HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #801  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2023, 6:46 AM
Changing City's Avatar
Changing City Changing City is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 8,108
Environmental opposition to RBT2 has been reiterated by Delta Council in 2022, (Global News). There was also a letter written a year ago to the federal Environment Minister by 12 scientists with expertise on Chinook salmon, southern resident killer whales and the Fraser River estuary, also urging Ottawa to reject RBT2.

“We evaluated the threats facing 102 species of conservation concern in the Fraser River Estuary, and found that pursuing projects that further reduce the habitat for these at-risk species will only further their decline,” said Tara Martin, a professor in the Forest and Conservation Science Department at the University of British Columbia, in a news release.

“Our research shows that species recovery requires implementing cost-effective conservation-based science that is supported by a management plan and co-governance.” (Reported in The Narwhal in detail, and mentioned by Global).

Many first nations were opposed to the project, and some appear to have been bought off. The Tsartlip First Nation, for example, based on southern Vancouver Island withdrew their objection following an offer of “payments on signing of a mutual benefits agreement and payments on approval of the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority Board of Directors making a final decision authorizing construction of the Project.” (The Tyee). Others continue to object to aspects of the project.

In 2020 Fraser Voices and The Boundary Bay Conservation Committee were opposed to both projects. (Delta Optimist).

Perhaps most importantly, Environment and Climate Change Canada in their most recent submission (October 2022) on the changes that the Port suggested could make everything alright, continue to hold the opinion that "The changes predicted as a result of the Project would likely constitute an unmitigable species-level risk to Western Sandpipers, and shorebirds more generally."

There's lots of groups opposing the project on environmental grounds, local and national, including two local Councils. (Even the District of North Vancouver debated the idea of objecting, but decided not to, as they aren't directly affected). The Port have been forced into making changes, adding more extensive (and expensive) 'mitigation' and payments to first nations, but haven't convinced scientists that their plans won't cause significant harm to the wildlife that use the area, including birds, fish and whales.
__________________
Contemporary Vancouver development blog, https://changingcitybook.wordpress.com/ Then and now Vancouver blog https://changingvancouver.wordpress.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #802  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2023, 7:55 AM
chowhou's Avatar
chowhou chowhou is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: East Vancouver (No longer across the ocean!)
Posts: 3,674
Guess it hasn't been on my radar then.

I suppose we'll see if the environmental opposition is enough to sway Ottawa. I took a quick look at the impact assessment registry you linked and through a few pages I could only find one quasi-First Nation (Hwlitsum which aren't recognized) with opposition. All the rest were either consenting, approving, or collaborating. Maybe they're all "bought off" but if the local FNs are happy then Ottawa is happy.

Seems to me like a foregone conclusion that at least one of RBT2 and DP4 will be built, and it's not like DP4 is that much better for the environment. Yes there will certainly be environmental impacts, but that's kind of been the history of humanity. You can't really build anything without it being on the Earth somewhere. As long as it's not going to collapse the salmon fishery or cause keystone species to go extinct I have a hard time seeing how Ottawa would oppose the project.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #803  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2023, 7:05 PM
svlt svlt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,021
Yeah I would tend to agree, in the sense that this isn't a big obvious target like a pure oil and gas extraction or export project that would directly contradict their climate commitments.

There's a lot of negative publicity bubbling up in the country in terms of not developing and exporting the natural resources as best as the country could - RBT4/DP4 looks like a relatively easy way to quell or at least not stoke further anger there while not obviously drawing attention to "we will only adhere to our climate commitments where convenient".
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #804  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2023, 11:04 PM
Jimbo604 Jimbo604 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo604 View Post

Source: Google Street View

Anyways in PORT related news, I went by Heatley and Powell and can confirm the Heatley Port overpass has been completely demolished all the way to where the orange barriers are in this March 2022 Google Street View photo.

It is demolished to ground level but they haven't yet fully restored the street and there is still a fence around where the overpass previously joined the ground. I'll try and get a photo next time.

I think this is a win-win as the Port didn't want and/or didn't need it. And now the neighbourhood is more connected.

Src: me

Current status Powell St & Heatley St looking north. Been this way since umm last summer or something.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #805  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2023, 1:34 AM
madog222 madog222 is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 4,073
I get the feeling it's going to stay like that for a while. Looking on VanMap there are storm and sanitary sewer lines from the lane to Alexander on the west side which would need to be moved when Heatley is refinished. That's assuming the excess land would be sold for development, I guess it could become a small park.

EDIT: Jimbo, did you happen to notice any sign of traffic light relocation on the SW corner? A year ago they were doing work there. https://goo.gl/maps/UGs2y9A5C57tgsDx6

Last edited by madog222; Feb 20, 2023 at 4:36 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #806  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2023, 3:33 AM
Jimbo604 Jimbo604 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by madog222 View Post
I get the feeling it's going to stay like that for a while. Looking on VanMap there are storm and sanitary sewer lines from the lane to Alexander on the west side which would need to be moved when Heatley is refinished. That's assuming the excess land would be sold for development, I guess it could become a small park.

EDIT: Jimbo, did you happen to notice any sign of traffic light relocation on the SW corner? A year ago they were doing work there. https://goo.gl/maps/UGs2y9A5C57tgsDx6
Didn't get a chance to look, I can try next time.

I think you're right about current condition. When the recipe is: the city, not really pressing and involves a bunch of ancillary work then the outcome is likely status-quo.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #807  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2023, 7:24 AM
fredinno's Avatar
fredinno fredinno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,317
If all the environmental approval is too difficult, couldn't they get rid of the coal terminal on Deltaport and move it to a location on the Fraser River (like say, South Richmond?)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #808  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2023, 2:47 AM
madog222 madog222 is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 4,073
Centerm expansion is now officially complete, they just have some road work outside the terminal to finish up.
News release is a bunch of corporate back patting without saying much: https://www.portvancouver.com/news-and-m...ng-port-of-vancouver-container-capacity/

Photo from Port of Vancouver https://twitter.com/PortVancouver/status/1628152166606331905?cxt=HHwWgoDTrZ3xrZgtAAAA
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #809  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2023, 7:33 AM
aberdeen5698's Avatar
aberdeen5698 aberdeen5698 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by madog222 View Post
Centerm expansion is now officially complete, they just have some road work outside the terminal to finish up.
Man, a brand new expansion and the port still looks chocka-block full of containers. Maybe they'll have to expand again...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #810  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2023, 11:31 PM
Sheba Sheba is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: BC
Posts: 4,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo604 View Post
Horrible.

"In discussion with Transport Canada, the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority will defer implementation of the Rolling Truck Age Program by a final six months to April 3, 2023. This program phases out older container trucks serving the port, for the benefit of the region’s air quality and local communities’ health."

Web page does say "final" extension, but forgive us if we are a bit sceptical at this point after so many delays.

Guess what...
Quote:
A controversial program that would ban diesel-powered trucks more than 12 years old from accessing the Port of Vancouver has been delayed yet again.

The Vancouver Fraser Port Authority’s Rolling Truck Age Program was originally meant to take effect on Feb. 1, 2022, but has been postponed twice amid opposition from the trucking industry.

The port says the program has been in the works for more than a decade, and is intended to cut emissions from older, less-efficient vehicles. According to the port authority, more than 85 per cent of trucks are already compliant with the new program.

On Thursday, it announced the program — which was delayed in September until April 3, 2023 — would be deferred for at least another nine months “in light of the current economic landscape and continued pandemic-related issues.”

...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #811  
Old Posted Feb 25, 2023, 3:15 AM
MIPS's Avatar
MIPS MIPS is online now
SkyTrain Nut
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Kamloops
Posts: 2,076
The union dragging their heels with less that 15% of the fleet being non-compliant unless they get paid money? Color me surprised!
Get the non-compliance under 10% and then tell them it's time to find a new job, I guess. They'll drag this out for years if they can.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #812  
Old Posted Feb 25, 2023, 7:08 AM
VancouverOfTheFuture's Avatar
VancouverOfTheFuture VancouverOfTheFuture is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 3,481
if 85% are already compliant, does it really even matter if the program is delayed or not? seems like it would make little to no difference with their "goals" anyways.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #813  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2023, 4:26 PM
Jimbo604 Jimbo604 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheba View Post
Last September the port announced a "final six-month deferral of Rolling Truck Age Program" to April 3, 2023. That date is now one week away from today. So announce your best guess now if you think they will actually go through with it or not.

Source: Port of Vancouver Rolling Truck Age Program web page

They've deferred it a number of times already and said "final deferral" so I'm going to go with yes. Not a strong yes, given the the history on this, but on the balance.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #814  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2023, 4:28 PM
Changing City's Avatar
Changing City Changing City is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 8,108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo604 View Post
Last September the port announced a "final six-month deferral of Rolling Truck Age Program" to April 3, 2023. That date is now one week away from today. So announce your best guess now if you think they will actually go through with it or not.

Source: Port of Vancouver Rolling Truck Age Program web page

They've deferred it a number of times already and said "final deferral" so I'm going to go with yes. Not a strong yes, given the the history on this, but on the balance.
Read Sheba's comment again. I think it says it was already extended last month.
__________________
Contemporary Vancouver development blog, https://changingcitybook.wordpress.com/ Then and now Vancouver blog https://changingvancouver.wordpress.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #815  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2023, 4:35 PM
Lexus's Avatar
Lexus Lexus is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Vancouver | BC | Canada
Posts: 2,763
Rolling Truck Age Program will not move forward on April 3

https://www.portvancouver.com/wp-content...ram-will-not-move-forward-on-April-3.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #816  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2023, 3:17 AM
Jimbo604 Jimbo604 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,888
D'oh, I missed their Feb 23rd step down. These things happen with so many deferrals.

So much for "final extension". Sigh.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #817  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2023, 3:58 AM
Tvisforme's Avatar
Tvisforme Tvisforme is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 2,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo604 View Post
....So much for "final extension". Sigh.
It's like the "going out of business" carpet store sales... "Our final extension before the 'we really mean it this time' update"...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #818  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2023, 4:09 AM
madog222 madog222 is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 4,073
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo604 View Post
D'oh, I missed their Feb 23rd step down. These things happen with so many deferrals.

So much for "final extension". Sigh.
They weren't going to but the federal transport minister forced them after a group of SOTF MPs complained.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #819  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2023, 5:43 PM
flipper316 flipper316 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 887
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #820  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2023, 11:03 PM
aberdeen5698's Avatar
aberdeen5698 aberdeen5698 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,779
Yeah, this is what happen when people move in to a subdivision behind a major rail line and then realize that it's an inconvenience. It's fine if they don't want to pay for grade separation, but if an over or underpass is to be built then they loose me at why they shouldn't have to pay anything for it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:03 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.