We highlighted "entire community" because this is what we see is lacking in the current process and the politicking of a few council members (including Mayor Green). Instead of relying on the facts and greater good of the entire community, Green and company use this group of vocal residents to solidify their political futures. Or so they think...If council's final decision agrees with those numbers, the "winners" will applaud the triumph of democracy - and the "losers" will point out that a simple head-count at a public hearing is meaningless, in the final analysis, because even well-attended hearings, like the one concerning much of Fort Langley over the past two weeks, attracts only a small minority of the total population of the area affected.
At the end of the day, the rule of municipal democracy still comes down to the council table, and the weight that council members put on the votes they need to get re-elected, the contributions they'll need for their next election campaign, and - if democracy really, truly is working well - the facts of the issue, as they pertain to the greater good of the entire community.
The 208th Street Open House attracted approximately 750 people and that included many who do not live anywhere near 208th Street. Then look at how many people came out from Walnut Grove as compared with Willoughby. Are these numbers as substantial as The Langley Times (or Green Times) made them out to be?
Most new developments on 208th have added 1,000 - 1,500 people per development. If we took five developments along 208th alone, that would conservatively be 5,000 residents. Is 750 out of 5,000 and overwhelming response? Enough people for council to throw away all plans and leave things as they are? How many people live in Fort Langley? 91 people spoke for or against and that includes many repeat speakers (people who spoke more than once). Why wasn't it reported that a substantial group of silent and respectable people wore "Support The Plan" stickers in support of Parklane?
Good on Groeneveld for being well-balanced, rational and accurate. Now if more rational people in the community look at facts and operate from them (in place of emotions), Langley will be a better place for it.
6 comments:
It is unclear what you mean when you comment that many of the people who came out to the 208th meeting came from Walnut Grove?
Please correct me if I misinterpreted your post but it sounds like you are implying that the residents of Walnut Grove shouldn't be interested in what happens on 208th? The intersection of 208th and 88th is THE busiest intersection in Walnut Grove. 88th is one of only two east-west connectors in Walnut Grove. An accident at that intersection essentially splits our community in two. Any increase in traffic on 208th will have an incredible effect on our community. If you are suggesting that people from Walnut Grove should not be interested in the status of 208th then you may wish to look again at a map of the area.
I guess we were thinking that with Costco and such at he other end of 208th, the primary concern would be with the new homes in Willoughby. Many of the residents we talked to in that area are accustom to change and didn't have an issue with the proposal. The primary opposition came from that far end of Walnut Grove that yes, would certainly be impacted by a crash, but are pretty removed from the primary truck area.
LRE,
I beg to disagree. The truck route went from Costco through to 96th which is, as you seem not to realize, is at the north end of Walnut Grove. The reason we came out is because the route runs right through our neighborhood. As I will point out below we were completely forgotten in the planning.
Let's start out with our major concern. North of the bridge 208th hits a section where it simply cannot be expanded (at the 88th Avenue intersection). That intersection is already horribly congested in the afternoon with cars backed up south almost to the bridge deck trying to turn left on 88th. At the same time 88th can get backed up almost to 204th going east when commuters from Highway 1 (via the 200th Street off-ramp) hit the route. If you needed to add trucks to that intersection you would have a recipe for gridlock and accidents.
North of 88th meanwhile you have a quiet neighbourhood with a major school crossing (to Walnut Grive Secondary at 90th Avenue the only pedestrian route across Yorkston Creek). At 88th and 96th (the presumed left turn for trucks trying to get to the bridge) you once again have a limited intersection with virtually no room for expansion.
The reason so many from Walnut Grove were in attendance and the reason many of us spoke up is that many, like you apparently, took it for granted that the only important part of the route was the section from Costco to the Bridge.
The truck route, however, went from Costco to 96th, right through the heart of Walnut Grove. When I spoke to the planner at the Open House he didn't even notice that they had the road/light layout wrong north of the bridge on his map. He admitted ignorance about how the route would affect those north of the highway and admitted it hadn't been a serious consideration in their planning process.
Sure Willoughby is a growing community but Walnut Grove is a mature densely-populated community. Its road network is fixed and cannot be expanded since the Township has already acted on its right to claim its rights-of-way. We got involved because somebody had to remind bloggers and planners alike that the world doesn't end at Highway 1 and that there is a vibrant community north of 88th that wants a say as to how it will be treated.
Blair
We can never get all the bits and pieces here to fully explain. We will respond to your comments by the weekend for sure.
;
I agree with you there. I am always willing to provide my input but in the long run I know that Council will make decisions based on its priorities. I only hope that they listen to what we say and take our ideas into consideraton as they make their decisions.
Just for clarity, our June 29th posting at 5:54PM should have read like this and to which Blair has responded (June 30th):
Blair,
Our information was that despite any truck route designation, it would never become one for several reasons. We were very much aware of the proposed areas for the truck route. Township staff is currently negotiating 208th to become part of the Major Road Network (MRN) only. We also get the fact that the truck route proposal did in include Walnut Grove north of the highway. We can never post everything here, but we did confirm with several sources that it was truly a "take the funding and run"option for MRN with Truck Route, but this could not be provided as an option. The people weren't comfortable with the plan, and council responded to those concerns.
Our emphasis (in the article) should have been based on what we originally said. That was that 750 people (including those from outside Walnut Grove and Willoughby are still a very small number compared to the actual populations of those areas. Therefore, people cannot always expect that council will vote their way, when more people and opinions must be included in the consultation.
People who organize against proposals also need to remain open to the fact that the group they gather together may not represent the majority, although it does not diminish their efforts. But we should all refrain from acting out of 99% emotion and if someone disagrees, we should do so respectfully. Unloading on staff and threatening politicians with votes against them does not contribute meaningfully to the process nor our community as a whole.
Post a Comment