Friday, October 29, 2010

Email John Cook and Tell Him to Save the Scenic Corridor

Click to enlarge

We have learned that Mayor John Cook has told the El Paso Times that he will veto any attempt to preserve the Trans Mountain scenic corridor as Natural Open Space. As a member of the Public Service Board, he voted with the strongly worded PSB resolution that opposes rezoning land in the Northwest Master Plan to NOS – a resolution which also urges him to veto any attempt at rezoning by Council. The resolution was adopted at last Friday’s PSB strategic planning meeting. The vote for the resolution opposing re-zoning was 6-1. Only Dr. Richard Bonart opposed it.

I suggest that all of you email John Cook and let him know how you feel.

Email him at and tell him you support saving the beautiful natural corridor.

We have also learned that the City Plan Commission has moved its consideration of rezoning to its Thursday, November 18th, meeting rather than the November 4th meeting. The CPC meets in the Council chambers of City Hall at 1:30 p.m. Please send your comments now to Maria Acosta and let the CPC know that you support preserving land in the NW Master Plan as Natural Open Space. If you can, please plan to go to the meeting on the 18th. We will continue to update you.

If you haven’t, please also sign the petition and gather more signatures. Go to to download the hard copy of the petition or ask others to sign online at There are now 1,028 online responses – and many more hard copy signatures!

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Cook Promises NOS Veto

Cook would take the sprawl clear across the Trans Mountain corridor.

Elpasonaturally has learned that John Cook has told the El Paso Times that he will veto the Byrd NOS proposal to preserve the scenic corridor of Trans Mountain.

Also developing today: the rezoning of that land to NOS which was to be on the City Plan Commission (CPC) agenda for November 4 was first moved to December 2nd and then later this afternoon moved again to November 18. The only explanation forthcoming was that "upper management" is trying to schedule meetings before the CPC to discuss "conflicting issues with various stakeholders". Translated this means that city management is dealing with the the PSB resolution against rezoning that passed 6 to 1 with the support of John Cook. Many have characterized the document as "belligerent" and "provocative".

One last piece of news: Cook struck again with this reply to an email from a science teacher: "People show their stupidity by writing e-mails such as yours." He also signed it with "warmest regards". More on this later and on reaction of City Hall employees to the Mayor's reaction to citizens who disagree with him.

Cook Opposes Natural Open Space

"Warmest regards" from John Cook. Click to enlarge.

After my October 21st e-letter, I received more positive responses than I have ever before. “That’s awesome!” “Your newsletters on this issue are brilliant.” “You rock.” “Here! Here! Great work!” These were just a few of the very positive and encouraging messages that I got. I did get one negative response however:


Thanks for including me on your e-mail so I can follow how you continue to insult me and other members of the Public Service Board.

So now you've become an expert on land valuations too? Figures don't lie, Jim, but in your case liars figure.

Warmest regards,

John F. Cook
Mayor of El Paso, Texas

To say that message is beneath the office and dignity of the Mayor of the great City of El Paso just about goes without saying. Warmest regards?

Elpasonaturally has learned that Mayor John Cook has changed his position on the rezoning of land along Trans Mountain. As a member of the Public Service Board, he voted with the PSB resolution not to rezone land in the Northwest Master Plan to natural open space – a resolution which urges him to veto any attempt at rezoning by Council. The resolution was adopted at last Friday’s PSB strategic planning meeting. The vote for the resolution opposing re-zoning was 6-1. Only Dr. Richard Bonart opposed it.

I suggest that all of you email John Cook and let him know how you feel.

You can try emailing him at but that probably goes to an assistant and not directly to him and probably never will. Instead email him at – the email address from which he wrote me his “dignified” message. Better yet, email one address and copy the other.

Remember that the City Plan Commission will take up the proposal at its November 4th meeting at 1:30 p.m. Please send your comments now to Maria Acosta If you can, please plan to go to the meeting. Meeting information is here. You can sign up to speak.

If you haven’t, please also sign the petition and gather more signatures. Go to to download the hard copy of the petition or ask others to sign online at There are now 1,025 online responses – and many more hard copy signatures!

Let’s just take a moment to go over what we can expect the “other side” to say about us and what their arguments are:

I had not expected the ad hominem attack of being called a “liar”. Some have however questioned my estimate of the land value and suggested that my estimate was too low. Their statements are certainly reasonable. Even if comparables on the land in question are higher, run the numbers and you still get very little back in the way of public benefit or monetarily as a private rate payer. In fact, it is what you pay as a rate payer month after month that really finances the operations of the El Paso Water Utility. Also, paying down the bond debt can never be done simply by selling land over a period of time. Simply put, bond ratings are not affected by zoning.

But, let’s say that, in the case of the Trans Mountain land in question in the Northwest Master Plan, the rate payer does get something financially significant in return. Two things: First, the City has to increase services to this area and that’s additional tax dollars to support that portion of development that can even run in the red (as seen recently) not to mention all of the additional costs to you as an EPWU rate payer to maintain the infrastructure in the area! Preserving beautiful open space is always much cheaper than developing and accruing ongoing responsibilities for services (you know – fire, police, streets, parks, schools, etc. – all the things you pay for with your tax dollars.)

More to the point is what one of you said in an email to me: any of us would pay much more to preserve this beautiful natural space. Cost of a new water tank and lift station: $6 million. Cost of services: millions of dollars more. Cost of preserving the beautiful Trans Mountain scenic corridor: Priceless.

My comparables may have been low. (Or maybe not. The real value of the land – and we are dealing with averages among commercial and residential properties – is what someone is willing to pay on the day you need to sell.) The beauty of the land along Trans Mountain in the Northwest Master Plan is incomparable!

The PSB will say that the Master Plan preserves arroyos and open space, etc. If that’s a value, then let’s preserve it all. What we get back for sales just doesn’t justify developing any of it. Besides, we have all seen how arroyos get preserved – in concrete! Over a year ago I participated in a cactus rescue for land above Redd Road. We were told not to harvest cacti in one area because the developer was going to keep that natural. What really happened? It all got bulldozed away.

Besides, the Northwest Master Plan wasn’t really derived from a consensus of stakeholders; and, even if it had been, that consensus is now gone and new ways of doing development and preserving natural open space really cry out for revising any plan. That the PSB paid $700,000 for the plan is no reason to pursue a bad plan. (Note that, if all the land is rezoned as Natural Open Space, there will be no need to do another master plan.)

Byrd’s proposal of preserving just 900 acres of the NW Master Plan as NOS is a good compromise. Unfortunately, the PSB is intransigent about giving up one single acre. They want the power to tell us how our land is used – and that power they now cling to.

Expect the PSB to marginalize you and me as misfits and “tree huggers” – not a mainstream of regular folk. I know many of those who have signed the petition and some of those who are on my email lists. Demographics come from all areas of the City, all professions and all political persuasions. Copies of emails written by many of you were included in yesterday’s packet of materials for the regular Open Space Advisory Board meeting. There were emails from PhD’s, business owners, home owners, business administrators, educators, architects, professors, etc. This is hardly a group of misfits.

Expect them to say that they are the only experts and should alone be trusted. What is the adage? Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

A few more of their arguments:

1. It’s unnecessary to rezone any of the land as NOS as their plan preserves open space (as concrete).

2. There will be a $20,000,000 revenue loss (about $1/month/ratepayer over 10 years not accounting for additional costs of infrastructure, maintenance, other taxable services to the tax payer – and this assumes only today’s number of rate payers of 177,000.)

3. Development will go to NM and we will lose $12,000,000/year in taxable revenue (but won’t accrue the higher service costs – besides didn’t NM already preserve all that land north as open space? Also, so what? Where is it written that we must always expand to get more revenue to pay for more services? There are plenty of people who live in New Mexico and work in El Paso. We benefit as they pay sales tax and we don’t pay for additional services.)

4. There will not be water and sewer service for adjacent lands. (Sure there can be – easements for added water tanks and pumping stations can always be worked out without building office buildings, houses, big box stores and more.)

Thursday, October 21, 2010

PSB Land Sales Produce Negligible Results

Mr. Archuleta and the PSB continue to contend that their policy of selling land for development is saving the rate payers money. In fact, when associated expenses are considered, math errors corrected, and the “spin” debunked, we can make an apples to apples comparison and show that those savings are negligible.

In his most recent presentation to City Council, Mr. Archuleta estimated the cost of Representative Byrd’s plan to set aside 868 acres for a scenic corridor on Trans Mountain at $28 million. That works out to over $32,000 per acre! This number is quite an exaggeration when you realize that land at the Palisades was purchased for $12,250/acre and at Resler and Thunder Canyons for $20-21,000/acre. Hunt backed out of a deal in the Northeast because the price of $26,000/acre was deemed to be too high.

A price based on a sales of a comparable place is $17,500/acre and not Mr. Archuleta’s $32,000/acre. When you realize that only 415 of the 868 acres are developable anyway, the math really begins to change.

PSB’s costs associated with providing infrastructure are about $7,500 per acre. The real cost of Representative Byrd’s plan is $17,500/acre less of costs of $7,500 X 415 acres comes out to be $4.2 million – not $28 million.

Now consider that there are currently 177,000 rate payers and on average 3,000 new rate payers are added each year. Take that $4.2 million over a 10 year amortization period (number of rate payers equals 207,000) and you get a one-time savings by all rate payers of 17 cents per month!

17 cents!

One last little detail: When Mr. Archuleta totaled land use in the 868 acres to get $28,000,000, he estimated 66 acres of drainage/trails at 10,000/acre or $6,600,000 according to the total in his presentation. Do the math. $10,000/acre X 66 = $660,000 not $6 million dollars. That $28,000,000 shrinks to less than $23,000,000.

Archuleta knows this, and so does his top brass. When will members of the Public Service Board stop being “yes” people and begin exercising some proper oversight?

As for us rate payers: Ask yourself, when did you ever see your water bill go down? If we are saving all these millions of dollars, when do we see an actual reduction in the bill?

Would you pay 17 cents per month to save the scenic corridor of Trans Mountain? Are you going to keep sacrificing your children’s and grand children’s quality of life because Mr. Archuleta says you can’t afford 17 cents a month.

PSB’s land policy seems arbitrarily determined and designed to benefit a select few. So why do we do it? It may very well be that this is one way that Mr. Archuleta maintains power. He says what we buy and sell. He dictates what land can be preserved and what land must be bulldozed. The reason for the policy seems to be one big power trip. For that egoism, we could lose the natural beauty of the Trans Mountain Corridor!

We actually should rezone all of the NW Master Plan as Natural Open Space. Short of that is the Byrd plan which also includes eliminating one additional overpass (Paseo del Norte) which would seem to be pretty easy to do without losing $80,000,000 for a highway project. We should question how another intersection (Plexxar) which was never a part of the Master Thoroughfare Plan even got to be included in the TxDOT freeway plan; and we should, at the very least, insist on a new Northwest Master Plan failing rezoning all of that land as NOS.

Friday, October 15, 2010

Urgent Action Needed to Save Scenic Corridor

This is a long letter but please read it through. To preserve the beautiful scenic corridor along Trans Mountain, please do two things:

1. Email the contacts below.

2. Please sign the petition and gather more signatures. Go to to download the hard copy of the petition or ask others to sign online at

Understand what Council voted for on Tuesday, October 5. They voted to apply for the rezoning of 900+ acres in Representative Byrd’s plan. The process will be vetted through the City Plan Commission on November 4 before returning to City Council probably on November 8. City Council will make its final decision then. The vote to apply only passed 5-2 with the Mayor threatening a veto.

Prior to going to the CPC, it will be an issue raised at the Development Coordinating Committee (DCC) next Wednesday, October 20. Know that Ed Archuleta and the PSB are already targeting DCC and CPC.

Kimberly Forsyth, Lead Planner in the City’s Planning and Economic Development Department, wrote in a letter to Neighborhood Association Presidents:

The City of El Paso is submitting an application to rezone approximately 918 acres of City-owned property located north and south of Transmountain Road, near the entrance to Franklin Mountain State Park, from R-3 (Residential) and PMD (Planned Mountain Development) to NOS (Natural Open Space). The property is legally described as follows: Parcel 1 - Nellie D. Mundy Survey No. 246; and Parcel 2 - SJ Larkin Survey 269, Abstract 10070, Tract 1; and Parcel 3 - SJ Larkin Survey 269, Abstract 10070, Tract 1-A, all within El Paso, Texas.

The purpose of the rezoning is to preserve this land in its natural state and to maintain the scenic corridor at the entrance to the state park. Please feel free to contact me at 541-4668 if you have any questions or need further information concerning this application.

Once again, the reason for the proposed zoning change on city-owned land managed by the PSB east of the Gas Line Road on Trans Mountain Road to Natural Open Space (NOS) is to preserve El Paso's only scenic corridor. The current Northwest Master Plan calls for zoning the land for commercial and residential. This will destroy the beautiful scenic corridor's natural beauty. As I’ve said, that Master Plan never really was a consensus by stakeholders; and, the fact that so many of you have spoken out through your petition signatures, shows that the Plan has no strong agreement. Moreover, the Open Space Advisory Board of the City of El Paso voted to re-zone the area as NOS and asked Council to review the Master Plan.

I very strongly urge everyone to write the Mayor and City Representatives to support the zoning change from R-3 Residential and PMD Planned Mountain Development to NOS – Natural Open Space. The PSB is opposed to this zoning change. Go here for map information.

Email the following now before the DCC meeting on Wednesday:

Kim Forsyth

Linda Castle

Art Rubio

Esther Guerrero

Andrew Salloum

Email the Mayor and Council members as soon as you can:

Mayor John Cook -

District #1 Rep. Ann Morgan-Lilly -

District#2 Rep. Susie Byrd -

District #3 Rep. Emma Acosta -

District #4 Rep. Carl Robinson -

District #5 Rep. Rachael Quintana -

District #6 Rep. Eddie Holguin -

District #7 Rep. Steve Ortega -

District #8 Rep. Beto O'Rourke -

Mark these dates:

October 20 – DCC (Development Coordinating Committee) Meeting (closed to public)

October 22 – PSB Strategic Planning Meeting

October 27 – Regular PSB Meeting

November 4 – CPC (City Plan Commission) Meeting (public)

As I get more information, I will share it with you.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Native Plant Appreciation Week Begins at UTEP

The El Paso Native Plant Society is partnering with the El Paso Cactus and Rock Club and UTEP's Centennial Museum and Chihuahuan Desert Gardens to kick-off Texas Native Plant Week on Saturday, October 16, 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. at UTEP's Centennial Museum and Chihuahuan Desert Gardens. This is a Celebration of Our Mountains event.

For schedule and other information, click on image to enlarge.

Prior to the kick-off the Native Plant Society will hold its annual native plant and seed exchange on Thursday, October 14, at the El Paso Garden Center, 3105 Grant at 6:30 p.m. Light refreshments will be provided. John White, Asst. Curator at UTEP's Centennial Museum, will give a short presentation on propagating native plants from seeds.

Bring your harvested seeds and plants and exchange them for new varieties to increase diversity in your garden.

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

FMWC Renews Petition Drive in Face of Push Back

As expected, push back against Representative Byrd’s proposal that passed Council last week is being organized. There has been disturbing talk about a Mayoral veto and a vote to change the vote. Why? The fear of losing 80 million dollars. More about that in just a second.

For now, Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition has decided to continue its efforts to collect more signatures and needs people out getting signatures. Go to where you can download the petition file and print hard copies. If you have friends who find it easier to sign online, there is a link to do just that.

I presented the El Paso City Clerk copies of the signed petition this morning during the “call to the public” segment of the regular City Council meeting. There are currently 1,135 signatures and 893 online responses!

The petition calls for rezoning all City of El Paso land east of gas line road as Natural Open Space. It does so because the current TxDOT highway/freeway plan threatens the natural scenic corridor. Especially, an overpass at the contemplated Paseo del Norte intersection with Trans Mountain will not only critically scar that corridor, it will facilitate development that will change “this naturally scenic corridor, critical wildlife habitat, and potentially invaluable recreational land forever.”

Now here’s what is happening. TxDOT is undergoing an environmental assessment. As soon as they are done, they must take public comment. As elpasonaturally learns more about the schedule for this process, you will find out. In the mean time, FMWC is planning to gather more petitions and get those to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

EAs are usually simple and TxDOT usually gets EAs favorable to their projects. However, what comes up in public comment can force TxDOT to get an Environmental Impact Statement. The process for an EIS can take from a year to 18 months. The fear that 80 million dollars may evaporate when the new Texas legislature convenes next year is real. One would think that, rather than organizing push back and a counter attack, proponents of a freeway/highway plan would jump at the opportunity to take what they can with the Byrd proposal. Why they don’t was the reason for the speculation and criticism of an anonymous contributor to the elpasonaturally blog: Who Really Is Delaying the Project.

Petitions and opinions by biologists and other wildlife and land experts can force the matter to an EIS.

Elpasonaturally has also learned that there are plans to review the Northwest Master Plan. It was created before smart growth ordinances and much of the new “green” thinking in El Paso. We also know now that the old plan was not the product of consensus but rather of manipulation. In fact, the intelligence of some on the planning team was publicly ridiculed by PSB officials. There was no consensus and the really good plans were tabled by the PSB. Now that the public is either waking up or speaking up, the consensus is for preservation and conservation.

One petition gatherer told me that probably 90% of people who signed said that they had no idea about current development and highway plans. El Paso has been and still is a great place for covert machinations. It has an English-speaking newspaper that is conspicuously silent; media outlets that haven’t had a clue; powerful groups that have done whatever they want and so have discouraged public participation and will. However, things are changing. The word is getting out. Back room deals will become less possible. People will be involved in the process.

Many on both sides of the issue would have no compromise. However, there are others who see as a good deal the Byrd plan accompanied with moving Paseo del Norte westward to the contemplated Plexxar intersection near the gas line road, a widening of culverts near the State Park for a wildlife passage/corridor, building a new road to the Park entrance and thoroughly reviewing the NW Master Plan.

Finally, there will be a special reception tomorrow, Wednesday, October 13 from 4:00 to 6:30 p.m. at the UTEP Centennial Museum. The Centennial Museum at UTEP will unveil its newest publication: A Pocket Guide to El Paso’s Geological Sites by Professor Bill Cornell The book gives the layman a through sweep of El Paso geological history and is lavishly illustrated with color aerial photographs by FMWC President and museum exhibit curator, Scott Cutler.

Friday, October 8, 2010

Who Really Is Delaying the Project

The following post was written by someone who wishes to remain anonymous:

The suggestion has been made that those who oppose all or parts of the expansion of Trans Mountain into a freeway/highway while attempting to preserve our scenic corridor are holding up an important project and jeopardizing 80 million dollars in State funding.

NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH! Greed and arrogance by local developers and TXDoT are killing the project.

The developers, who will benefit to the tune of millions of dollars in increased property values by having TxDOT construct feeder roads and overpasses, should be falling all over themselves to donate right-of-way (ROW) for the project. However, they are so greedy, that they are holding those ROWs hostage for frivolous concessions like digital signs for gas stations.

If the developers are so worried the project will die unless the Texas Legislature sees significant forward progress, then they should immediately sign over the needed ROWs and resolve their differences with the City.

As for TxDOT’s contribution to the delay, in a collaborative effort with the land owners, TxDOT hoped to sneak an extra underpass of dubious need, into the most congested part of the project at taxpayer expense. In an arrogant and heavy-handed manner, TxDOT attempted to include the underpass without first receiving approval by the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), a possibly illegal act. Shame on them!

In addition, TxDOT is required by law to complete a NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) review before they start the project. As a part of that process, TxDOT’s Environmental Assessment (EA) is currently under review by the Federal Highway Administration. Once that review is complete, the public has the right to scrutinize the documents and comment on the study.

According to TxDOT’s District Engineer, Chuck Berry, TxDOT normally gets a clean bill of health on 90 percent of their EAs. However, TxDOT's behavior has resulted in the loss of public trust. It won’t be hard to find a scientist who can raise significant enough concerns about wildlife issues omitted in the EA in order to force issuing an Environmental Impact Statement. An EIS can take as long as a year to 18 months to complete. Delays from an EIS will kill the funding.

Yet, instead of addressing the public’s legitimate concerns as well as creating support and building consensus, TxDOT bulldozes forward with their singular plan along with the threat that, unless the public acquiesces immediately, the 80 million dollars for the project will vanish and no changes along Trans Mountain will be made.

Is there a way to avoid this impasse and move forward? You bet. First, how about a bit more humble approach with a little genuine deference to public opinion?Developers could immediately sign over the ROWs. TxDOT should drop the Plexxar overpass and move the proposed Paseo del Norte intersection westward. They should construct a safer entrance to the Franklin Mountains State Park utilizing a feeder road; and they should expand the existing culverts under the roadway near the Park entrance to accommodate wildlife passage. These changes would actually save construction money.

El Pasoans have gotten wiser. The priority for us is safer roads that respect the environment and improve mobility. We no longer want our tax dollars squandered for the privileged few. We don't want our environmental assets destroyed for the elusive promise of lower taxes or the threat of losing millions of dollars in funding. These false promises and threats do not match our real life experiences of more sprawl, higher taxes, more congestion, fewer services and zero job creation.

We’re not lining up for Kool-Aid any more.

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Council Votes for Natural Open Space and Delay on Final Freeway Approval

Great news!

City Council voted yesterday to zone as Natural Open Space the 900+ acres in Representative Byrd's plan. Council also held off voting on lifting restrictions on land along Trans Mountain until an environmental assessment is made regarding the proposed freeway plan.

The 5-2 vote to zone land in the Trans Mountain scenic corridor went this way: Byrd, O’Rourke and Ortega were joined by Lilly and Holguin voting “aye”. Emma Acosta and Carl Robinson voted “Nay”. This followed an exploratory motion by Byrd to rezone all PSB land east of Gas Line Road as NOS. That vote failed with only Byrd, O’Rourke and Ortega voting “aye”. However, that vote, along with the Mayor’s honest declaration that he would veto rezoning all of the land but that he could live with rezoning some of the land, led to the second and successful motion.

In addition, Council now wants further study about the number of overpasses for the proposed freeway. Maintaining the scenic corridor really requires not extending Paseo del Norte. An alternative plan presented by the Borderland Mountain Bike Association would bend Paseo del Norte to the proposed Plexxar interchange. This plan may have some traction.

It was revealed that the overpass at/for Plexxar was never part of the Master Thoroughfare Plan – a legal condition to be built. It would seem that that overpass was put into the freeway plan as a favor to Plexxar, a development company, so they could turn around 18-wheelers back and forth on Trans Mountain at state expense. They could still be benefited by “their” overpass becoming the “Paseo del Norte” connection to the freeway and abandoning the current planned extension of Paseo del Norte to Trans Mountain in order to preserve the scenic corridor. Some would call this a win/win.

The Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition collected over 1100 signatures on hard copies of its petition to zone all of the NW Master Plan as NOS. In addition, nearly 900 signatures have been recorded online. Bill Addington of the El Paso chapter of the Sierra Club announced at Council yesterday that they have over 2,000 signatures on a similar petition to save the Franklin Mountains. FMWC has no immediate plans to stop collecting signatures.

The number of signatures makes it clear that there is not and has never been a consensus on the NW Master Plan. In fact, elpasonaturally has learned that there was no consensus of stakeholders even when the plan was concocted in 2005. (More on that later.) The vote at Council reveals that there is not a majority of Council members willing to rezone now the entire area as Natural Open Space. On the other hand, it reveals that there is a consensus on Council as to what constitutes the scenic corridor and that that scenic corridor should be preserved.

The Open Space Advisory Board has already called for revisiting the NW Master Plan in light of new smart growth ordinances and insights which will come from the Dover Kohl review. Council has concurred.

As reported in a story in today’s El Paso Times, City Council “voted to postpone the release of several rezoning conditions necessary for the construction of the freeway until Nov. 30 in anticipation of a report from the federal government about the environmental consequences of building the highway.” Developers argued that failure to remove the restrictions may jeopardize the building of the freeway because the $80 million for the TxDOT project may “go away” when the Texas legislature convenes again in January. On the other hand, one could argue that the insistence that the restrictions be lifted is the real hold-up. After all, the City could just seek to condemn the frontage area to move the project along.

The recent tragedy on Trans Mountain was the basis for one argument to move immediately on approval of the freeway and not to zone Natural Open Space. However, it was pointed out that improving the road (2 lanes to 4 lanes) does not require the particular plan being proffered by TxDOT. Zoning something Natural Open Space or not has no impact on the safety issue. Those who used such faulty logic also felt that doing careful study and analysis has led to paralysis.

Since there is not the consensus that freeway/development advocates purport, a bit more time to do some due diligence cannot be anything but good.

The last slide in the presentation below shows the key intersections in the proposed Trans Mountain project:

Byrd Proposal for PSB Land on Trans Mountain Road