HOME | TRASHIN' THE BOG | TRASHIN' YOUR HOOD | PULLING THE WOOL OVER YOUR EYES | F.A.Q.
Sample Letter:
An open letter to Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon
Dear Mr. Falcon; 21/09/06
In the past year there has been much dialogue about the Gateway program. I would like to share with you my experiences and opinion regarding the program.
On April 8 this year I attended the Gateway presentation at the Guildford Recreation Centre with my questions in hand. On the Gateway website it states that the Port Mann Bridge is congested 13 hours per day. I asked the MOT representative how that figure was determined. He said "That's a good question you'll have to check our website". I then asked him "If the 13 hour figure is accurate how much of that congestion is caused by stalls or accidents?" He said "That's a good question you'll have to check our website." The answer isn't found on the website and I have been unable to get an answer to those questions. I live in the Fraser Heights neighbourhood adjacent to highway #1 and the Port Mann Bridge and I can tell you unequivocally there are often times during the day when there is no congestion and a driver can cross the Bridge westbound above the speed limit. Congestion is frequently accident or stall related.
Three days later, on April 11, I attended a City of Surrey transportation presentation at Fraser Heights High School. Surrey's contracted transportation consultant made a couple of telling comments. When I suggested that accidents or stalls would still cause congestion if there were one or two more lanes added to highway #1 he said "Yes there are no guarantees". His exact words awhile later were "a few cars taken out of congestion can make a dramatic difference."
Your staff informed me that more than one-third of the westbound traffic on the Bridge enters at 152 Ave. and about one-third of the Bridge traffic exits at the other end. Granted it is not all the same traffic but the fact is there is a huge movement of people between north Surrey and Coquitlam/PoCo. Before spending 3 billion dollars of taxpayers money I think it would make sense to ramp up the solutions incrementally. At this time there is not one bus traveling between the two areas. If busses were serving the area it could very well make a dramatic difference by taking a few cars out of congestion. As is done in other areas of the city a queue jumper lane would allow busses to stick to their schedule.
On May 16 this year I attended a Surrey Environmental Partners meeting at which MOT representatives Pam Ryan and Malcolm Smith made a presentation about the South Fraser Perimeter Road. Apparently the need for the efficient movement of goods from Fraser Surrey Docks is a high priority. Ms. Ryan explained to us that much of the truck traffic would travel north on the SFPR, east to 176 St., then south to access the US border. This appears to be a nonsensical solution which has trucks traveling 20 kilometers out of their way when a direct route using highway #10 to 176 St. already exists. In addition the viability of the Docks is questionable due to the lack of sufficient draft for large ships, recent significant loss of business and ownership uncertainty. Also it appears the SFPR will be a formidable barrier to the movement of wildlife across most of it's length through Delta and Surrey. There will be numerous creeks and wetlands impacted; some of which have no compensatory areas available. The cost for the proposed viaduct type span over the Fraser Heights wetlands will add significantly to the overall cost as will the expropriation of many houses, some of which are new. There are no community associations along the SFPR corridor that I know of that support the SFPR concept. I asked Simon Lamb, the SFPR project manager, for the cost of the section east of Port Mann Bridge. He didn't phone me, as promised, with the information. In fact, overall, information has been difficult to obtain and critical questions relating to the Gateway Project have gone unanswered.
At the Surrey Environmental Partners meeting one component of the Project was viewed favourably. The Pitt River crossing appears to be low impact to the surrounding area and has a reduced footprint.
Mr. Falcon as you can tell I am not supportive of most of the Gateway Program. Vancouver and region is annually acknowledged as one of the most livable cities in the world. This status has been achieved, in part, due to our past desire to limit the use of freeways. The Gateway Program is more about industry than moving people. It is about increasing the number of trucks and freighters, a significant source of air pollution, to funnel goods to other locations. The program should be about improving the long term livability of the region and adherence to the Sustainable Region Initiative through good planning principles. Progressive cities in 2006 are striving for sustainability and focusing on reducing their ecological footprint. The Gateway Project will drive us in the other direction. There are alternatives.
Thank you for your attention.
Kevin Purton,
Surrey resident.
