A few days left “to share your thoughts on transportation priorities and issues that matter most to you and your community through a survey … until December 12, 2014 at 4 pm.”
.
Download Discussion Guide from here (click lower right box).
- Information about the provincial and regional transportation network to help you participate in the process.
.
It helps to understand that this is not a plan; it’s a menu for Motordom:
.
The main assumption is this:
To keep our economy growing and to keep our communities strong, we must continue to enhance connectivity, safety and mobility across our transportation networks while keeping in mind the following opportunities and challenges.
In other words, grow in the same way as we have in the past (which is what most of the discussion guide is devoted to describing.) Even when there’s a hint of a changing perspective, there really isn’t:
Travel choices are changing. In urban areas, many more people are choosing to walk, cycle or take public transit; infrastructure development needs to factor in these choices. In addition, more people are commuting long distances – for example, to work in the resource sectors – and need to depend on a reliable transportation network.
There is no examination of alternatives, no relationship to land use or existing regional plans, no serious consideration of climate change or fiscal risk related to carbon infrastructure..
This is essentially a laundry list for Motordom, particularly the for goods movement and the resource industries.
.
Here is the most revealing statement – the usual cover for Motordom, justifying massive expansion of the vehicle-dominant transportation system in the name of safety and reliability, as near congestion-free as possible:
1. MOVING PEOPLE AND GOODS SAFELY AND RELIABLY
Safety is a priority for all modes of travel, and safe movement of people and goods is dependent on access to a reliable transportation network. Reliability means having a network available in good condition with sufficient services and choices available to meet the transport and trade needs of the province, and with minimal delays and uncertainties that can lengthen travel times.
Strategies to support this priority include: …
1.3 Continuing to expand and improve highway capacity, bridges and side roads by:
• Adding rural highway passing lanes (e.g., Highway 3 and Highway 5) and completing intersection upgrades
• Delivering major projects such as the George Massey tunnel replacement, the Cariboo Connector and exploring options for a future second crossing of Okanagan Lake in Kelowna
• Expanding key corridors by four- and six-laning and completing significant improvements such as new and upgraded interchanges
• Improving highway rest areas
.
So there it is: billions of dollars of projects over the next decade for the next phase of Motordom. Massive bridges, new roads, expanded highways – and some rest areas.
You will not vote on any of this. If you live in Metro Vancouver, you will only get to vote on whether transit is funded. All the rest will likely go ahead.
To repeat: you will pay for Motordom. But you will not get to vote on it.
BC on the move . . .
. . . I thinq NOT!
You should move there Roger since you love it so much. Hangout with Kirchner before she disgracefully leaves office. Have your retirement savings disappear through government corruption, massive inflation and squandering of tax payer money. You would love it! Go on laddie, put your money where your mouth is!
Now aren’t you just typical Vancouver Ron S: resorting to petty insults rather than addressing the subject with maturity!
I put my money were my mouth is sixty-four years ago . . .
Sorry, but it you are constantly referring to Buenos Aires and I am just wondering why you still live here and not there?
Dont feed the trolls i always say.
On the topic.
Its sad that the NDP would probably have no objection to this report. Any NDP enthusiasts on the list who beg to differ?
I wonder what the lone Green MLA has to say?
This is a province wide plan for a massive area, larger than the three states to our south combined – all the way to the Mexican border. The future growth will not just be where transit is practical, in the city of Vancouver and Victoria and perhaps Surrey, South Surrey and Langley. The growth will also be in the boonies and that means roads. It won’t be practical for transit out into the valley to Abbotsford for a few decades yet. So roads and airlines it is.
Incidentally, the push by Vancouver City for priority of the Broadway transit line simply means more sprawl in Surrey and Langley. A transit plan for Surrey would lead to density close to any planned stations. Less traffic.
“The growth will also be in the boonies”
In significant numbers?
“It won’t be practical for transit out into the valley to Abbotsford for a few decades yet.”
Why can’t we invest in transit in and to/from Abbotsford now? There are towns in Europe with population less than 10,000 that are well served by transit. Why can’t we have that in Canada?
“There is no examination of alternatives . . ..
Yes there is.
“Dont feed the trolls I always say.
On the topic.”
On the topic! That is why I posted Buenos Aires, a city of similar pop to Vancouver with similar antecedents.
For those who has the perspicacity to see how BA and Vancouver once had similarities (forest vs pampas vs exporting economy) can understand the difference. Or is so complicated?
“ . . . no relationship to land use or existing regional plans, no serious consideration of climate change or fiscal risk related to carbon infrastructure..”
I’d keep away from climate change if I were you. Climate is always changing, Gordon, despite playing Canute on your throne.
UBC’s various schools of what not have missed the apex of enlightenment: architecture, urban design or gardening, critical thinquing: just look at the product.
I watched Gloria Macarenko of CBC talking with UBC’s President Gupta a few weeks ago. Gupta insisted upon referring to his institution as a training establishment. Woe betide anyone who graduates form a university masquerading as a training establishment. Were did critical thinquing and enlightenment go?
AndPatrick, being nice to shopkeepers doesn’t cut it!.
On topic by comparisons: i.e. BA has had its Sube for nearly a century and has preserved an urban ambience by respecting it’s urban villages: San Telmo, Ricoleta, La Boca y Palermo etc!
“This is essentially a laundry list for Motordom, particularly the for goods movement and the resource industries.” Well, gas is tracking C$60.00 and lower so don’t be surprised when the proletariat take to the road again!
(Bike lanes! Wot is them?)
“There is no examination of alternatives . . ..
Yes there is.
“Dont feed the trolls I always say.
On the topic.”
On the topic! That is why I posted Buenos Aires, a city of similar pop to Vancouver with similar antecedents.
For those who has the perspicacity to see how BA and Vancouver once had similarities (forest vs pampas vs exporting economy) can understand the difference. Or is so complicated?
“ . . . no relationship to land use or existing regional plans, no serious consideration of climate change or fiscal risk related to carbon infrastructure..”
I’d keep away from climate change if I were you. Climate is always changing, Gordon, despite playing Canute on your throne.
UBC’s various schools of what not have missed the apex of enlightenment: architecture, urban design or gardening, critical thinquing: just look at the product.
I watched Gloria Macarenko of CBC talking with UBC’s President Gupta a few weeks ago. Gupta insisted upon referring to his institution as a training establishment. Woe betide anyone who graduates form a university masquerading as a training establishment. Were did critical thinquing and enlightenment go?
AndPatrick, being nice to shopkeepers doesn’t cut it!.
On topic by comparisons: i.e. BA has had its Sube for nearly a century and has preserved an urban ambience by respecting it’s urban villages: San Telmo, Ricoleta, La Boca y Palermo etc!
“This is essentially a laundry list for Motordom, particularly the for goods movement and the resource industries.” Well, gas is tracking C$60.00 and lower so don’t be surprised when the proletariat take to the road again!
(Bike lanes! Wot is them?)
BA on the move…..
http://www.grindtv.com/outdoor/outposts/post/cyclist-held-gunpoint-videotapes-incident/
BA doesn’t stand for Buenos Aires it stands for Bicycle Assassin
“That is why I posted Buenos Aires, a city of similar pop to Vancouver with similar antecedents.”
Ummmmmm
Metro Vancouver, population 2.3 million.
Metro Buenos Aries, population 12.7 million.
Metro Vanc = 2,460,000 +/-
Metro BA = 2,890,151 +/-
Both resouce exporting economies riddled with unmanageable debt: BA knows it. Vanc don’t!
Roger, you’re just flat out incorrect here. Why are you pretending these cities are remotely similar in terms of population?
BA/Vanc similarities . . .
Similar pop.
Export: Vanc. raw logs, coal. BA meat.
Ex-colononies . . .
Failing economy . . .
Heavily indebted . . .
Cruise ships/tourists . . .
Suburban sprawl . . .
Unstable financial . . .
Go there Don. I prefer BA any day . . .
They do not have similar populations. What’s wrong with you–Why are you just flat out lying?
The province of Buenos Aires . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Buenos_Aires
It’s disheartening, but not surprising that public transit, cycling, and pedestrian infrastructure are mentioned a few times in the discussion guide, but only get a brief mention in the Moving Forward section (3. Connecting and Strengthening Communities).
Transit has the potential to move people much more safely and reliably (see section 1) than private vehicles, and grow the economy (section 2) – there are multiple sources which suggest that transit expansion creates more jobs than road construction. Yet transit is not considered for either of those objectives.
I also didn’t see any discussion of improving inter-city access through bus and rail, to reduce car dependence, and only passing mentions of increased goods movement by rail, which is more environmentally friendly than trucking.
Most galling is the government’s assertion that “Transportation is a major
contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. But every step we take to improve
efficiency helps to minimize the impact.” But any small gains from transit, cycling, and walking will be overwhelmed by the expansion of driving and trucking. Classic doublethink.
I’ve completed the survey, including my thoughts above, so the government knows that I support expanded transit, cycling, and walking infrastructure, not expanded highways, for what it’s worth.
Right…did you read that?
Now try Vancouver and see what it says.
Right Don. Read it and you will see that Greater BA is a Province of Argentina.
If Vancouver could develop as a series of urban villages, maintaining their character, as has BA, I would enjoy it.
As it is, Vanc has no character and the current surge of development is making it worse as Puerto Madero is making BA better . . .
Roger, for a person that goes on about Buenos Aires all the time, you don’t seem to appreciate the definition of BA.
There is the autonomous city of BA.
There is Greater BA, with the city plus 24 adjoining municipalities.
There is the Province of BA, larger again.
We can talk about the city of Vancouver, which compares to the city of BA, but has much less population (600,000 vs 3 m)
We can talk about Greater Vancouver, which is comparable to Greater Vancouver (Metro), but has much less population. (2.5 m vs 13 m)
We can talk about the province of BA (population of 15.6 m), but why would we?
You are confusing the above, and their respective populations. To compare Greater Vancouver with the autonomous city of BA is misleading.
Should read We can talk about Greater Vancouver, which is comparable to Greater BA, but has much less population (2.5 m vs 13 m)
Whatever, you’re clearing just trolling. Next you’ll argue Tokyo and Victoria are comparable.
Ha! Love it!
No Don Tokyo and Victoria are not comparable and I am surprised you would be so absurd as to thinq so.
There is, neverthless, a strong correlation between BA and Vancouver for reasons that would be obvious if you would take your next vacation there: for instance Puerto Madero and North False Creek are quite similar although the former is so much more humane and better planned. But then perhaps it had the advantage of the existing masonry warehouses.
Vancouver is a port city with freighters lined up in English Bay and BA mismo with freighters lined up along La Rio del Plata.
But perhaps the essence of a comparison faults Vancouver by virtue of the latter’s tight-ass population obsessing over bike lanes while BA tangos the town coloured (google La Boca).
To say nothing of Vancouver’s gluttenous squandering its natural resources while beef, diary and agriculture thrives on the pampas indefinitely!
Roger, you said you sailed everywhere and hadn’t seen any evidence of rising sea levels. Well here it is:
http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2014/11/vancouver-seawall-submerged-water-photos/
“No Don Tokyo and Victoria are not comparable and I am surprised you would be so absurd as to thinq so.”
LOL You are absurd.
When emissions disappear, so do jobs: http://business.financialpost.com/2014/12/01/when-emissions-disappear-so-do-jobs/
Excerpts: “The manufacturing jobs found in factories and the auto industry need affordable power – not the intermittent, stupendously-priced, boutique power generated by wind turbines. Coal mining feeds families. Oil wells put food on the table.
We used to view the dignity that accompanies a paying job as an important social good. We used to understand that working class families are vulnerable. We used to care that unemployment, substance abuse, and family breakdown are closely connected.
These days, we’ve convinced ourselves that driving CO2-emitting factories into bankruptcy is smart. That throwing people out of work makes sense. That plunging families into crisis is the path to glory.
What a strange new religion we’ve adopted in the name of saving the planet.”
Rising Sea levels are already starting. Keep denying Troll…
http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2014/11/vancouver-seawall-submerged-water-photos/
Please do not insult me only because I disagree with your worldview. Even if all humans disappeared tomorrow the sea levels would continue to rise !
How silly and insulting.
“ . . . you said you sailed everywhere and hadn’t seen any evidence of rising sea levels.”
http://www.theyorkshirelad.ca/3sailing/desolation.sound.2008/sailing.desolation.sound.2008.html
In the fifteen years I have been watching the Salish Sea, Ronnie, I have seen no overt evidence of sea rise.
AGW! OMG, Ronnie, are you still sucking that worn our canard.
I’ve seen sea like that on the sea wall since before you were born.
Why don’t you get out and see a bit of the world instead of trying to outsmart yourself?
“Connecting and Strengthening Communities” This is inherently contradictory, unless the network is good enough (e.g., transit) that the driving of cars is unnecessary or mostly so. To drive within one’s own community is unnecessary; to drive to another community requires all the negatives inflicted on the communities at either end, and on each community in between: streets dominated by through traffic rather than foot “traffic.”
A complete network means only walk, bike, transit and MASC (metered access to shared cars). Owning and being dependent on a car is simply seen today as the only way to life a full life, in the minds of most people, given how incomplete our transportation network, which should have not just shared corridors, but share vehicles of all kinds..
Not everyone likes to share a bus or a car. Individual choices are required, too. The issue is that cars use up a lot of space, both driving and parking. As such, both states have to be more expensive, but we should never disallow individual choices, such as driving a high end luxury vehicle, not shared. It just has to be priced far higher than today.
Trains and planes offer first class service and economy, why not public transit, parking stalls or roads ?