Get Moving BC. Get Moving BC. 3 Nov. 2008 website.
Bridging the Infrastructure Gap. Sep. 2008 Get Moving BC. 1 Nov. 2008 website.
An organization self-proclaimed to represent that majority of citizens who, in their belief, support the Gateway Program. They are mainly supported by Jordan Bateman, a Langley Councilor. Their report, “Bridging the Infrastructure Gap”, focuses on the inadequate number of bridges in the Metro Vancouver area compared to other major Canadian cities. They find that in order to live up to the standard of these other cities, Vancouver needs at least four times more bridges. They promote massive increases in both vehicular and transit infrastructures all across the region. They also support the use of PPP’s to finance projects. Bateman supports another organization which is called South Fraser OnTrax which wants to revive light rail in the South Fraser Valley to also help ease congestion.
Any websites that attempts to bribe people into registration for iPods or transit passes in my personal opinion should carry no weight in an argument. I also have a problem with their list of "40 groups working to keep you stuck in traffic"; I doubt that is their true intention. In addition they do not take a balanced approach on the issue of congestion; they turn it into a black and white argument. Their solutions are not realistic: that many infrastructure projects could create a fantastic society but would not only be very costly to build but also to maintain. I understand that their belief is that PPPs will help cover some costs but it does not seem economically viable. They seem to believe that bountiful cheap vehicular infrastructure and transit infrastructure can coexist. True both infrastructures are necessary but it is not economically sound logic that both can prosper. In addition their ideas are based on infinite oil reserves which is a fundamentally false concept. Their report is widely discussed on the internet as making unnecessary comparisons to Canadian cities in the prairies. I just cannot accept like their rhetoric.
November 3
.
Showing posts with label ProG. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ProG. Show all posts
The Official Gateway Program
British Columbia. Ministry of Transportation. “Gateway Program Backgrounder.” 5 May 2008 website.
British Columbia. Ministry of Transportation. “Gateway Program Definition Report: Summary.” 31 Jan. 2006 website.
The “Program Definition Report” on the GP prepared by the British Columbia Ministry of Transportation presents the current problem of congestion and offers expanding the PBM and H1 as a viable solution. In addition it discusses current and future projects that could also be used with highway expansion in order to ease traffic congestion. The report begins by explaining the situation of both current and future congestion due to population growth. It then analyzes congestion in both monetary and social costs and states that quality of life would decrease unless the current vehicular capacity was increased. The report then explains what and how the GP would do reduce congestion. Highway expansion and other congestion reduction methods must be used in order to reduce future traffic. This includes tolls, better HOV, cycling, pedestrian and transit infrastructure. If all is properly implemented, there should be no traffic congestion until 2031. The cost of the project is reported to be much less than the benefits of time saved and lower operating costs. Construction should be completed by 2013
The full report is available but the Executive Summary has given me a basic idea of the logic and goals used by the government. The Backgrounder provides some updated information and effectively summarizes the project. It is interesting how little analysis there is of alternative options, I expected proof that expansion of H1 was the most effective option. In my opinion this is very troublesome because the Ministry of Transportation could be so strongly implicated in their support of GP that they may be discounting all other options. When an idea is put forth, an effort must be made to demonstrate full understanding of the issue and complete analysis of alternative options. This should be the main priority for the government who should be working in the interest of all citizens.
November 3
.
British Columbia. Ministry of Transportation. “Gateway Program Definition Report: Summary.” 31 Jan. 2006 website.
The “Program Definition Report” on the GP prepared by the British Columbia Ministry of Transportation presents the current problem of congestion and offers expanding the PBM and H1 as a viable solution. In addition it discusses current and future projects that could also be used with highway expansion in order to ease traffic congestion. The report begins by explaining the situation of both current and future congestion due to population growth. It then analyzes congestion in both monetary and social costs and states that quality of life would decrease unless the current vehicular capacity was increased. The report then explains what and how the GP would do reduce congestion. Highway expansion and other congestion reduction methods must be used in order to reduce future traffic. This includes tolls, better HOV, cycling, pedestrian and transit infrastructure. If all is properly implemented, there should be no traffic congestion until 2031. The cost of the project is reported to be much less than the benefits of time saved and lower operating costs. Construction should be completed by 2013
The full report is available but the Executive Summary has given me a basic idea of the logic and goals used by the government. The Backgrounder provides some updated information and effectively summarizes the project. It is interesting how little analysis there is of alternative options, I expected proof that expansion of H1 was the most effective option. In my opinion this is very troublesome because the Ministry of Transportation could be so strongly implicated in their support of GP that they may be discounting all other options. When an idea is put forth, an effort must be made to demonstrate full understanding of the issue and complete analysis of alternative options. This should be the main priority for the government who should be working in the interest of all citizens.
November 3
.
Halcrow Analysis of Transit-Only Option
Krajczar, Karoly. Re: Assessment of Transit-only Option for Port Mann Bridge. 31 Mar. 2006 Halcrow Consulting. 1 Nov. 2008 website.
Memo by Halcrow, an infrastructure consultation company, who has been commission by GP to analyze LRC claims that current and future congestion issues on PMB can be solved using only transit. The sketch planning method is used to show that a 20% transit mode share of commuters on the Port Mann Bridge, more than the regional average, could only reduce 350 vehicles. This figure is not enough considering the 650 vehicle queue during the peak morning commute. They state the problem with using transit on the PMB is that it would have to compete with the SkyTrain. The results are the same when using a reliable and frequently used transportation model with a frequency 40 buses per hour. Ridership is estimated at 660 passengers but most are estimated to have been newly generated commuters or been taken from the SkyTrain and only 100 vehicles removed from the Port Mann Bridge queue. The conclusion is that transit-only solutions are not a viable alternative to expanding the Highway 1 corridor.
There are some issues based on historical Halcrow cooperation with the GP and other governmental infrastructure projects. They may have an advantage of good knowledge of the situation; however it is in their interest to keep these infrastructure programs moving to make themselves more business. Their methodology seems sound, especially the use of two models to prove their data. However the seem to miss the point that the LRC demands transit improvements everywhere not just on the congested H1; the PMB express bus would not be competing with the SkyTrain but work with it.
November 3
.
Memo by Halcrow, an infrastructure consultation company, who has been commission by GP to analyze LRC claims that current and future congestion issues on PMB can be solved using only transit. The sketch planning method is used to show that a 20% transit mode share of commuters on the Port Mann Bridge, more than the regional average, could only reduce 350 vehicles. This figure is not enough considering the 650 vehicle queue during the peak morning commute. They state the problem with using transit on the PMB is that it would have to compete with the SkyTrain. The results are the same when using a reliable and frequently used transportation model with a frequency 40 buses per hour. Ridership is estimated at 660 passengers but most are estimated to have been newly generated commuters or been taken from the SkyTrain and only 100 vehicles removed from the Port Mann Bridge queue. The conclusion is that transit-only solutions are not a viable alternative to expanding the Highway 1 corridor.
There are some issues based on historical Halcrow cooperation with the GP and other governmental infrastructure projects. They may have an advantage of good knowledge of the situation; however it is in their interest to keep these infrastructure programs moving to make themselves more business. Their methodology seems sound, especially the use of two models to prove their data. However the seem to miss the point that the LRC demands transit improvements everywhere not just on the congested H1; the PMB express bus would not be competing with the SkyTrain but work with it.
November 3
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
