“I’ve seen one possible future for Vancouver and it’s scary”
The quote is the headline for a blog piece by Daniel Fontaine. He is “a former Chief of Staff to Vancouver Mayor Sam Sullivan and … a commentator for the civic affairs panel on the top-rated Bill Good Show”. He is one of the several authors on CityCaucus.com, which is not a site I frequent, but it got tweeted about.
A trip with his family to Disneyland has convinced him that the LA solution to traffic – building more and wider freeways – has not worked. Someone known only by the intials JP commented
There are some excellent local blogs (Stephen Rees and Gordon Price) that have repeatably mentioned that building lane capacity only invites congestion.
Shame that JP didn’t actually provide a link here, but Google will find me, of course, so thanks go to JP.
But what the tweeters noticed was the way that a former opponent of the Burrard Bridge cycle lane trial seems to have seen the light.
I grudgingly admit that I am even looking at the recent lane re-allocation trial on the Burrard Bridge in a different light. If the future of Metro Vancouver really does look even a little like LA, and facilitating more vehicle use will get us there, then perhaps removing one lane on a six lane bridge wasn’t so bad a decision after all. Dare I say it might even be time to retire our $35 dollar “www.gregorsgridlock.com” investment and prepare for the onslaught of “I told you so” emails. I’ve asked to put this topic on the agenda for our next backroom CityCaucus corporate executive meeting next Wednesday. I’ll keep you posted.
It’s almost enough to make me follow the blog to see what happens. Or perhaps one of my regulars would like to volunteer for that duty.