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
.
Showing posts with label Scholarly. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Scholarly. Show all posts
Livable Region Coalition
Will Freeway Expansion Kill the Livable Region. Oct. 2004 The Livable Region Coalition. 1 Nov. 2008 website.
The Livable Region Coalition effectively argues that the provincial GP counters many regional initiatives for sustainable growth. They cite LRSP goals of protecting green space, building complete communities, achieve a compact metropolitan region, and increased transportation choices and then proceed to demonstrate how the highway enlargement violates these goals. They demand a thorough assessment of the most effective method of long-term congestion reduction. They claim that the plan will not solve the problem of congestion, will have negative effects on the liveability of the region, does not consider more effective solutions, and that the process lacks transparency. The report demonstrates the highways lead to more traffic and not reduced congestion. It also explains the detriments to standards of living such as suburban sprawl, congestion on secondary roads, public health and physical activity, and environmental impacts. The report follows with other solutions of improved transit, carpooling, light rail, flow regulation, congestion tolls, and managing demand on the transportation infrastructure. The conclusion of the LRC is that the GP will not achieve its intended purpose and that different approaches are necessary in order to reduce congestion while keeping Metro Vancouver liveable.
In order to add more weight to the argument, the LRC lists their supporters on the first page. Some may state that this is an elitist strategy and that they are trying to use their credentials instead of logic. I am of the opinion that it demonstrates that they have made a thorough analysis of their position. It makes it easy to distinguish in whose interests the report was prepared. Because I made an analysis of the DSF paper first, and this report is two years older the DSF one and predates the GP Definition Report by 6 months, it is slightly less relevant.
November 3
.
The Livable Region Coalition effectively argues that the provincial GP counters many regional initiatives for sustainable growth. They cite LRSP goals of protecting green space, building complete communities, achieve a compact metropolitan region, and increased transportation choices and then proceed to demonstrate how the highway enlargement violates these goals. They demand a thorough assessment of the most effective method of long-term congestion reduction. They claim that the plan will not solve the problem of congestion, will have negative effects on the liveability of the region, does not consider more effective solutions, and that the process lacks transparency. The report demonstrates the highways lead to more traffic and not reduced congestion. It also explains the detriments to standards of living such as suburban sprawl, congestion on secondary roads, public health and physical activity, and environmental impacts. The report follows with other solutions of improved transit, carpooling, light rail, flow regulation, congestion tolls, and managing demand on the transportation infrastructure. The conclusion of the LRC is that the GP will not achieve its intended purpose and that different approaches are necessary in order to reduce congestion while keeping Metro Vancouver liveable.
In order to add more weight to the argument, the LRC lists their supporters on the first page. Some may state that this is an elitist strategy and that they are trying to use their credentials instead of logic. I am of the opinion that it demonstrates that they have made a thorough analysis of their position. It makes it easy to distinguish in whose interests the report was prepared. Because I made an analysis of the DSF paper first, and this report is two years older the DSF one and predates the GP Definition Report by 6 months, it is slightly less relevant.
November 3
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
