1.Sustainability seems to be a common word these days, but its use is often ambiguous. How do you define the word “sustainability”, and how does it relate to the job of a City Councillor or Mayor?
Sustainability is one of the most abused words in the green vocabulary. For example; Sustainability isn’t replacing a fossil fuel vehicle with a more fuel efficient fossil fuel vehicle. I believe that sustainability is an environmental application that truly reverses the causation of climate change, or at the very least is neutral. A green roof or planting trees remove carbon dioxide form the air, whereas geothermal heating Zero Waste, and wind power are steps towards slowing the need for non renewable commodities.
2.Still on the subject of sustainability, what do you see as the major successes in New Westminster during the last council term, and what were the missed opportunities?
The greatest success was the Brown field clean up on the waterfront park and the manner in which creosote and waste were recycled and remediated. Also the fact that such a park could be constructed with 30 cent dollars due to the partnerships with other levels of government.
More can be done by taking a lead in City electric vehicle upgrades and modernising our building practices.
3.What do you see as the major opportunities and challenges for the upcoming Council term in regards to sustainability?
We need to work with our development industries and senior levels of government towards construction processes using technical advanced and proven energy systems and proven construction materials and applications.
4.The City will be developing a Master Transportation Plan within the next term, what would you like to see included in that plan?
We are the thoroughfare of metro Vancouver, and if you think the traffic is bad now, wait until the new 10 lane Port Man bridge is open. We need to take advantage of our Chartered control of some of our roads and curb the expansion of the vehicle onslaught into our city. At the same time we need to move people and goods efficiently and creatively.
5.Translink continues to mull a replacement for the Pattullo Bridge. Would you rather see the bridge repaired, replaced with a 4-lane structure, or replaced with a larger structure? Would you support tolling the bridge to pay for its replacement? If you don’t support replacement, would you support tolling the existing bridge?
There is a group called Get Moving BC, which had a report produced by a Voice New Westminster founding director (see Kent Spencer, The Province Published: Monday, September 15, 2008) recommending another 8 lanes of traffic into New Westminster by replacing the Pattullo bridge with an 8 lane structure at the foot of King George. I do not support an 8 lane Pattullo replacement. We can’t keep dumping the regions traffic through our city. When an 8 lane bridge becomes gridlocked, and it will, our neighbourhoods will suffer total gridlock and emergency vehicle response times will become critical.
6.Do you support a Tree Bylaw to regulate the removal of nuisance trees on private property?
I would only support a tree bylaw if it were not a monetary burden on a resident dealing with a dangerous tree. I think the city can work with the landowner to identify the risks and look at options for replacements as well as mitigation.
7.Now that MetroVancouver’s Solid Waste Management Plan is approved, would you support the location of a Waste-to-Energy plant in New Westminster?
I say no to waste to energy. I think that zero waste is the direction we should head for waste control. If you can build it you can dismantle and reuse it. I have not seen any proof that nano particles and incinerator maintenance don’t cause environmental contaminates to enter our over burdened air shed.
