FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: (October 4, 2016)
Local leaders from Colwood and Langford will not cooperate on a regional transportation plan!
Amalgamation Yes has discovered official correspondence to confirm that once again local municipal fiefdoms will not cooperate to develop a common approach to the daily transportation impasse experienced by residents.
Almost every day there is evidence that Greater Victoria has serious traffic problems as over 60% of one million daily travel events require inter-municipal travel. En route to work, school, shop, recreation or travel to the airport and ferries – everyone has to travel through several municipalities.
The Capital Region District had taken steps to establish a Transportation Service providing a multi-modal scope including cycling, trails, transit and vehicles. In July 2014 the CRD Board approved a comprehensive Regional Transportation Plan and commissioned a Transportation Service Feasibly Study to provide a framework for realizing and implementing that regional plan. In March of 2016 the CRD gave second reading to a draft bylaw to establish such a service with a proposed budget and work plan.
But buried in the CRD minutes of June 22, 2016 is a surprising letter dated March 2, 2016 from the City of Colwood. The letter informed the CRD that on March 14th Colwood Council approved a resolution that: “The CRD be advised that the Council of City of Colwood strongly objects to the Capital Regional District creating a regional transportation authority or service.”
Subsequently, the CRD minutes of June 22 show that in the vote of the Transportation Select Committee to proceed with forwarding the draft bylaw to the Inspector of Municipalities, two dissenting votes were recorded from Mayor Hamilton of Colwood and Councilor Seaton of Langford.
“A comprehensive transportation plan is essential to our region”, said John Vickers spokesperson for Amalgamation Yes, “Unfortunately our municipal leaders, once again, and as with sewage, cannot come to agreement on a transportation initiative.”
“Local residents must be more than puzzled and dismayed by this negative action. Stuck in lengthy traffic jams, how do residents of the Westshore expect to travel to the core of our city or access the airport or ferries if local leaders won’t develop a regional approach?” Vickers added.
It is one thing to defend municipal autonomy in delivery of some local services, but responsibility for inter-municipal travel patterns can only be dealt with at a regional level. It is obvious that essential services such as water supply, landfill and sewage, plus functions such as transportation, public safety and emergency services, cannot be effectively delivered at a local level.
A staff report proposes an approach to revitalize this initiative at the meeting of the CRD Transport Select Committee on Wednesday, October 5th.
“We can only hope that common sense and the greater public interest will prevail, and that a sober second look will enable some leadership to emerge from all municipal councils with a positive approval for the CRD to proceed”, Vickers said. “Otherwise, once again we are left with an intolerable situation of parochial politicians defending their turf to the detriment of regional residents. Thirteen is just too many!”
Contact Information:
Jim Anderson, Director
Amalgamation Yes
Tel: 250.477.8255
AmalgamationYes.ca
Local leaders from Colwood and Langford will not cooperate on a regional transportation plan!
Amalgamation Yes has discovered official correspondence to confirm that once again local municipal fiefdoms will not cooperate to develop a common approach to the daily transportation impasse experienced by residents.
Almost every day there is evidence that Greater Victoria has serious traffic problems as over 60% of one million daily travel events require inter-municipal travel. En route to work, school, shop, recreation or travel to the airport and ferries – everyone has to travel through several municipalities.
The Capital Region District had taken steps to establish a Transportation Service providing a multi-modal scope including cycling, trails, transit and vehicles. In July 2014 the CRD Board approved a comprehensive Regional Transportation Plan and commissioned a Transportation Service Feasibly Study to provide a framework for realizing and implementing that regional plan. In March of 2016 the CRD gave second reading to a draft bylaw to establish such a service with a proposed budget and work plan.
But buried in the CRD minutes of June 22, 2016 is a surprising letter dated March 2, 2016 from the City of Colwood. The letter informed the CRD that on March 14th Colwood Council approved a resolution that: “The CRD be advised that the Council of City of Colwood strongly objects to the Capital Regional District creating a regional transportation authority or service.”
Subsequently, the CRD minutes of June 22 show that in the vote of the Transportation Select Committee to proceed with forwarding the draft bylaw to the Inspector of Municipalities, two dissenting votes were recorded from Mayor Hamilton of Colwood and Councilor Seaton of Langford.
“A comprehensive transportation plan is essential to our region”, said John Vickers spokesperson for Amalgamation Yes, “Unfortunately our municipal leaders, once again, and as with sewage, cannot come to agreement on a transportation initiative.”
“Local residents must be more than puzzled and dismayed by this negative action. Stuck in lengthy traffic jams, how do residents of the Westshore expect to travel to the core of our city or access the airport or ferries if local leaders won’t develop a regional approach?” Vickers added.
It is one thing to defend municipal autonomy in delivery of some local services, but responsibility for inter-municipal travel patterns can only be dealt with at a regional level. It is obvious that essential services such as water supply, landfill and sewage, plus functions such as transportation, public safety and emergency services, cannot be effectively delivered at a local level.
A staff report proposes an approach to revitalize this initiative at the meeting of the CRD Transport Select Committee on Wednesday, October 5th.
“We can only hope that common sense and the greater public interest will prevail, and that a sober second look will enable some leadership to emerge from all municipal councils with a positive approval for the CRD to proceed”, Vickers said. “Otherwise, once again we are left with an intolerable situation of parochial politicians defending their turf to the detriment of regional residents. Thirteen is just too many!”
Contact Information:
Jim Anderson, Director
Amalgamation Yes
Tel: 250.477.8255
AmalgamationYes.ca