►THE ISSUES
Where?
|
A Liveable Region Coalition Initiative
Tel: 604-736-7732
(SPEC OFFICES)
What about goods movement?
case study:The Port of Rotterdam
The Port of Rotterdam, in the Netherlands, one of the world’s largest and most successful shipping ports is situated in an extremely populous region with all kinds of congestion challenges. Rotterdam makes significant use of several modes of in-land transportation to ship goods to and from the port. In addition residents are provided with many transportation choices so that the private automobile is not the only option for personal mobility.
Copyright Port of Rotterdam In Rotterdam, there is no escaping congestion, but transportation choice optimizes the use of available infrastructure and assures reliable mobility for goods and people. Also see:
þPort
of Rotterdam
|
The movement of goods and services is vital to our local economy and
shipping through the port of Vancouver is critical to the Canadian economy
as a whole.
Do we not need to expand Highway 1 to accommodate a growing and vibrant
economy?
Perhaps, but first it should be recognized that there are many ways to
move goods throughout our region and each method has its advantages and
disadvantages.
In addition to an extensive road network, our region has an established
and extensive rail network and the natural advantage of navigable in-land
waterways. It is even possible to consider efficient transfer stations
where goods are moved up the valley by rail or water, out of the congested
urban areas and then transferred to trucks to travel to their final destinations.
Clearly rail and water transport do not have to compete with traffic on
our congested roadways.
The alternative modes of goods transportation are well established in
other competitive ports of the world. The tradition of shipping by rail
and by water has already been established in the Fraser Valley, yet they
both in need of investment to be competitive.
Why is Minister Falcon not exploring these recognized possibilities
for moving goods through our region to and from the ports?
But what about local goods and services which are frequently stuck
in traffic?
Clearly much of this kind of traffic must move by roads. As these movements
are also important to our economy, it makes no sense to pursue transportation
initiatives, such as Minister Falcon’s general purpose road expansion,
which serve to increase the amount of general traffic on our roads, and
encourage individuals to travel more in the cars for their daily activities.
The greater congestion which will ultimately result from Falcon’s
solution will make it difficult for businesses which rely on road transportation
in our region.
On the other hand it might make sense to develop road infrastructure which is reserved exclusively for local goods and services movement. These are known as High Priority Vehicle (HPV) lanes. As the traffic in these lanes would benefit economically from rapid and reliable travel times it would be reasonable to toll the lanes to help pay for their costs. This would benefit the taxpayer in addition to the businesses relying on regional transportation. The monies saved by the taxpayer by not building general purpose roads could go towards improving transit in the region, thereby further reducing the stress on our existing road system.
Whether shipping goods by rail or water, or shifting truck and services traffic to dedicated lanes our road system and our region would benefit with cleaner air, safer roads, and a stronger economy. These kinds of solutions to our local congestion challenges are proven, realistic, affordable and do not conflict with regional planning priorities.
Why has Minister Falcon chosen to pursue a general-purpose road expansion solution to congestion on the Highway 1 corridor?