B.C. Transit Facility Takes Another Step
Prince George, B.C.- Council for the City of Prince George have given the first two readings on the application to revise the Official community Plan and rezone a property at the south end of Foothills to develop a B.C. Transit maintenance and operations facility.Granting first two readings opens the door for a community meeting on the project, to be followed by a public hearing before Council makes a decision on whether or not the project will be approved.
Council has received a great deal of correspondence from the public who say while it may be the right facility it is the wrong location.
“Obviously there is a lot of community interest in this project” said Councillor Murry Krause, “If we could have some real clarity on what would be the process on consultation, and what the public will look like.”
There will be a community meeting, information has already come in to the City on the project, and Manager of Development Services, Ian Wells, says it’s hoped there will be conceptual drawings available at that time so people can have a better idea of what the project will look like, and what type of landscaping screening will be part of the project.
Members of Council did tour the area earlier today to get a better idea of the location. Councillor Albert Koehler says when he was there he couldn’t see any residential properties from the proposed site.
Wells says if the proposal moves forward, there will a redesign of the intersection of Foothills and 18th to make it safer for people who are using the existing trail system ( through Ginter’s field) which is accessed from Foothills. The actual site is south of the existing hydro sub-station.
There is a driveway leading to the site, but while some members of the public thought that was a City Trail, that is not the case. Wells says the driveway was put in by the owner of the property to gain access to an area he had hoped to develop.
Councillor Jillian Merrick says while those who oppose the development have been using the slogan “right facility wrong location” for her, ” it’s the wrong facility, period”. She says the current location of the facility which services the BC Transit is sufficient “I’ve not seen a shred of research or data that backs the necessity for the project.”
Mayor Hall says he is looking forward to receiving more information on the safety issue, the reconfiguration of the intersections, the geotechnical process, the buffer between the facility and the existing trails.
Council has approved first and second readings, allowing the project to move to the next step in the process.
Comments
Finally I have found something I can agree with Jillian Merrick on but you will never get my vote again…
Jillian should put a bike lane in the middle of things to prevent further progress
The headline for this story reads:
“B.C. Transit Facility Takes Another Step”.
Sorry Elaine, but you forgot to add the word “Backwards” to the end of the headline!
They must be out of their mind to even think of putting a facility there. We have enough air pollution now and if they want to add to it I guess we will have more free day bus rides. Move out to an industrial area where it belongs.
“There will be a community meeting… Manager of Development Services, Ian Wells, says it’s hoped there will be conceptual drawings available at that time…”
– Why would they even think of having the meeting if they dont know the drawings will be there by that time?
– If they aren’t ready then the meeting should be delayed.
“Councillor Albert Koehler says when he was there he couldn’t see any residential properties from the proposed site.”
– What about the existing recreation values at the site?
– Do they think people will still want to walk beside a busy bus facility?
– What about the newly approved SPCA site that would be directly across from this bus site?
– Would they have chosen such a site knowing it would soon be a potential industrial development area?
I am very curious to know why this site was chosen for this project. Why not the Boundary Road industrial area that remains almost entirely undeveloped? Seems like this type of project could help spur other much needed development out there.
Why does it seem like every time the City has a proposal it involves a revision to the Official Community Plan and a re-zoning process?
“I am very curious to know why this site was chosen for this project”
Simple. It was offered to BC Transit by Ian Wells. He is not a planner. He is not a person with vision. The only vision he has are $$$.
Jillian got this one right.
Another eye sore for the city and another stupid decision being made. Who cares if there is no residential houses in sight? What does that have to do with anything??? This needs to be in an industrial site…this city makes the worst decisions because there is zero planning; or something under handed is in the works. This is another 6161 Otway road bad or crooked decision. This city council cares nothing about the look of this city or what the TAX payers would like. I guess all the river front is gone by other industry type business’s so they plan to wreck this little peice of land that is nice the way it is. What a joke. It’s embarrassing.
As I said before they never gave it any thought. IMO they had to come up with something very quick to get a picture with Shirley in it because after all we have an election coming very soon.
Actually there are roughly 100 apartments (200 residents?)at the Carriage House Apartments, who live between 170 and 320 metres from the turnoff to the proposed bus depot. Think they might be disturbed by the 24 hour movement of 80 buses? Well they probably will be, but have no recourse under the municipal noise bylaw, which exempts the operation of a public transportation system,as well as any act of maintenance carried out by municipal employees.
If you want to help stop the bus depot being located to 18 and Foothills,there is a facebook page you can join
“PG Residents with Concerns about Transit Centre at 18th and Foothills”
And an online petition
“Right facility, wrong location. Find an alternate location for BC Transit facility” at change.org
I am really wondering why this facility doesn’t go downtown into the light industrial area east of Queensway? Is city council trying to just abandon the downtown core?
There is a lot of room for Industrial out on the Hart as long as they make it appealing to the eye. Don’t need anymore eye sores out this way. Foothills is totally the wrong place for this. Does anyone know where I can find the online petition for this project?
ht tps://www.change.org/p/city-of-prince-george-right-facility-wrong-location-find-an-alternate-location-for-bc-transit-facility?recruiter=101931050&utm_source=share_for_starters&utm_medium=copyLink
Thank you
The site needs to be centrally located – “central” here refers to central to riders’ traffic flow. Industrial sites, Hart sites, light industrial sites will not be central to passenger transit. I rely on public transit (by choice) as I don’t own a car, and I enjoy the trail here as well. It sucks, I get it, but this city desperately needs a central bus hub, and this location is perfect for that. I expect the city and the developers know that Prince George residents are very protective of our green spaces, and will keep that in mind as this project moves forward. I will keep their feet to the fire on this question of minimizing ecological disruption, but folks, this spot is (sadly) perfect for our transit needs in the city.
This is not a “transit hub”. It is a maintenance garage.
There is a web site which identifies the following 43 points when considering the construction of a new bus maintenance facility:
1. Include all stakeholders in the process, especially local politicians and authority staff members.
2. Determine the capital funding source in advance.
3. Consider existing service routes, proposed routes and access to main thoroughfares.
4. Assess adequate and controlled access from the site to at least one major artery.
5. Plan for the future now; consider sites large enough for expansion.
6. Select a site that is large enough so that all bus operations can be done at ground level.
7. Verify adequate utility services are available adjacent to the site.
8. Perform an environmental soil sampling and testing program to identify potential remediation costs and to determine potential building foundation costs.
9. Consider the traffic load that the facility will place on existing streets and roads.
10. Investigate applicable building and zoning codes.
11. Investigate whether stormwater retention will be required.
12. Verify that local ordinances allow for adequate fuel storage. Don’ts for site selection Consider the following things to avoid when choosing a facility site:
13. Don’t choose a site that requires excessive deadhead mileage of bus fleet to revenue routes.
14. Don’t select a site with unknown environmental or geotechnical conditions.
15. Avoid sites with wetlands.
16. Avoid the selection of a site that is within the 100-year flood plain.
17. Avoid sites with severe elevation changes.
18. Don’t wait to contact local building officials and fire marshals about the project.
19. Avoid sites that do not have adequate existing utility services — especially sewer and water.
20. Don’t assume that the facility will be welcomed into any neighborhood.
21. Don’t delay the discussion on whether alternative-fuel vehicles should be considered during the design.
22. Avoid storing buses outside in climates where the temperature falls below 35 degrees.
23. Don’t assume anything — plan ahead for all possibilities to avoid surprises later.Do’s for facility layout Once a site is selected, consider the following when laying out the facility:
24. Separate bus, automobile, truck and pedestrian traffic.
25. Provide sufficient queue space for buses during afternoon pull-in and morning pull-out functions.
26. Lay out the bus circulation for counterclockwise bus movement.
27. Allow for adequate turning radii of buses.
28. Provide for a secondary access to and from the site.
29. Locate buildings on the site to allow for growth.
30. Provide adequate access around buildings for local fire fighting apparatus.
31. Locate fueling tanks in an area that can be easily accessed by fuel trucks.
32. Plan for access of various delivery vehicles. Keep this separate from other vehicular traffic.
33. Provide a separate parking area for trucks that deliver parts and tires.
34. Minimize walking distances from automobile parking areas to work areas.
35. Determine whether the local sewer district will require effluent pretreatment.
36. Buffer the site from adjacent properties to avoid potential noise and light pollution.
37. Include adequate building maintenance and support facilities space in the facility footprint.
38. Choose low-maintenance building materials.
39. Program site and building security into the design.
40. Include the principles of sustainable green design and energy conservation.
41. Design the facility to score as high as possible on the LEED(TM) Green Building Rating System.
42. Include at least one LEED(TM) certified professional on the design team.
43. Seek qualified professional assistance — there is no substitute for experience!
Read them and trick off the points which are met by the proposed site. There are some important ones which are not met by the proposed site.
Also, I want to see the GIS calculation of the areas in PG which would meet the “central” location criteria.
We have not seen that. Until we do, we are not fully informed to determine what actually drives the site selection.
Absolutely the wrong location. This site has he cleanest air in the bowl, has long been zoned for recreation development, would be an eye sore in the nicest part of the city, and is just too close to residential areas.
I think the ideal location would be across the Nechako bridge and across highway 97 from the brewery. There is about 15 acres of flat city owned land with a large highway interchange for access. It is only a block from the school bus depot, and less than a mile from the main central point of the city bus network at Spruceland.
Something is corrupt for the current site location to go ahead IMO.
On this I will agree with you Eagleone. Why this site for this project was chosen makes me suspicious.
the fact that they are so insistant that this is the site is what has me suspicious not the fact they picked it.
Also, the response time from the Nechako bridge location for an emergency evacuation would be reduced by ten minutes in the event we have a major industrial incident downtown, along the CNYard, or out at any of the pulp mills or oil refinery. This should also factor into any decision IMO.
Something is definitely corrupt. Same with the absolute disregard of public opposition for the rezoning to light industrial at 6161 otway road. Lynn hall is as corrupt as they come. Makes SICK.
Using existing light industrial land would be a great opportunity. Purchase the old Canadian Freightways yard maybe. Look for areas that would benefit from a remodel or per-purposing.
So I have to ask . What about the big new Boundary road industrial area .
They will have the whole area to themselves for at least a couple years to come , all utilities and services are there , access to both sides of the city ??
Sorry a little late to the party here.Lots of excellent comments.Everyone is concerned about the location of the depot which I think is distracting the fact that 22 million dollars is about to be passed onto our future taxpayers.I”ve done the calculations and seen the studies about how long it will take PG transit to pay this back.Never.
Comments for this article are closed.