Get Moving BC

Port Mann Bridge project is underway

2009-02-04T21:31:00.000-08:00

Today was a truly historic day in transportation history here in British Columbia. It was one of those red letter days that people will talk about for years to come.

Shortly before 2:00 pm this afternoon, a beaming Premier Gordon Campbell operated the controls of a large hydraulic ram as he drove the first of many foundation pilings for the new 10-lane Port Mann Bridge. Construction is now officially underway and 2013 can’t come soon enough for anyone who’s had to contend with the existing bridge and the traffic bottleneck it’s become.

Perhaps the best news of all was the announcement that, instead of just twinning the existing 45-year old bridge, the P3 project partner is going to build a completely new 10-lane bridge. And the new bridge is going to be built strong enough to add rapid transit in the future without costly upgrades to the bridge structure.

You can read more about the announcement on the government’s website and you can also read our Get Moving BC press release that was sent out late this afternoon.

Kudos to Translink

2009-01-26T10:21:00.000-08:00

Luck has smiled on the Lower Mainland, and in conjunction with a round-the-clock repair effort that Translink CEO Thomas Prendergast has described as “aggressive,” the Pattullo Bridge was open again for business and traffic first thing this morning.

The Pattullo Bridge closure has been an eye-opening experience for everyone in the Lower Mainland. The chaos caused by the bridge closure has been well-documented in the media as well as in the daily lives of hundreds of thousands of Lower Mainland residents. There isn't anyone who hasn't been affected in some way by this crisis.

Get Moving BC spokesperson, Jordan Bateman, was on Global News last night stressing the importance of staying on top of our transportation infrastructure needs so that we aren't always scrambling to catch up because of generational gaps between projects. As always, great job Jordan!

Face-to-Face with "Total Gridlock"

2009-01-23T10:13:00.000-08:00

Translink officials are to be applauded for the swift action they’ve taken to resolve the Pattullo Bridge crisis. The bridge is expected to be back in action two weeks from now, which is a relief to the hundreds of thousands of Lower Mainland residents who’ve been adversely impacted by the closure.

The world renowned North Vancouver bridge engineering firm of Buckland and Taylor is credited with having located a suitable replacement section at the Surespan Construction works yard in Langley. The replacement section was previously used during the Canada Line construction to bridge over an excavated station location.

Fortunately for everyone, Translink was already planning to replace the 60 foot wooden section of the Pattullo Bridge that was destroyed last Sunday and Buckland and Taylor were well underway with the design work and planning.

The economic cost of the Pattullo Bridge closure is going to be massive. According to the BC Trucking Association, the added cost to the trucking industry alone could be as much $10 million per day (costs that get passed on to you and I as consumers).

On the positive side, the loss of the Pattullo Bridge this past week has been a timely wakeup call. The closure has provided everyone with a taste of what's in store for the Lower Mainland if we don't get on with building the kind of transportation infrastructure we need to serve the region's growing population; and that includes increasing bridge lane capacity over the Fraser River with important projects like the Port Mann Bridge twinning and the replacement of the Pattullo Bridge.

The havoc caused by the closure of the Pattullo Bridge this past week has dramatically, albeit painfully, underscored the fact that we don't have an adequate amount of bridge infrastructure crossing the Fraser River, something fairly obvious that we at Get Moving BC have been diligently pointing out for quite some time. Let’s just be grateful that this disruptive face-to-face encounter with “Total Gridlock” is only temporary and not a permanent reality - yet.

Total Gridlock: Day One

2009-01-19T21:39:00.000-08:00

Traffic in the Lower Mainland was predictably snarled today as people did what they could to cope without the Pattullo Bridge.

The evening newscasts have been filled with horror stories recounting four hour commutes and hopelessly gridlocked traffic.

The sudden loss of the Pattullo’s four traffic lanes has dramatically, although painfully, underscored the fact that we don’t have an adequate amount of bridge infrastructure crossing the Fraser River. In fact, we have no margin for error whatsoever.

Most, if not all, of those interviewed on the newscasts tonight echoed what we’ve been saying for quite some time: Namely, that we don’t have nearly enough bridge infrastructure crossing the Fraser River for the population we currently have let alone for future population growth or for emergency situations like the one we’re facing right now.

We can’t begin to imagine what the final cost to the Lower Mainland and BC economies will be over the next month or so due to the loss of this vital, albeit decrepit, link in Greater Vancouver’s fragile transportation system. 80,000 vehicles a day depend on the Pattullo Bridge, and we’ve been brought face-to-face with “Total Gridlock” for the sake of an 18-metre section of the bridge that’s been burnt to a crisp.

By the time this Pattullo Bridge crisis is over in a month or so – and we can only hope – our collective nerves in the Lower Mainland are going to be seriously frayed.

Pattullo Bridge Fire Raises Traffic Fears

2009-01-18T12:54:00.000-08:00

News of this morning's fire at the south end of the Pattullo Bridge has spread quickly.

According to Translink, the Pattullo Bridge will be out of commission for the rest of today and tomorrow.

There’s also a distinct possibility the bridge could be out of commission even longer, possibly months.

One of our Get Moving BC supporters travelled to the scene late this morning and spoke to the fire crew on site. They confirmed that the bridge was not driveable and that it would probably not be driveable until the damage is repaired.

The damaged section of the bridge is the 30 to 40 foot section at the south end of the bridge where the bridge joins the King George Highway. Unlike the rest of the Bridge, this 30 to 40 foot section is constructed from wooden beams instead of steel and concrete. According the fire crew, this section of the bridge was scheduled to be replaced in the summer.

It’s definitely frightening to contemplate the traffic chaos that will result from any long-term closure of the Pattullo Bridge, and we certainly hope it doesn’t come to that. As our Get Moving BC Bridge Infrastructure Study demonstrated last September, the Lower Mainland already has an inadequate supply of bridge infrastructure crossing the Fraser River. Losing four traffic lanes will only make things worse and it raises the spectre of “Total Gridlock” for our regional transportation system.

As our Bridge Study also showed, the Vancouver area would have to triple and quadruple the bridge infrastructure crossing the Fraser River just to match what other cities in Western Canada already have on a per capita basis.

Road-Building Myths Busted

2008-11-24T11:14:00.000-08:00

A recent column by the Vancouver Province’s Driving editor, Keith Morgan (Upside of adding new asphalt to landscape, Province, Friday, November 14, 2008), has drawn our attention to an interesting report by the Royal Automobile Club Foundation.

The report, entitled Misconceptions And Exaggerations About Road Building In Great Britain busts many of the commons myths and misconceptions about road-building frequently put forward by the “wishful thinkers” opposed to twinning the Port Mann Bridge and improving Highway 1.

You can read and download an executive summary of the RAC Foundation’s myth-busting report here: Misconceptions And Exaggerations About Road Building In Great Britain - Executive Summary.

Bridging the Infrastructure Gap

2008-09-20T12:54:00.000-07:00

Our thanks to Jordan Bateman for taking the lead as our spokesperson with the media on our bridge study earlier this week (Bridging the Infrastructure Gap). We’re thrilled with the coverage and the public reception our study has received. We’ve had lots of positive comments from supporters and the general public, and people are genuinely appreciative of our efforts to provide an organised voice for the majority of people in the Lower Mainland who support improving our roads, bridges and transit systems as part of a balanced transportation system.

You can read Jordan’s comments about the whirlwind of activity on Monday and Tuesday on his Langley Politics dotcom website.

Of course, there are those who do not agree with the majority viewpoint we represent which favours adding to our bridge supply in the Lower Mainland, and they’ve been blogging furiously, and angrily, about our new study all week.

Blogger Eric Doherty from the Livable blog, for example, basically just calls us names in his blog posting about our study and then denounces us for having opinions that differ from his. He even proposes a wild theory that our ad hoc group pulled together a detailed 47 page study on bridge infrastructure in less than a day just to counter Surrey Mayor Diane Watts? Does Mr. Doherty really believe this is true or even possible? Our bridge study took a year’s worth of volunteer time and effort to collect the data and compile the report!

Mr. Doherty also seems kind of angry that there are people out there who don’t agree with him. But at least he admits that he hasn’t looked closely at our study yet. We certainly hope he does take a look and that he can then engage in constructive dialogue about the complete range of transportation infrastructure needed in a balanced transportation system for the Lower Mainland.

Blogger Nathan Pachal’s South Fraser blog thankfully refrains from immature name-calling. In fact, Mr. Pachal makes a sincere effort to grapple with the material contained in our study. However, we feel he hasn’t fully grasped some of what the study is saying about bridge capacity across the Fraser River. Put simply: a water barrier is a barrier to transportation regardless of how wide the river it spans. To cross a water barrier, whether on foot, on bike, in a car or truck, or even in a bus or riding in a SkyTrain car requires some sort of bridge infrastructure. Water barriers are an impediment to transportation whether they are 300 feet across or 3 kilometres across, and other cities, like Edmonton with its deep ravine that must be spanned, face their own construction challenges.

Yes, we have a big river to cross and it’s expensive to do that, but we also have a very large and growing population. We need more bridges, plain and simple and we need to be planning ahead for the future. We need to make these investments. If the $1.5 billion we currently waste on traffic congestion costs in the Lower Mainland were spent instead on new transportation infrastructure we’d be in great shape in no time. Most people get this. Unfortunately, a small minority don’t and they tend to hold stubbornly to what can only be called “the magic bus” plan which they suggest will miraculously solve all of the Lower Mainland’s transportation woes.

Blogger Kim Richter’s Langley Free Press blog posting about our study reverts back to name-calling and denouncing people for the opinions they hold, just as in Mr. Doherty’s blog posting on the Livable blog. As with Mr. Doherty, Ms. Richter doesn’t seem to like it when people hold an opinion that differs from her own. And she certainly seems to have particular hate on for Jordan (Bateman)...

We certainly hope Ms. Richter will take the time to read and consider our study: it took us a year to collect all the data and compile the report and we are confident that our study presents valuable, accurate and valid insights into the question of the transportation infrastructure needs of the Lower Mainland. Most people get what we are saying in our study. Many of them experience it on a daily basis. The number of bridge lanes available to a given population to cross a significant water barrier is an entirely reasonable measure to put forward as a point of discussion and comparison. Just ask anyone who has to contend with the lack of bridge lanes crossing the Fraser River on a regular basis.

Finally, we have blogger Stephen Rees who also responds to our study with name-calling and what appears to be palpable anger. We get the sense that the only view that can possibly be correct for Mr. Rees is his own. No others need apply. Unfortunately, denouncing people for who they are (or what they are imagined to be), or denouncing them for what they believe, is neither tolerant nor productive.

At Get Moving BC we believe it’s an exciting time in the transportation history of the Lower Mainland. We finally have some new bridge infrastructure being added across the Fraser River for the first time in a quarter century, and a new bridge across the Pitt River as well. We have a new SkyTrain line that will soon be in operation from Richmond to Vancouver. And the $14 billion Transit Plan announced earlier this year will add considerably to our region’s rapid transit and transit infrastructure, and will bring the expanding SkyTrain network to the Tri-Cities and further east into Surrey and Langley. We support these projects and we know the majority of people in the Lower Mainland do as well.

Over the past year, our ad hoc group has been building public support for its efforts. We have a couple dozen active volunteers who help out with our efforts, over and above the six people who volunteered to sit on Get Moving BC’s advisory committee. We also have more than 400 active supporters from across the political spectrum who’ve taken the time to contact us and offer their encouragement and their comments on the transportation issues we face in the Lower Mainland. We hope to increase on all of these over the coming year.

As our Bridging the Infrastructure Gap study released this past week shows, we are way behind where we should be with our transportation infrastructure in the Lower Mainland and we need to catch up. Then we need to stay caught up by always looking ahead and planning for our transportation needs in a growing region. As Jordan Bateman said, we can’t allow ourselves to fall so far behind by leaving generational gaps between the improvements we make to our transportation infrastructure. But name calling and ad hominem denunciations will not get us there and we hope the critics will take some time to consider our viewpoint just as we do theirs. Focusing on the facts not the attacks will be far more productive for all concerned.

Overall, we think Tuesday’s editorial in the Province sums things up best:

Let's trump the bridge gap
The Province
Published: Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Just because the transportation group, Get Moving B.C., has ties to the B.C. Liberals doesn't mean we should ignore the results of its new study which warns that "total gridlock" throughout the Lower Mainland looms unless we build more bridges across the Fraser River.
Anyone who commutes daily over the Fraser knows full well that the eight regional bridges now in use are woefully inadequate to handle the traffic volumes.
And as the study -- Bridging the Infrastructure Gap -- points out, even with the addition of the new Golden Ears Bridge in 2009 along with replacement of the aging Pattullo Bridge and twinning the Port Mann Bridge within the decade, the Lower Mainland will still be behind the eight-ball in terms of too few bridges.
In fact, the study concludes that in addition to the current bridge expansion projects, a further three new eight-lane bridges need to the built.
Most of that additional lane capacity needs to be constructed across the Fraser River because another one million people will take up residence south of the Fraser over the next few decades.
The study tells us that compared to four other western Canadian cities -- Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, and Saskatoon -- Metro Vancouver is extremely poorly served by its bridges.
For example, while Metro Vancouver has more than twice Calgary's population, it's served by fewer that half the number of bridge lanes (31 to Calgary's 75).
Even Edmonton, with half as many people as Metro Vancouver, has 60 per cent more bridges. And on a per capita basis, one Vancouver bridge lane serves 74,194 people compared with Edmonton (26,190), Winnipeg (18,000), Calgary (14,667) and Saskatoon (10,909).
But environmentalists slam this report on the basis of its political connections to the B.C. Liberals and on the premise that if more commuters abandoned their cars in favour of public transit, bridge expansions wouldn't be necessary.
Although well-intentioned, this is wishful thinking and it ignores the reality that this entire region will continue to grow rapidly for many years.
This means there will be more trucks delivering our groceries and other products to super markets and shopping centres and they'll need additional bridge capacity. And yes, additional commuter buses will also need more bridge lanes to cross local waters.
The point is even with expanded use of public transit, there will be more cars so we'll still need more bridges.
It's time our politicians recognized this need and started an intelligent and practical
planning process.

© The Vancouver Province 2008

Light at the end of the Port Mann tunnel

2008-08-20T14:23:00.000-07:00

Excitement built quickly on Monday when news began circulating that Peter Kiewit Sons Co. had been awarded the contract to build the new Port Mann Bridge. CKNW was first to report the news and they even contacted us here at Get Moving BC to see if we had heard anything concrete (note: pun intended).

A press release issued by the Ministry of Transportation yesterday has now provided some details about the news. And although no contract has been signed with Kiewit as of yet, there is definitely light at the end of the tunnel for the vast majority of Lower Mainland residents who are patiently waiting for the bridge project to get underway.

As CKNW, the Vancouver Sun and the Vancouver Province reported today, Connect BC Development Group (a development group which includes Peter Kiewit Sons Co.) has indeed been selected “to enter into negotiations with the provincial government for the Port Mann/Highway 1 project.” If contract negotiations are successful, a deal would likely be signed in the fall and construction would begin.

For supporters of the Port Mann Bridge project (and they far outnumber the detractors) this week’s news means it’s definitely time to put a few bottles of champagne on ice even if popping the cork this week would be premature. Good news is definitely on the way and it’s only a matter of time now before the rubber hits the road.

"Thumbs up" for Get Moving BC

2008-08-13T09:32:00.001-07:00

Get Moving BC has just received the nod of approval from Business in Vancouver. Here's what they had to say about us:

"Thumbs up: to the passionate and persistent folks at Get Moving BC, whose dedication to improving roads, bridges and transit systems in the Greater Vancouver region is admirable."

The Business in Vancouver article goes on to say that Get Moving BC offers "solid suggestions" for moving people around the crowded Vancouver region and tops things off by disagreeing with critics who've tried to dismiss Get Moving BC as an "irrational group."

Our thanks to the people at Business in Vancouver. We appreciate this positive recognition very much.

The sky (bridge) is falling

2008-07-29T17:49:00.000-07:00

Sources in New Westminster say big chunks of concrete have recently been falling from the SkyTrain SkyBridge that crosses the Fraser River between New Westminster and Surrey. Consultants have reportedly been out to assess the problem which appears to be fairly serious.

There’s a possibility that scaffolding could be put in place to protect people and vehicles passing underneath the SkyBridge.

There is even talk, apparently, of bringing in a barge with a crane to prop the bridge up if it is indeed failing for some reason.

We’ll keep you posted as we hear more.

Crane Collapse renews call

2008-07-23T09:21:00.000-07:00

Get Moving BC
For Immediate Release
July 22, 2008

GET MOVING BC RENEWS CALL TO ACCELERATE PORT MANN TWINNING

A twinned Port Mann Bridge would allow traffic to continue to flow during accidents and other shutdowns by providing a greater number of clear lanes for traffic to get through

Vancouver, B.C. - This morning's collapse of a construction crane on Highway 1 has lead Get Moving BC to renew its call for the Province to accelerate the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge.

Get Moving BC spokesperson Michael McBratney says the incident, which brought traffic to a grinding halt for the better part of a day, demonstrates the pressing need to move forward as quickly as possible with the Port Mann / Highway 1 project.

"Incidents like this one are a timely reminder of how easily the Port Mann / Highway 1 system can be brought to a complete standstill," McBratney says. "Until the Port Mann is twinned, and Highway 1 expanded, we're going to continue to be vulnerable to situations like this and the horrendous traffic chaos they create."

McBratney points to the fact that a twinned Port Mann Bridge would allow traffic to continue to flow during accidents and other shutdowns by providing a greater number of clear lanes for traffic to get through. At present, there are few options for traffic when the Port Mann Bridge is blocked other than the equally problematic, and often deadly, Pattullo Bridge.

"The Port Mann Bridge is forty-four years old and we're paying a heavy price economically and environmentally because the bridge no longer meets the needs it has to serve," McBratney says. "Today's incident really hits that home - it really is time to move the project forward."

- 30 -

Get Moving BC is dedicated to holding governments accountable for a balanced transportation system and was formed to provide a voice for the majority of Greater Vancouver residents who support improving our roads, bridges and transit systems.

For more information please contact Get Moving BC at 604-678-5567 or by email at info@getmovingbc.com

Online References and Attachments:
· http://www.getmovingbc.com/
· NRG Research Group: Survey of Burnaby Residents Regarding Attitudes Toward Development of the Port Mann Bridge and Highway 1 September 2007 http://www.getmovingbc.com/press_release/NRG_Report_September_2007.pdf
· Opinion-Editorial (679 words): "MAYOR CORRIGAN'S STANCE OUT OF SYNCH: HE DIDN'T EVEN ASK THE QUESTION." By Michael McBratney, Get Moving BC Advisory Board Member http://www.getmovingbc.com/resources/MICHAEL%20MCBRATNEY%20OPED.html

Dwarfed by Portland

2008-07-14T12:12:00.000-07:00

A Get Moving BC supporter recently travelled to Portland, Oregon and volunteered to email us his observations and impressions of Portland’s bridges and highways. With his kind permission, we’re able to share some of what he wrote:

-----Original Message-----
Sent: July-02-08 9:31 PM
Subject: Getting around in Portland

.... Here is the most interesting observation I have from today: While I was waiting to pick up my wife and kids who were shopping downtown, I decided to try out some of Portland’s bridges and highways. In a single hour, roughly between 3:30 and 4:30 (rush hour in almost any place you can care to imagine), I was able to cross over six or seven of Portland’s bridges (some of them in both directions) and along several lengths of freeway and roads. I was awestruck by some of their bridges and I was taking photos all the way. The bridge and highway infrastructure around Portland is awe-inspiring and more massive in scale than anything we have in the Lower Mainland. We are midgets compared to Portland. Getting around in the Portland area is a breeze compared to the Lower Mainland....

Yesterday (Tuesday), when we headed to downtown Portland from where we are staying in Beaverton (a suburb a lot like the urban/suburban part of Surrey but not as dense), we left from the Chevron station near our motel at 12:05 and proceeded north along Cedar Hills Blvd and then east along Hwy 26 toward Portland. We travelled most of the way along Hwy 26 at about 80 KmPH. At 12:17 (i.e., 12 minutes after we left the Chevron) we reached Downtown Portland at the point where Interstate 405 passes through. At 12:19 (i.e., 2 minutes later) we were in the heart of Downtown Portland at 6th Avenue and Clay Street.... Wow!.... Where in the Lower Mainland can you go in 14 minutes these days?

We were, of course, travelling in the middle of the day and there were 3 lanes minimum available to us all the way along Hwy 26 (and often 4 lanes plus on and off ramp lanes). But then again, when we came into Portland the day before around 4:00 in the afternoon along the same route it was just as fast.

Today (Wednesday) we took a slightly different route into downtown Portland. We headed out from our motel at 12:10 and headed east along route 8 (Canyon Blvd) to the junction with Hwy 217. The mileage reading on the odometer said 61092 Km. It was a little slower going along this Canyon Blvd route (mostly due to my unfamiliarity with it and the one wrong turn I made) but by 12:16 we were at the on ramp to Hwy 217 north (the Sunset Hwy) heading toward Hwy 26. The odometer read 61095 km. After a couple of minutes of driving on Hwy 217 we shifted over to Hwy 26 and we were at Pioneer Square in the centre of downtown Portland by 12:30 (i.e., 20 minutes after we left our motel). It probably would have taken less time if I hadn’t missed the first turn off and needed to double back. The odometer read 61105 which means our travel distance was 13 Km.

On our way back to the motel in Beaverton we left downtown Portland at 4:10 pm. When we left from Pioneer Square the odometer read 61147 km. Again, because of my unfamiliarity with the roads it took a bit of hunting and pecking to find our way to the on ramp to the freeway, but by 4:21 we were on Hwy 405 and we quickly reached the Hwy 26 off ramp. The odometer read 61150 km and we were heading west and there was no gridlock in sight. At 4:28 we exited Hwy 26 and turned onto Cedar Hills Blvd and headed south. The odometer read 61159 km. And by 4:37 we were back at the motel. The odometer read 61163 km. A distance of 13 km in 17 minutes during rush hour (note: Cedar Hills was a bit slower than it is for most of the day and we also had to stop and wait for a minute when the light rail crossed Cedar Hills in each direction).

Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

-----Original Message-----
Sent: July-03-08 10:22 PM
Subject: Photos

... I took a whack of digital photos of the bridges and freeways of Portland while walking along the Willamette River today. I even walked up onto some of the bridges and took photos.

As I said yesterday, the bridge and highway infrastructure around Portland is awe-inspiring and more massive in scale than anything we have in the Lower Mainland. We really are midgets compared to Portland. In fact, I’d have to say we are the Verne Troyer of the transportation world compared to Portland (the actor who plays Mini-Me in Austin Powers).

I can also say that the Willamette River is no insubstantial river and many of Portland’s bridges would fit nicely across the Fraser River. In fact most of them extend for several blocks past the river banks on both sides of the river.

But the thing that really impressed me about Portland’s freeways and highways, and even some of their bridges, is the very generous paved shoulders on both sides of the road and the fact that there are usually a minimum of three lanes in each direction with more lanes, sometimes up to five, at the on and off ramps. And the on and off ramps tend to be long and smooth and extend for a considerable distance (often with two full lanes available). Now that’s infrastructure.

And here’s an interesting story for you: While I was trying to take a picture of the massive eight-lane Marquam Bridge on I-5, which is located just north of the Ross Island Bridge and just south of the Hawthorne Bridge, I had to “trespass” onto the property of a waterproofing company across from the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry. I had to go really far back into their property to get the photo I wanted and one of their people came out to check on what I was doing. When I told him what I was doing he was fine with it and he then told me that their company secretary had just come back from Vancouver, B.C. and was telling everyone how crazy the traffic congestion is in Vancouver. She couldn't believe how hard it was to get around compared to Portland.

I wish I could have spent more time exploring Portland’s bridges and highways, but I did get some excellent photos. Looking up and down the [Willamette] river is really amazing because you see bridge after bridge after bridge (note my envy). I would also have liked to ride on their light rail system a bit more than I was able to, but I’ll save that for a future visit. Their light rail cars seem very comfortable and have big windows even if they are a lot slower than SkyTrain.

Another thing that I should make note of is the fact that leaving Portland during rush hour and travelling north toward the Interstate Bridge on I-5 was a bit of a chore today. The road was quite congested. But then today is the start of their July 4th weekend down here and the Interstate Bridge is the bride they are about to replace with a new ten to twelve lane bridge. I can certainly see why they want to double the capacity of this bridge. This particular stretch of highway was also the only stretch of highway I saw in the Portland area that physically resembled the highways we have here in the Lower Mainland (old and narrow). But once we got across the bridge the highways on the Washington State side were first class with plenty of traffic lanes and great on and off ramps....

Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

-----Original Message-----
Sent: July-05-08 1:08 PM
Subject: Observation of the day

Observation of the day: three to four lanes of highway in each direction is definitely the norm here in Washington state, and in some places they have five full lanes plus on and off ramp lanes.... So why do we have such puny highways in the Lower Mainland? The extra lanes provide a lot of flexibility and they keep the through traffic separated from traffic that is entering or soon to exit the highway. It just makes sense from a safety perspective as well as from the perspective of keeping vehicles moving instead of having vehicles crawling along in gridlock spewing greenhouse gases and burning gas unnecessarily.

-----Original Message-----
Sent: July-06-08 11:09 PM
Subject: tight curves

The one thing I really noticed about our roads and bridges last night when we arrived back in the Lower Mainland was how tight the road curves are. This was really noticeable after having spent a week driving around on highways and bridges in Washington and Oregon where they have nice gradual curves that don’t slow traffic, and long on and off ramp lanes. What is wrong with us? Let’s give our heads a good shake and build some proper roads and bridges.

Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

We want to thank our Get Moving BC volunteer for allowing us to post excerpts from his emails to us. We couldn’t agree more with what he has to say. Let’s give our heads a shake and start building some proper roads and bridges.

Burnaby wants a Port Mann twin

2008-05-08T12:41:00.000-07:00

Get Moving BC Advisory Board member, Mike McBratney, has a great letter in today's Burnaby NewsLeader. Many thanks, Mike, for exposing - yet again - the methodological flaws in the City of Burnaby's anti-Gateway survey.

Burnaby wants a Port Mann twin

May 07, 2008

Re: Who says residents want Port Mann twinned (Letters, NewsLeader, April 24)

Russ Leach questions where the polls are to suggest the majority of Burnaby residents are in favour of twinning the Port Mann Bridge and improving Highway 1. The “independent poll results” which demonstrate that 72 percent of Burnaby residents support these projects are part of a scientific poll conducted by NRG Research Group, a leading North American public opinion and market research company.

Our group, Get Moving BC, commissioned this independent poll last September in response to Mayor Corrigan’s claim that 87 percent of the people in Burnaby opposed the Gateway project. NRG Research interviewed 300 randomly selected Burnaby residents. NRG asked straightforward questions and discovered that 72 percent of the people in Burnaby do indeed support the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge and the widening Highway 1, with only 21 percent opposed and eight percent who did not have an opinion. These independent poll results are available in their entirety on our group’s website at http://www.getmoving.bc.com/ (see our resources page).

The question that really needs to be asked, then, is how the City of Burnaby and Mayor Corrigan can claim “strong (87%) opposition to the Port Mann/Highway 1 project” in Burnaby when a professionally-conducted scientific poll shows that only 21 percent oppose the project.

The mayor’s 87 per cent claim is based on an unscientific, non-random, online questionnaire posted on the city’s website and selectively circulated at a shopping mall and a Burnaby library. The questionnaire consisted of 11 “statements” about the Gateway project worded in such a way that it would be nearly impossible to disagree with them.

The City of Burnaby received only 154 responses to their questionnaire; and only 65 of these responses actually came from residents of Burnaby. Sixty-three responses came from Vancouver residents, with five each coming from Surrey and New Westminster, four from North Vancouver, three from Coquitlam, two from Port Moody and one each from seven other municipalities.

Burnaby staff then assigned a “score” to each questionnaire based on a “cumulative response” to their questions. Based upon this questionable measure, they decided that 87 per cent of Burnaby’s residents were opposed to the Gateway project.

And as absurd as it seems, the city’s anti-Gateway questionnaire never even asked whether the respondents supported or opposed the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge and the widening of Highway 1.

The people of Burnaby are in favour of the Port Mann Bridge/Highway 1 project, and this fact has been demonstrated independently, scientifically and fairly.

Michael McBratney
For Get Moving BC
Burnaby

Interurban, and Langley's Streetcar Possibilities

2008-04-30T21:52:00.000-07:00

Last summer, I released my draft paper on bringing light rail to Langley, with a focus on the 200th Street corridor. In the months since that release, I have continued to dialogue with experts and to do my own research on the various forms of light rail.

Today, I presented my thoughts on the possibilities to VALTAC, a transportation advocacy group that is especially interested in the old Interurban line that runs through the south Fraser region. It was a good meeting, and I was able to show how I think the 200th line (which would serve local Langley transportation patterns) could tie into the Interurban (which, as you can tell by the name, is a regional service).

Here is the slideshow of my presentation:

| View | Upload your own

Slide 22 is the dream--the "Jordan has all the money in the world for streetcar lines, and Langley is pretty much built out (i.e., it's 2040) option."

Burnaby Resident Support Twinning

2008-04-25T08:29:00.000-07:00

The Port Mann should be twinned, writes Burnaby resident Gary Bizzo in this letter to the Langley Times:

Editor: Regarding the misguided opposition to twinning the Port Mann Bridge and improving Highway 1, the Port Mann Bridge was built more than 40 years ago when there were less than a million people living in the Lower Mainland. Most of those people were living on the north side of the Fraser River. 

Today, there are more than 2.3 million people living in the Lower Mainland and almost a million them are living south of the Fraser River.  

Before too long, there will probably be more people living south of the Fraser than there are people living north of it.

Yet according to some misguided individuals, we don’t need any more roads or bridges to serve the Lower Mainland’s growing population beyond the four-lane Port Mann Bridge that was built more than 40 years ago. 

Correction: five lane bridge — the NDP repainted the lines on the Port Mann Bridge back in the 1990s, turning four lanes into five.

Fortunately, those opposed to improving the Lower Mainland’s transportation systems are in the minority.  The majority of people in the Lower Mainland fully support the investments being made to twin the Port Mann Bridge and widen Highway 1. 

Just look at the angry public pasting Carole James took when she decided to announce she was opposed to twinning the Port Mann Bridge.

The Port Mann Bridge is going to be twinned and Highway 1 is going to be improved, and most of us can’t wait to see that happen (along with improvements to the transit system) because it’s going to improve life for a lot of people in the Lower Mainland.

Gary Bizzo,
Burnaby

So What Happened At Langley Township Council Today?

2008-04-21T18:42:00.000-07:00

Township engineering staff, UMA consultants, and TransLink representatives presented the Township's Community Rail study. Here is the powerpoint from that presentation:

| View | Upload your own

As I previously wrote, I filed a notice of motion on this issue:

Whereas transit service in the Township of Langley is the poorest, per capita, in the Lower Mainland, and

Whereas the vast majority of trips south of the Fraser stays south of the Fraser, and

Whereas a desire for light rail, streetcars, and community rail has been expressed throughout the south Fraser region, including the Township of Langley,

Therefore be it resolved that the Township support the concept of community rail and pursue the following measures:

1. A study of the possible routes for community rail within the South Fraser region,

2. An EMME2 and micro-simulation ridership study, as recommended in the UMA community rail report, for community rail improvements in the South Fraser and Fraser Valley regions,

3. The Township continue to protect key right-of-ways for possible community rail or other transit use, including, but not limited to, the Interurban rail line, 200th Street, 208th Street, Fraser Highway, 88th Avenue, and 96th Avenue.

4. Send a letter of support to the Fraser Valley Heritage Rail Society reinforcing the Township's support for their efforts, and

5. Send an update to the TransLink Board, Ministry of Transportation, and the Mayors and Councils of the Cities of Surrey, Langley, Abbotsford, and Chilliwack regarding this motion, and offering these agencies an opportunity to participate in the routing and ridership studies.

The rail motion comes back at our May 5 meeting.

Langley Township Talking Rail Today

2008-04-21T11:31:00.001-07:00

Today's scheduled presentation from our UMA emgineering consultants on the high level review of Langley Township Community Rail report is getting a lot of buzz around the blogsophere already. (UMA will present at 4 or 4:30 today, at the Council meeting in the Fraser River Presentation Theatre).

Having read the UMA report carefully, I have come to some conclusions and have put together a notice of motion for our May 5 meeting.

I think the most perplexing part of this issue is the resistance of the transportation establishment to really look at the growing desire for light rail in the South Fraser. In TransLink's own trip diary report, we read the following statistics:

- The vast majority of trips in Langley and Surrey stay within their municipal boundaries (1.1 million internal trips in Surrey every day, 284,200 in Langley--that's almost 1.4 million total trips).
- A grand total of 78,000 trips are made from Surrey and Langley into Vancouver. To get there, they have all of the local transit options--every bus route in this region is designed to feed SkyTrain, which is designed to get our residents into Vancouver.
- But almost twice that number, 140,000 trips, are made between Surrey and Langley every day. And we have the lowest per-capita transit service to help them get there.
- On top of that 140,000, another 37,000 trips leave Langley and Surrey to go outside the GVRD, presumably Abbotsford and Chilliwack.

More than double the trips are happening amongst the Interurban communities that happen from Langley and Surrey into Vancouver--let alone the trips that stay within our own municipal borders. These are the people that light rail and streetcars can serve, and in a way that will attract riders who would never set foot on a bus.

Community rail, based on the British model and proposed by UMA in this report, makes sense to me. It's a good place to start--and I think it would so successful that we would soon be upgrading both its frequency and its reach. Whether it ends up on the old Interurban line, or on a new alignment through Langley and Surrey, I don't know. Local Interurban enthusiasts, please don't panic over that statement. I'm merely saying that we should look at options for the Fraser Hwy. and Hwy. 10 corridors, as well. While the Interurban line may be the cheapest, it may not be the best value for dollar, and we need to keep all of the options open at this point. If the Interurban is as viable as many of us think it is, it will stand up to that type of comparative scrutiny.

There are some exciting things happening around the world with community rail and streetcars. I read on the weekend that Charlotte, North Carolina, has designed their system so light rail vehicles and streetcars can use each other's tracks. This is the kind of innovative thinking we need south of the Fraser.

I do know that we need to get rolling. We need a plan, the research and documentation to support it, and the will to move it forward.

I prefer light rail to SkyTrain in every way. It is less intrusive, and has a better community feel. It is also far more saleable politically to our communities. SkyTrain frightens many people, with its industrial, concrete, overhead guideways, and the perception that crime springs up around every station. Light rail is also much, much cheaper. And when light rail is one-quarter the cost of SkyTrain, that means you can go four times further.

None of the obstacles in this report seem insurmountable. The key now is to get TransLink's attention with some well-researched business plans, ridership studies, and development scenarios.

This leads me to some practical questions. Clearly, we need to approach Surrey (whose mayor, Dianne Watts, is already on record as supporting light rail) and see how we can work together to get this done.

I read on page 24 of the UMA report that "EMME2 and micro-simulation modeling be completed for these rail service scenarios in combination with future employment and potential scenarios for various combinations of bus, bus rapid transit, and rail improvements in the South of Fraser area and outside the region to the Fraser Valley." I also know that from recent changes at TransLink, that the transportation authority will look carefully at options that can be funded through development of stations and surrounding areas. I think Surrey and Langley are better positioned than any other community in the Lower Mainland to provide that type of financial upside for TransLink.

So my question to the UMA folks today is simple: how do we get this rolling? What are the next steps? UMA's answers, some of which are in their report, will refine a notice of motion I plan to put on the agenda for our May 5 afternoon meeting (a draft version of which is below):

Whereas transit service in the Township of Langley is the poorest, per capita, in the Lower Mainland, and

Whereas the vast majority of trips south of the Fraser stays south of the Fraser, and

Whereas a desire for light rail, streetcars, and community rail has been expressed throughout the entire south Fraser region, including the Council of the Township of Langley,

Therefore be it resolved that the Township support the concept of community rail and pursue the following measures:

1. A study of the possible routes for community rail within the South of Fraser region,

2. An EMME2 and micro-simulation study, as recommended in the UMA community rail report, for community rail improvements in the south of the Fraser and Fraser Valley regions,

3. The Township continue to protect key right-of-ways for possible community rail or other transit use, including, but not limited to, the Interurban rail line, 200th Street, 208th Street, Fraser Highway, 88th Avenue, and 96th Avenue.

4. Send a letter of support to the Fraser Valley Heritage Rail Society reinforcing the Township's support for their efforts, and

5. Send an update to the TransLink Board, Ministry of Transportation, and the Mayors and Councils of the Cities of Surrey, Langley, Abbotsford, and Chilliwack regarding this motion, and offering these agencies an opportunity to participate in the routing and ridership studies.

Evergreen route announcement is welcome news

2008-04-18T16:47:00.000-07:00

Get Moving BC
For Immediate Release
April 18, 2008

EVERGREEN ROUTE ANNOUNCEMENT IS WELCOME NEWS: GET MOVING BC

Vancouver, B.C. – Today’s announcement that the Evergreen Line will follow the northwest route comes as no surprise, but it’s still welcome news to people living in the Lower Mainland’s fast-growing northeast sector according to Get Moving BC Spokesperson Sheri Wiens.

“We’ve been eagerly expecting this northwest route announcement for more than a month,” said Wiens. “It’s great to know the Evergreen Line project is now officially on track and moving forward.”

Wiens says building the Evergreen Line is as important to a balanced transportation system for the Lower Mainland as twinning the Port Mann Bridge and improving Highway #1. “Commuters need convenient choices,” she said. “I’m pleased the Evergreen Line is soon going to be one of those choices.”

Wiens says she is also pleased about the new Rapid Bus Network that was announced in January as part of the province’s $14 billion transit plan.

“The Rapid Bus Network is going to have a huge positive impact on the reach and effectiveness of the Evergreen Line and the region’s other rapid transit lines,” said Wiens. “The Rapid Bus Network puts POCO, Pitt Meadows, Maple Ridge and Mission into the rapid transit picture, and we really needed to be part of that picture—it’s a very good start.”

Wiens says she is also relieved that fears the Evergreen Line would be pushed aside in favour of a westward expansion of the Millennium Line have finally been put to rest.

“Last October, when Sam Sullivan said completing the Millennium Line was Vancouver’s top transit infrastructure priority and that he would get it done, we called on the Provincial Government to fully fund the Evergreen Line and get the project underway,” said Wiens. “Our biggest fear at that time was that the Millennium Line would get built before the Evergreen Line, which would leave POCO, Pitt Meadows, Maple Ridge and Mission out of the rapid transit picture for years to come, and we felt that was just plain unacceptable.”

Wiens was quick to add that Get Moving BC is not opposed to extending the Millennium Line, and is pleased that the Millennium Line project will move forward too, but not at the expense of the Evergreen Line.

“The Evergreen Line was on hold for way too long now,” said Wiens. “I’m glad it’s finally becoming a reality—it really can’t wait any longer.”

The TransLink board approved plans for the Evergreen Line in principle in October 2004. When completed, the Evergreen Line will serve the people in one of the fastest growing areas of the Lower Mainland—the northeast Sector.

– 30 –

Get Moving BC is dedicated to holding governments accountable for a balanced transportation system and was formed to provide a voice for the majority of Greater Vancouver residents who support improving our roads, bridges and transit systems.

For more information please contact Get Moving BC at 604-678-5567 or by email at info@getmovingbc.com

Online References and Attachments:
· http://www.getmovingbc.com/
· The Evergreen Line: http://www.translink.bc.ca/EvergreenLine/default.asp

Use P3 to bring streetcars back to Vancouver

2008-04-05T11:53:00.000-07:00

CKNW recently ran an online poll that asked whether Vancouver city council should consider using a P3 to bring streetcars back to Vancouver? 64.48% said “Yes” and 35.51% said “No.” This is a very interesting result.

As we recently saw with the City of Burnaby’s online Gateway project poll, online polls can produce highly questionable results. But in the case of CKNW’s poll the question asked was very direct and very straightforward and their website receives more than enough hits everyday to provide some random statistical substance to the poll results.

What strikes us as being noteworthy is the fact that two-thirds of the CKNW poll respondents were in favour of the P3 approach to bringing back streetcars; a fairly overwhelming endorsement of the P3 approach when you consider the vast amount of time and money that different vested interest groups have spent spreading anti-P3 propaganda in B.C. over the past few years.

Lately, P3 success stories have been piling up in B.C. faster than gridlocked cars on the Port Mann Bridge: The new Abbotsford Hospital, the new Kicking Horse Canyon Bridge, the new Canada Line, and the Gordon and Leslie Diamond Health Care Centre at VGH are just a few examples of notable P3 successes we can point to here in B.C., with the Port Mann Bridge and the Evergreen Line soon to join the list.

There is an old saying that you can’t argue with success. Unfortunately the great success of P3’s in B.C. hasn’t stopped the anti-P3 vested interests from trying. But if I was an anti-P3 propagandist I would probably be thinking about making a career change sometime soon.

You heard it here first folks!

2008-03-31T11:31:00.000-07:00

The Vancouver Sun ran a great editorial on Saturday endorsing Hong Kong’s real estate development model as a way to expand the Lower Mainland’s transit system without reaching into the pockets of taxpayers.

We’re particularly pleased about the Sun’s editorial because we’ve been pitching the Hong Kong approach for nearly two months. In fact, the Hong Kong model has been central to our last three press releases. Remember folks, you heard it from Get Moving BC first.

TransLink has to start milking its cash cows to pay for expanded service
Vancouver Sun - Published: Saturday, March 29, 2008
The notion that transit lines don't have to be bottomless pits for public dollars is a radical departure from past experience in Metro Vancouver.
In Hong Kong, however, the public transit system is not only run at a profit, new lines and stations are seen as cash cows, not just added costs.
Hong Kong's MTR Corporation started service in 1979. After aggressive expansion, it has a network of 211 kilometres of rail with 150 stations.
That expansion was financed by real estate development, which MTR regards as a primary business function.
MTR began as a government enterprise and was transformed into a publicly traded corporation. In 2007, it had a net profit of more than $1.1 billion Canadian.
We can't duplicate these results in the Lower Mainland. Hong Kong is a much more densely populated city with a more authoritarian government, but we can profit from the principle that makes the MTR so lucrative.
That principle is that while transit is expensive, it also creates value. Developers have long known this. They harvest that value by using proximity to transit as a selling point.
Now the recently reformed Metro Vancouver Transportation Authority, armed with new enabling legislation from the province, is finally getting serious about capturing some of that value to help pay for new transit.
It's a welcome move. Dale Parker, the chair of the new TransLink board, hopes to raise up to $1.5 billion through a real estate arm now under development.
The key to that success will involve persuading municipalities to go along with bidding for the routing of new transit lines with their willingness to assign added density around stations.
These are early days, but one obstacle that will have to be overcome is the possibility of speculators jumping in and tying up property around potential station sites.
Private developers can play an important role in creating both value and exciting urban neighbourhoods around transit stations. But this scheme will only work if municipalities make it clear from the start that much of the initial value for added density is going to be used to pay for construction of the transit line.
So if a developer, existing owner or speculator wants to build larger buildings with more units than allowed by the existing zoning, much of the windfall value of changing the zoning will go to TransLink, not into their pockets.
Such exchanges already occur when developers seek higher density for buildings. In return, municipalities extract benefits, such as parks, social housing, community centres, green space or land for schools. Those benefits typically eat up a significant portion of the value of the increased density.
In this case, municipalities will have to be persuaded to share with TransLink benefits they have until now taken as their own.
In return, TransLink may be able to deliver new transit lines more quickly.
So, for example, if the city of Vancouver wants the Broadway line extension to jump the queue, council will have to look at ways to create valuable density along the route and offer it up to pay a larger share of the construction cost.
No doubt there will be considerable difficulties in following this route, including some yet to be imagined. But we know where the traditional methods of financing take us -- straight to higher taxes, slow progress and continuing congestion.
This looks like a better route.

© The Vancouver Sun 2008

Mayor's stance out of touch

2008-03-27T11:45:00.000-07:00

Get Moving BC Advisory Board member, Mike McBratney, had a great letter published in Wednesday's Burnaby Now debunking the claim that 87% of Burnaby's residents oppose the Gateway project. As a professional poll conducted for Get Moving BC by NRG Research demonstrated last fall, 72 per cent of the people in Burnaby support the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge and the widening of Highway 1, with only 21 per cent opposed and eight per cent who did not have an opinion. Nice work, Mike!

Mayor's stance out of touch

Burnaby Now (Published: Wednesday, March 26, 2008)

Dear Editor:

How does the mayor's antagonistic stance on a new $14-billion transit plan serve the people of Burnaby? The majority of Burnaby residents are actually in favour of twinning the Port Mann Bridge and widening Highway 1, and I suspect they also support the new transit plan.

In attempting to justify his stance against the Gateway project, Mayor Derek Corrigan has gone to some fairly extreme lengths, including having city staff draft a report - using very questionable methodology - that states that 87 per cent of Burnaby's citizens are opposed to the Gateway project. Last September, we at Get Moving B.C. decided to challenge that claim.

We commissioned NRG Research Group - a leading North American public opinion and market research company - to scientifically gauge the level of support among Burnaby residents for twinning the Port Mann Bridge and widening Highway 1. NRG Research interviewed 300 randomly selected Burnaby residents and discovered that 72 per cent of the people in Burnaby support the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge and the widening of Highway 1, with only 21 per cent opposed and eight per cent who did not have an opinion. The full report is at http://www.getmovingbc.com/.

How can the City of Burnaby and the mayor claim there is strong opposition to the Port Mann/Highway 1 project in Burnaby? As it turns out, the city's claim is based on an unscientific, non-random, online questionnaire posted on the city's website and circulated at a shopping mall and a Burnaby library.

The city's questionnaire consisted of 11 'statements' about the Gateway project, worded in such a way that it would be nearly impossible to disagree.

In total, the City of Burnaby received 154 responses to their questionnaire, with only 65 of these responses actually coming from residents of Burnaby. Sixty-three responses came from Vancouver residents, with others coming from Surrey, New Westminster, North Vancouver, Coquitlam, Port Moody and seven other municipalities.

Burnaby staff then assigned a 'score' to each questionnaire, based upon a cumulative response to the 11 'survey' questions. Based upon this questionable measure, they decided that 87 per cent of Burnaby's residents were opposed to the Gateway project and were therefore supportive of the anti-Gateway position taken by Corrigan and his majority on city council.

The city's questionnaire never even asked whether the respondents supported or opposed the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge and the widening of Highway 1.

When it comes to speaking out against the project, Corrigan clearly does not speak for the people of Burnaby. The evidence does not support the stance he has taken. And considering the positive reception the public and the media have given to the new transit plan, the same can very likely be said for the mayor's negative assessment of the $14-billion transit plan.

Get Moving B.C. supports a balanced transportation system for the Lower Mainland, one that maintains the prosperity of our region and its livability. We believe the majority of Burnaby's citizens also support a balanced transportation system and, in our opinion, Corrigan is clearly way out of sync with the people of Burnaby on this issue.

Michael McBratney, Burnaby, Get Moving B.C.

© Burnaby Now 2008

Peter Ladner's Transportation Tax

2008-03-24T13:23:00.000-07:00

Last week, Vancouver City Councillor and mayoralty candidate Peter Ladner was on The Christy Clark Show to float his idea for a congestion tax to pay for TransLink's $18-million budget shortfall. It was an interesting conversation (available in CKNW's Tuesday, March 18, 2008 audio vault during the noon hour). Here are a few excerpts, and my thoughts on them...

Clark: "When you are talking about those proposals, are you imagining that they would apply to the downtown core of Vancouver, you might see a toll like that on the Burrard or Cambie Street Bridge?"

Ladner: "These cannot be tolls that simply apply in Surrey or Langley or Maple Ridge or somewhere else than in Vancouver. They have to apply everywhere. The principle has to be that we want to raise money."

True enough. If you want to bring these measures in, they shouldn't be limited to just one bridge (i.e., The Port Mann) but they should also ding Vancouver drivers. In fact, Vancouver drivers, in my view, should pay far more for those congestion taxes than South Fraser drivers, as the Vancouver folks have access to all of the rapid transit in the region. Their choice to drive is mind-boggling when you consider they have SkyTrain and oodles of rapid buses.

Clark: "But Vancouver has a disproportionate number of businesses that depend on regional migration. If you make it more expensive to get into Vancouver from Coquitlam, people will shop in Coquitlam Centre rather than coming down here to shop at Pacific Centre."

Ladner: "Well that's what they should be doing. We don’t want…people shouldn't be travelling right across the region to go shopping. There should be a good, as there is, a good shopping mall in Coquitlam Centre and that's where people should shop... as it happens, they can come in on SkyTrain."

Let's walk down that path a little bit. If I were a Vancouver merchant, I'd be concerned about my wannabe mayor suggesting I limit my trading area. As a side note, I'd like to welcome shoppers from anywhere in the region to come spend money in Langley any time. Consider our door wide open to your business!

Whether we like it or not, there are certain regional amenities that only exist downtown. Tens of thousands of regional residents travel to GM Place and BC Place every year for Vancouver Canuck games, BC Lion games, trade shows, concerts, and other events. The PNE is in Vancouver, along with the Pacific Coliseum. There is also toursit attractions like Science World, Granville Island, and, yes, the shops on Robson Street. These are regional amenities located downtown, and I don't think Lower Mainland residents should be punished for having them located there.

As for the SkyTrain comment, it's almost laughable. SkyTrain barely comes into the south Fraser, and its four stops are in the worst part of Surrey (admittedly, Surrey is working hard on improving the area). And SkyTrain doesn't go near the PNE.

Clark: "How much would a toll be?"

Ladner: "Christy, I haven’t done this work. I have no idea. My main message is that we have got to start thinking about measures. It may not be a toll. It could be an increase in fuel taxes. Fuel taxes are effectively a toll on the amount of driving you do. They are an effective tool because they also measure the bigger your engine the more you pollute the more you pay. So you have an option with a fuel tax. You can have a smaller engine and you can share the ride and so on... that’s one alternative."

He is backing away from the congestion tax idea here--even though that's what got the play in the media. To Ladner's credit, he also talked about the need for the feds and province to return more gas tax revenue to transportation projects, and his proposal was by no means the kind of pure congestion tax used in places like London. Nonetheless, you can bet the Sam Sullivan people will be pouncing all over the "I haven't done this work, I have no idea," quote.

Ladner: "I think that the other point this gentleman raises is that we have paid for these things [roads and bridges] or we don't want to spend more money. Okay, well then stay there in the line up in the Port Mann bridge and spend two hours getting to work every day. Or wait in the line up for the buses and watch the buses pass you by. We’re hearing that we need more transportation infrastructure and somehow or another other we have to pay for it."

A Vancouver politician finally admits that there is congestion at the Port Mann!

Transportation First Step of Livability Accord Process

2008-03-24T11:02:00.001-07:00

Last year, the Councils of Surrey, Abbotsford, Coquitlam, and Langley Township signed the Livability Accord, an agreement to work together to convince regional, provincial and federal agencies to better fund infrastructure in these four High Growth Communities (HGCs). At the time, I said this might be the most important thing we do this term (a sentiment I still carry).

Surrey's staff has been spearheading the implementation of the Livability Accord, and the four communities have jointly hired Urban Systems Ltd. to help develop the necessary strategies. Last week, the four councils received an update on the progress. I thought you might be interested in it:

The consultant has nearly completed the information gathering stage of the work and has held a number of meetings/workshops with key staff from the HGCs in commencing the development of the Accord strategies. Staff and the consultant have decided that it would be advantageous to develop one of the Accord strategies as a model to use in expediting the development of the other strategies. The target of this first strategy is "Public Transit and Transportation Infrastucture" (which includes as a necessary subset land use considerations). It is expected that a draft of this first strategy will be completed by the end of March at which time a further report will be forwarded to Council for consideration, followed closely by drafts of the remaining strategies during April.

It is expected that each of the HGC City Councils will consider a draft of the full set of strategies in April and will authorize staff and the consultant to proceed immediately thereafter with public review of the information through open houses and stakeholder meetings, including meetings with officials from other orders of government. Presentations will also be made to the Metro Vancouver Mayors Committee and to the Excecutive Committee of the FVRD. With this public and other stakeholder input in hand, the draft strategies will be finalized and a further report will be provided to each HGC City Council for consideration. the report will include a summary of the public and stakeholder input and will recommend final draft Accord strategies for Council approval. These final draft strategies will be forwarded to Council for consideration and approval no later than September.

I'm pleased to see transportation go first. This is the most pressing need among these four communities, as we share thousands of people who travel regularly among the four municipalities.

TransLink's Property Purchase Process

2008-03-21T10:09:00.001-07:00

Ken Hardie over at TransLink sent me an email outlining a little bit more about the TransLink property issue that I blogged here.

We would not find ourselves in the position of being able to purchase properties along a corridor before there was fairly broad public awareness of the possibilities that a rapid transit line would be constructed. The reason being is that, as before, TransLink is legally bound to support the region's growth management strategy -- currently the Livable Region Plan -- that is adopted by all the municipalities.

The process of developing that growth management strategy involves a review of potential rapid transit corridors. For example, the Millennium, Evergreen and Canada Line corridors have all been identified in the LRSP for over ten years. All of the bus rapid transit corridors in the province's plan are on the map as a result of transit planning that has involved a great deal of public consultation. TransLink would not be able to quietly assemble land and then suddenly announce to the world that it was going to build a rapid transit line through or by those properties.

What we have done in the past, though, is purchase properties that we know we're going to need for a project as they come up for sale -- we did this in a few locations along the Evergreen Line. The difference now is that we can purchase additional property over and above what we need for the project itself, in the interests of generating some of the benefits from higher property values back to the public, which has paid for the line in the first place.

Fraser Valley Ponders Gas Taxes

2008-03-20T14:29:00.000-07:00

The Fraser Valley Regional District is considering adopting the TransLink model of increasing gas taxes to fund transit. The group is also still pondering joining TransLink.