Frances Bula header image 2
← →

Transit referendum is making business groups cranky too

January 21st, 2014 · 7 Comments

This just out from the Surrey Board of Trade, who don’t sound like happy campers

The Surrey Board of Trade wants the Transit Referendum question now.

“I’ve called the Ministry of Transportation today and they indicated that there was no timeline on when the transit referendum question will be ready. I’ve written a letter asking for the question to be ready now,” said Anita Huberman, CEO, Surrey Board of Trade

Transportation is a very complex subject especially in Metro Vancouver. Even though the vote is not taking place until November 2014, time is needed to educate the public, and in our case, the business community of Surrey. Other referendum campaigns have had multi-year campaigns because transportation and transit systems are a complex subject to educate the populous.

We need the question now – and we need, finally, a solution that will benefit all of Metro Vancouver – and not compromise growing cities like Surrey. Surrey will be the largest city in BC, and yet our transit and transportation systems simply do not meet current and future economic demand. This puts our economic future at risk. This referendum will have far-reaching and even unforeseen impacts. This is an issue that can’t be politicized. Businesses – in terms of the efficient movement of goods and people – are at risk.

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Agustin

    Good! Let’s hear from other stakeholders, as well.

    This question will affect everyone in the region!

  • Richard

    We don’t need the question now. What we need is the province and regional politians to commit to the process that is required to develop a winnable question. The process includes public and stakeholder engagement as well as polling to determine the transit package and funding sources that people would be most likely to vote for. Developing these takes time and needs to start now.

    The actual question doesn’t really need to be finalized until 3 months or so before the election.

  • Jay

    Sorry for the short post, but Surrey is a mess. Transit is the least of their problems.

  • MB

    Richard, I am going to disagree with you here. We need a public transit system, urban planning framework and regional governance model that answers to tomorrow’s challenges, not today’s reality which actually evolved from 60 years ago. It is a pitifull state of affairs when the metro nitpicks and fights over pieces and crumbs.

    But I do agree that there needs to be a meaningful and highly educational discussion now. But that should really ask the question, What kind of city do you wish your grandchildren to inherit?

    Hey, maybe that could be put forward as the referendum question.

  • Richard

    @MB

    Huh? I was referring specifically to the ballot question for the referendum. In other places, the question typically is not written until it is determined what the funding sources and the transit improvements are.

  • Tessa

    I’ve got a referendum question for you: “Should premier Christy Clark quit immediately and call an election?”

  • Andrew Browne

    I think the suggestion that we need to talk endlessly about which projects to fund is really over-complicating things. The obvious answer is that for any common ground to be found, we will have to basically do it all. The added benefit is that it’s the right thing to do.

    So that means Vancouver gets its buried UBC line and maybe a budget light rail line around False Creek through Mt Pleasant and Chinatown (on RoW that is largely existing or already protected), Surrey and Langley gets their combination Skytrain extension and/or light rail feeder spurs and/or expanded bus rapid transit, the TriCities gets a completed Evergreen with redesigned bus network and maybe an Evergreen spur to Port Coquitlam, etc.

    The matter of funding becomes a heck of a lot simpler if road projects are also in the mix. A Massey Tunnel and Pattullo Bridge replacement seem to be funded. It’s absurd to need to justify transit improvements when these projects practically get a green light without scrutiny. The conversation at this point needs to be: “Want a bridge? A transit line comes with it, and you have to pay for both or neither.”

    I know that the Pattullo is apparently introducing traffic insanity in New West, I am told because of the impacts of the toll, but I do wonder simply from a capacity point of view (ignoring the toll for the moment) if a widened Pattullo is actually necessary. The Port Mann replacement isn’t even at full lanes yet and it will be 10 lanes, up from it’s original 5. Couldn’t we maybe wait a bit to see how much traffic it gobbles up before moving on to the next sure-thing $3 billion bridge replacement? Maybe we don’t need it!