs keep going up, I can hardly wait to get back in my car.
Post a Comment
<< Home