October 25, 2016

Drive-by Planning

Peter Ladner writes in Business In Vancouver.
Topics?  The Metro 2040 Regional Growth strategy, now officially honoured solely in the breach.  Tsawassen Mills.  Massey replacement bridge.  And motordom.
A.K.A. freeways to farmland.  Which seems to be our de facto growth strategy.
steveston-hwy

The justifications for the [Massey tunnel replacement] bridge have a Trump-like ring: instinctive gut appeal to frustrated SOV drivers, but making zero sense to anyone who knows how traffic congestion is really solved. The transportation minister’s claim that a big new bridge will reduce emissions from idling cars unbelievably ignores the massive increase in emissions from the new traffic that will inevitably rush in to fill a 10-lane bridge. The bridge is a desperation move to make the SOV great again, orchestrated by the same traffic engineers who keep making up claims about projected traffic increases on the money-bleeding $3.5 billion Port Mann Bridge that have never come to pass.
No one is suggesting the maddening congestion on Highway 99 doesn’t need fixing. Just not this fix. Nor is it reasonable to expect a future without cars, but we can’t afford the 25% efficiency of SOV traffic.
Projects like Tsawwassen Mills and the new 10-lane bridge are cementing Metro Vancouver into a heavily subsidized SOV-dependent future, in spite of overwhelming evidence that this will come at a huge cost to the social, economic and ecological health of the region.

Posted in

Support

If you love this region and have a view to its future please subscribe, donate, or become a Patron.

Share on

Comments

  1. “This mall is a travesty of common-sense planning”, says Mr. Ladner of the new Tsawassen Mills complex. All too often bad outcomes are blamed on “bad planning”. This is inaccurate and misplaced. This mall, the bridge, and other anti-urban galaxies of infrastructure are not the result of planning. They are the result of the opposite of planning. Of reacting. Of taking quick advantage of a situation while you can and making a quick buck while it’s there to be made.
    One could more accurately posit that the mall and bridge are the result of bad leadership that allows Metro Vancouver’s responsible and carefully-deliberated plan to be so easily dismissed whenever opportunity fancies. We have a pretty good plan for future development here in the Lower Mainland. Unfortunately, our provincial government is indifferent to it. It’s not the Planners’ fault.

    1. I think Peter was making the same point. Of course this is planning; it’s just bad highway planning overriding good community planning. Look at that picture and you see the “miracle” of highway planning which I call “lanesmanship”: every one of the 22 lanes allow you to enter, exit or proceed down the freeway in any direction without slowing down. That’s insane: if you exit into Richmond the speed drops to half in a hundred feet.
      Try googling images of the New Jersey Turnpike, one of the busiest motorways in the US. Look at the images of major interchanges and you’ll see something startling: it’s hard to find a single interchange with as many lanes.

  2. Both the Tsawwassen Mills mall and the proposed 10-lane bridge are the products of lack of acceptance of Metro’s planning, not a comment at all on the quality of that planning. Both are to some degree the product of the provincial and federal government planning and anti-planning over in fact decades. The provincial government forbad regional planning in the 1980s and have only recognized it in the breech since restoring the function to the then GVRD – now Metro Vancouver – since restoring the function in the 1990s. In this case the District of Delta is also involved and is supporting the highway and bridge-on-steroids proposals.

  3. There’s an excellent new talk on TED that, of course, the freeway fanatics won’t read. The presenter, Wanis Kabbaj, mentions that 85 out of a 100 vehicles are single occupancy – and that in the city up to 30% of them are driving around looking for parking. What a gross misallocation of cash, space, and energy. A to B is the sexy easy expensive stuff. What to do when you get there is sticky and expensive – choke points and wasteful parking.
    Aside from the agony and the idiocy of commuting, more attention needs to be focussed on the movement of stuff – lets stop calling them “goods”. The late great George Carlin has a great comedic piece on stuff.
    There’s an article today on the first commercial delivery of beer by a self-driving truck. That sounds so rah rah futuristic. It mentions that Annheuser-Busch delivers more than a milion truckloads per year. One company? A million truckloads?!
    Why is beer “stuff” being shipped at all? My dad brewed it in the kitchen. This is a mega business that must be disrupted: Local beer for locavores.

    1. Ditto for all the imported wines –
      French, Italian, Chilean, South African and Australian – think of the emissions to get those heavy glass bottles to North American markets.
      At least “import” brands of beer are often licensed to local plants to produce.

  4. Politicians planning in a vacuum always create an issue. The esteemed MetroVan Transportation council forgot three major issues
    A) they don’t control funding as much comes from the federal government and much from the province
    B) Families want houses with a yard or even a townhouse and they are not supplied close to Vancouver so they move further out
    C) Our constitution gives special rights via the Indian Act to FN and as such FN now assert them boldly

    1. It wouldn’t be a Plan if it simply said, ‘let’s let everyone have whatever they want whenever they want and never have to worry about the consequences of fulfilling their immediate desires’. That would simply be the status quo. Planning is what responsible adults do.

    2. Regarding Thomas’s point A: The reliance on senior government funding is one of the fundamental problems with our city-building model. Locals are responsible for planning the city, then the province goes and funds something completely different and highly damaging.
      With respect to points B and C: These have been rebutted and counter-argued ad infinitum. Is this a whack-a-mole game site or something?

      1. Indeed. Feds and provinces tax too much and give too little taxation room to cities (primarily property taxes and parking revenues). Ideally we lower GST and PST and introduce city consumption taxes, or give cities a share of income taxes.
        There is now some debate in Alberta to give Edmonton and Calgary additional taxation power. (no PST, remember). That debate is ongoing. We need this debate in BC, too. http://www.commonsensecalgary.com/notley_must_let_albertans_decide_on_new_city_taxes

  5. Not for nothing, but isn’t the author trying to have it both ways? On the one hand he says that the Port Man bridge is a failure because it isn’t getting enough traffic, and on the other saying that a new bridge will be a failure because it will fill up with traffic?
    Also… Regarding Tsawwassen Mills.. I was under the impression that the local band there was able to build whatever they wanted without the say-so of anyone else? Isn’t that correct? Seems like a cheap-shot to blame regional planners for it if that is the case…

    1. The Tsawwassen Band is a member of Metro Vancouver and was a member through the years of development of the Mills Mall and through the drafting of the Metro 2040 Plan. They work together as a board. It’s all there in the Metro Vancouver minutes.
      If there are questions about the development of the mall the Metro Vancouver board should be asked.

    2. You can have both: a bridge that doesn’t meet economic expectations through tolls AND have a bridge that induces traffic that should never have existed. You do that by building bridges that are way too big.

        1. Port Mann is not meeting revenue targets and costing you money. Happy? But it hasn’t reduced traffic either – just shifted it to other bridges. Ultimately it will still induce increased traffic but probably not enough to cover costs. Only time will tell but it doesn’t look promising.
          Unless we pave the ALR. Yay!

  6. “..new traffic that will inevitably rush in to fill a 10 lane bridge…”
    Is Oprah giving away free cars south of the Fraser now? Certainly existing home owners won’t be rushing out to buy cars just for the privilege of paying the toll. The only thing that makes it “inevitable” is population growth.

    1. And there rests one of the unadmitted goals of the BC Libs. Open up the ALR to sprawl and heavy industry. Even then, the chances are pretty good that Massey will be a permanent sinkhole into which public money is thrown.

      1. You might as well blame the federal Liberals who are among up immigration quotas as that will create the pressure to build more housing.

      2. Immigration, like housing, creates its own critical mass economy. Stopping immigration and placing the existing housing supply under a glass bubble while affordability and population pressures mount also have their economic effects, none of them healthy.
        The Boomers occupy the largest demographic block ever, and have now been in the workforce for 40 years. Waves of them are starting to retire. Soon it will be successive tsunamis. Who will fill the jobs that are vacated, pay taxes to keep the social programs afloat, and by simple daily living inject working person multipliers into the economy?
        Answer: immigrants. We are all immigrants or descendants of immigrants.

      3. @MB, is the NDP opposed to the current level of immigration?
        “So why not substantially increase the number of immigrants coming to Canada? And that is, I think, I hope, what we are about to do,” [Federal Liberal and Minister of Immigration] McCallum said [in the Philippines], according to a transcript of his remarks obtained by CBC News, August 2016.
        The Manila Times-May 27, 2016
        “There are 150,000 Filipinos living in British Columbia, and they are the number one source of immigration. Filipinos are the fastest growing population in Canada today. …
        The Trudeau government is already seeking to admit between 280,000 and 305,000 new permanent residents in 2016 — a record increase …’ CBC.

  7. There’s planning, and then there’s implementing those plans.
    Go read any city’s OCP, or town plan, or Provincial plan or anything. They all say the same thing. Walkability, more cycling, less reliance on cars, more/better density, smart growth, more transit, less pollution etc etc etc. They’re all the same.
    But when it comes to implementing that plan, and the politicians start getting phone calls from developers, their tune changes.
    It’s not a lack of planning, it’s a lack of conviction and courage by those who adopted those plans with fanfare and praise, to actually implement those plans.

    1. I am unaware of any provincial plan written this century that mentioned “walkability” or “less reliance on cars” or “smart growth” or “less pollution” unless it was doublespeak to justify freeways.

    2. Maybe the population isn’t buying into those plans. It seems the opposition to the Massey Bridge us coming from municipal politicians and bureaucrats. There are few outraged rallies over it The Translink referendum on the other hand showed a majority against what planners were trying to serve up.

      1. Please Bob. The plebiscite was designed to fail and TransLink became an easy target to scapegoat.
        No doubt that far flung suburbanites don’t like money spent on transit… they loath public transit. “Transit isn’t good enough out here therefore we need bigger roads and bridges.” But look at the growth around SkyTrain and how quickly those units are gobbled up and tell me again that the population is opposed to urbanization and transit.

      2. In the case of the TransLink plebiscite, it was the funding mechanism and institutional accountability that turned off the public. In typical fashion, a majority wanted improved transit services but few were willing to see a sales tax and property tax increase to pay for it. The funding mechanism wasn’t a Planning choice, it was a Political choice.
        To really gauge whether the public is buying into the Massey Bridge ‘plan’, perhaps we should hold a plebiscite on the topic and include the funding mechanism as part of the plebsicite question?

      3. Bob, you cavalierly dismiss regional planning. The Metro Regional Growth Strategy was not dreamed up on the back of a napkin after the second lunchtime Guinness. The drafts were widely circulated to every municipality for comments and detailed input, and the public consultation was open for months.
        The transit plebiscite was rejected for almost every reason EXCEPT the funding. The negative epithets were just so much typical raging at the world and ranged from undefined TransLink Fat Cats, taxes taxes taxes, hating the premier / mayors / the neighbour’s dog to (believe it or not) not enough transit already. Bus riders voted no it because they experienced too many pass-ups, drivers with lead feet and passengers with body odour. Oh, and SkyTrain broke down a couple or three times in the last five years. We’re angry and here’s our chance to show it.
        Anne Golden said, “Referenda are one step from mob rule.” The plebiscite and Brexit and a number of other recent votes stemmed from politician’s lack of courage to make decisions based on peer-reviewed empirical evidence and need, their desire to consolidate power by appeasing factions, or their vindictive desire to pummel anything attached to their political opponents (local and regional planning where transit figures large) while letting others off scott-free (freeways, exploitation of raw resources while ignoring value-added, honouring the wishes of campaign donors).
        TransLink and the mayors did not force the plebiscite onto the people. Christy did. It’s stunning how many people don’t get that, and equally stunning just how well the crown corporations and other creatures of the province shield the government and take the flak for government inaction and the failure of policy.

        1. @MB: Err, ” undefined Translink Fat Cats”.
          CBC managed to define a couple of them:
          Feb.13
          “It’s a sad comment on the state of executive compensation that most Canadians can only dream of being a failed CEO.
          Either you get fired with full salary for a year or more, or — like Vancouver’s former TransLink head Ian Jarvis — the same board of directors that found you lacking keeps you on as an “adviser” at roughly 10 times the national salary.
          In a hastily arranged news conference, the board announced it would be removing Jarvis as head of Metro Vancouver’s beleaguered transit authority to “restore public confidence” on Wednesday.
          “Heads you win and tails you win,” said Concordia business professor Michel Magnan.
          “Even if you don’t succeed, you still succeed financially speaking.” ‘Why keep him around?’
          Even by the gold-plated standards of the average CEO, business experts say TransLink’s deal with Jarvis is unusual. Jarvis will continue to draw his $422,000 annual salary until June 2016, when his contract ends. Only now he’s an adviser.
          “The guy is not adding any value. Why keep him around? Showing the way — showing the bad way?” asks Kai Li, finance professor with UBC’s Sauder School of Business.
          “All in all, this is outrageous and a manifestation of bad governance within TransLink.”
          Jarvis’s duties will be assumed by interim TransLink CEO Doug Allen, who will make $35,000 a month and will also participate in the hunt for a replacement. (CBC)
          I wouldn’t agree that the plebiscite was designed to fail but I would say that management at TransLink was.

        2. So start lobbying for the private sector to take over TransLink. Just don’t expect a miracle in terms of service levels and fares.

        3. Because efficiency is the only thing that matters!
          Of course we can get into a very lengthy debate about how you define efficient and what metrics are important.

        4. Yes. We could do what just about every public body does and start with striking a committee to decide on an agenda for a first meeting to have a discussion on what should be the first principals of equality relating to representation from all groups and and individuals while at the same time ensuring that marginalized groups or individuals have clear and proper representation, and taking into account necessary dietary variations that could possibly arise should refreshments be provided and taking into account possible religious holidays that might conflict should the venue be in too close a proximity to any drifting kitchen odours, whether private or commercial.
          Once this has been established then we can move forward in formulating a Mission Statement that, obviously, will be all inclusive, as above, while avoiding any potential for embarrassments that could arise by setting no targets so as to ensure that whatever might happen or occur at any future time does not stigmatize anyone.
          Paramount is that unlimited stress leave will be available for any employee at any time with full pay and full benefits, with the employees absolute option and full permission to engage in other employment concurrently with any stress leave they might need or simply want.

        5. I will repeat an earlier comment about your posts.
          You just like arguing.
          You have nothing useful to add by this. It might be funny if handled by Monty Python, but then they wouldn’t want it to be taken seriously

        6. I’m not arguing. We should remember that the ridiculous reality of much of British bureaucracy is where Monte Python repeatedly found their rich sources for parody. I concur.
          About the only public entity worth respecting is the library system.
          Can you pretend there is another?

        7. Police forces, navies, armies, air forces, CSA, UL, public utilities, health inspectors, testing labs, environmental investigation, education for the masses …..
          And of course there are vast areas of society the private sector would bankrupt if it wasn’t regulated to a degree, notably passing off pollution, financial losses and the external effects / costs of massive infrastructure based on near-total car dependency to the taxpayer to forgive, write down or subsidize.
          There is much to be said about private sector innovation, creativity and economic might, but it’s obvious some things are best left to the commons to counterbalance self-interest and to bring accountability to the full cycle.

  8. Now we are all agreed the Metro 2040 Plan and probably the vast majority of all those other plans are just wish lists. Gentle nice ideas. A bit like what the Pope might say about being nice to each other. Much like the Canadian Food Guide; whole grains and veggies are better than hot dogs and candy.
    We hope and pray that Metro Vancouver only uses unpaid volunteers in preparing these parables of metropolitan ideals. I’d hate think I was paying much at all for a bunch of urban trendies to be writing science fiction utopian and impossible pleas to little city councils, on my dime.

    1. In project management, there are two adages that come to mind, both of which apply to your comments:
      1) Failing to plan is planning to fail
      2) Hope is not a strategy

      1. yup. Only grey coats is so much better for the environment, and one type of wine. Maybe two: red and white.
        Socialists prefer a simple life style were everyone is equally poor.
        Planning without the available $s in mind is an academic exercise.

        1. Can you offer examples of where you’ll find the conditions of which you speak? And can you tell us all what it has to do with this topic?

    2. Senior governments have not been able to stop the progress in the city of Vancouver where MV traffic volumes continue to fall because of smart planning choices made by several different city governments over the past quarter century.
      If only other municipalities in the region would stand up to them too. But too often they bend to developers’ will in the short term at least. The visions of long term regional planning strategies are starting to bear fruit despite municipal government weakness and monkey wrenching by senior governments. Look at development investments along out metro lines and it is very similar to what the former GVRD proposed decades ago.
      But rather than complain about the power of the provincial Liberal Party – kick the bums out!

      1. Or maybe Vancouverites are a) so stretched in putting a roof over their head they can’t afford a car b) part-time residents who aren’t driving downtown to work.

        1. Or they choose not to have a car and can therefore afford to live in the city.
          I might add that Vancouver planning staff often presents very lofty goals to council to curtail motor vehicles and they are often derided as unrealistic. Invariably those goals are met years if not decades ahead of schedule.

        2. Yes RV it is amazing what a briad decline in living standards can do for a bureaucratic goal. However as the truism goes for every action there is a reaction. So for every North American who can no longer afford to keep a car there is a Chinese family with a shiny new one. The 1% win, the average North American keeps losing.

        3. I have a fantastic living standard, thank you. No car necessary. But then I guess you’re one of those people the car marketers love so much, the ones who see their self worth tied to the car they drive. I’m sure the 1% appreciate your loyalty.

      2. The New Depression Party bums are better why ?
        Oh yes, more unemployed folks consume less and drive less so it must be better ! Many falls for this but fortunately not the majority !

        1. There was some evidence this week from a by election in Alberta. The NDP is the ruling party in the provincial legislature and their leader, Rachel Notley is well liked in some areas, so expectations were fairly high. But:
          “As the first handful of polls reported Monday evening, NDP candidate Beverly Ann Waege was running in sixth — sixth! — behind candidates for the Rhinoceros Party, the Libertarians, and the Christian Heritage Party. When all the counting was done — 34,260 of 76,911 registered electors cast a ballot for a voter turnout of 44.54% — the NDP had notched all of 353 votes or 1 per cent of the total. Rod Taylor of the Christian Heritage Party got twice that with 702 votes.”
          This represents a loss of over 90% from the election of 2015. Ouch, with meaning!

    3. It is remarkable to see what the GVRD (Metro Vancouver) spend time and our money on.
      This is just a couple of snips.
      Zero Waste Committee
      Larina Lopez, Division Manager, Corporate Communications
      September 23, 2016 Meeting Date: October 13, 2016 2016 Christmas Campaign – Create Memories, Not Garbage
      PURPOSE
      To inform the Zero Waste Committee and GVRD Board of the 2016 Christmas Campaign – Create Memories, Not Garbage — in support of the zero waste objectives of Metro Vancouver’s Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan.
      Now we get into psychology, to cut down on colourful wrapping paper.
      “PURPOSE
      To inform the Zero Waste Committee and GVRD Board of the 2016 Christmas Campaign – Create Memories, Not Garbage — in support of the zero waste objectives of Metro Vancouver’s Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan.
      Current Consumer/Resident Mindset
      • Gift Giving
      o The factors that go into making a gift decision are affordability, what the recipient might
      need (practicality), and how much surprise would come from the gift.
      o Wrapping gifts is a key element of gift-giving ( creates anticipation and surprise).
      o Blame excessive packaging as the key contributor of solid waste at Christmas.
      • Barriers to Change
      o Emotional adherence to tangible gift-giving. Many prefer tangible gifts because they offer an immediate experience of seeing someone unwrap their presents.
      It goes on.
      Our money at work. The Propaganda Bureau helping us think. So far, there’s no call to report Santa if sighted.

      1. Actually, Eric, the Zero Waste Campaign (a tiny part of which you critique above) has been hugely successful at *reducing the cost of government*. By actively seeking ways to divert waste, and promoting those creative solutions, the region has vastly cut the cost of waste management, such that amount of your precious hard-earned tax money that goes to buying up real estate to dump solid waste has not seen the massive increases of other capital-intensive services.
        Brings to mind, if we, as a region, spent this kind of energy building and promoting alternatives to a $4Billion+ tunnel, we may be able to save you even more!
        Merry Christmas.

      2. I think you should be more appreciative of measures like this that save your tax dollars. We spend a lot of money trucking garbage to Cache Creek since there’s no room around here to have a dump. If any of that garbage can be prevented or repurposed then it’s less to truck, saving us all money.

      3. There are many other arts that can be eliminated that will save us waste. Anyone that knows anything about Japanese society knows well that the wrapping of gifts is equally important to the gift. We must stamp this misguided ancient art out of our society as soon as possible. Origami is another wasteful art and this should be, as in the directives and recommendations from the pure Zero Waste Committee “Blame” is useful and “Emotional adherence to tangible gift-giving. Many prefer tangible gifts because they offer an immediate experience of seeing someone unwrap their presents.” This is not what we want in our society, it’s barbaric.
        We should consider banning oriental rugs too. They are full of dyes and the manufacture uses massive amounts of water. Paintings with anything other that natural colourings must be banned too.
        Now that we pay bureaucrats to discourage the disgusting art of gift wrapping we must extend their mandate. No more plastic picture frames. These are worse than gift wrapping paper in the landfill. Ban plastic picture frames now! And, no more socks for Christmas unless they are 100% fair trade cotton or wool. Ban all others because they are made of plastic fibres and that all comes from OIL! Yuck!
        Stop worrying about improving the roads, there is so much more that is of much higher importance. Millions of miles of old worn out lights from millions of homes is clogging and polluting the landfills across the whole world.
        Ever wondered what the wire for all those Christmas lights is made from? You’d be horrified if they told you the truth.

  9. LOL rationale behind support for waste reduction committee = rationale for support for human sacrifice. You’re too much haha.

Subscribe to Viewpoint Vancouver

Get breaking news and fresh views, direct to your inbox.

Join 7,284 other subscribers

Show your Support

Check our Patreon page for stylish coffee mugs, private city tours, and more – or, make a one-time or recurring donation. Thank you for helping shape this place we love.

Popular Articles

See All

All Articles