UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Public participation in an inter-agency committee : the Airport Planning Committee in Vancouver St. Pierre, Paul Robert 1977

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1977_A8 S22.pdf [ 8.39MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094051.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094051-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094051-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094051-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094051-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094051-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094051-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094051-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094051.ris

Full Text

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN AN INTER-AGENCY' COMMITTEE: THE AIRPORT PLANNING COMMITTEE IN VANCOUVER by P a u l R o b e r t ^ S t . P i e r r e B.A. U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , 1973 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n t h e S c h o o l o f Community and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s a s c o n f o r m i n g t o t h e r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d May, 19 77 © P a u l R o b e r t S t . P i e r r e , 1977 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the requ i rement s f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co lumb ia , I ag ree that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s tudy . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . It i s u n d e r s t o o d that c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i thout my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department o f C o m m u n i t y &"d Regional Planning The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co lumbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date M a y 1 . 1977 ABSTRACT The Vancouver A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee met from 19 73 to 1976 t o examine the i m p l i c a t i o n s of an expansion o f Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t proposed by the M i n i s t r y o f T r a n s p o r t . The committee was an experiment f o r i t i n c l u d e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n by e l e v e n agencies, i n c l u d i n g e i g h t from a l l l e v e l s o f gov-^ ernment and three non-governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n s (two from i n d u s t r y , one from the g e n e r a l p u b l i c ) . The committee con-cluded i t s a c t i v i t i e s with the r e l e a s e o f a r e p o r t p r e s e n t i n g three d e c i s i o n o p t i o n s f o r f u r t h e r p u b l i c d i s c u s s i o n . The r e p o r t i s remarkable i n the degree o f disagreement among agencies t h a t i t d i s p l a y s . T h i s study f i r s t p r e s e n t s f o u r p o l i t i c a l models of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . One of the models, agency-public j o i n t p l a n n i n g , very c l o s e l y matches the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee. Then a number of normative c r i t e r i a f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n are developed, a g a i n s t which the exper-ience of the committee can be e v a l u a t e d . The case of the Vancouver A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee i s presented, based on readings o f r e p o r t s , minutes of meetings, correspondence, memoranda, r e l a t e d documents, and i n t e r v i e w s w i t h p a r t i c i p a n t s . A p p l i c a t i o n of the c r i t e r i a to t h i s com-mitte e process r e v e a l s a number of shortcomings, most s e r i o u s of which was the f a i l u r e to develop and assess a l t e r n a t i v e s which "expressed the f u l l range of values r e p r e s e n t e d on the committee. F u r t h e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the reasons f o r d i f f i -c u l t i e s encountered i n the pr o c e s s , r e v e a l s t h a t the c e n t r a l f a c t o r was t h e n a r r o w and r i g i d p o l i c y p o s i t i o n adopted, by t h e M i n i s t r y o f T r a n s p o r t when o t h e r a g e n c i e s p e r c e i v e d t h e i s s u e t o be much b r o a d e r . The n a r r o w p o l i c y p o s i t i o n was t h e r e s u l t o f an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e r o l e o f t h e co m m i t t e e as o n l y t o a d v i s e on measures t o m i t i g a t e t h e s p e c i f i c runway p r o p o s e d by MOT. Some o t h e r a g e n c i e s b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e com-m i t t e e ' s r o l e was much b r o a d e r , t o s t u d y and a d v i s e on a number o f a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s f o r managing t h e g r o w i n g demand f o r a i r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e s . F u n d a m e n t a l d i f f e r e n c e s o f v a l u e s s e p a r a t e d t h e a g e n c i e s i n v o l v e d , so t h a t t h e d i s a g r e e -ment on t h e n a t u r e o f t h e p r o c e s s was n e v e r overcome. I n s t e a d c o n f l i c t c h a r a c t e r i z e d t h e c o m m i t t e e p r o c e s s , c o n f l i c t w h i c h i s r e p o r t e d and r e c o r d e d i n t h e F i n a l R e p o r t . D e s p i t e t h e s e p r o b l e m s t h e A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee was b a s i c a l l y s u c c e s s f u l i n e x p r e s s i n g t h e r a n g e o f v i e w s , and i n g e n e r a t i n g r e l e v a n t i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e runway p r o p o s a l . P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n was s u c c e s s f u l i n s t a t i n g a v a l u e p o s i -t i o n ( c h a r a c t e r i z e d as t h e ' c o n s e r v e r ' v i e w p o i n t ) w h i c h g o v e r n m e n t a l a g e n c i e s d i d n o t e x p r e s s . However t h e c o m m i t t e e p r o c e s s d e m o n s t r a t e d an i n h e r e n t f l a w i n t h e a g e n c y - p u b l i c j o i n t p l a n n i n g m o d e l . When a d i -v e r s e s e t o f v a l u e s i s r e p r e s e n t e d w i t h i n a s m a l l p r o b l e m -s o l v i n g g r o u p d e a l i n g w i t h a s i n g l e i s s u e t h e n e c e s s a r y c o n d i -t i o n s f o r e v a l u a t i o n , b a r g a i n i n g , and d e c i s i o n do n o t e x i s t . C o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n must t a k e p l a c e a t t h e p o l i t i c a l l e v e l ; i t must n o t be e x p e c t e d o f s u c h a g r o u p . The a p p r o p r i a t e and i m p o r t a n t r o l e o f s u c h a g r o u p i s t o d e v e l o p t h e r e l e v a n t i v range of a l t e r n a t i v e s and to assess t h e i r impact on the v a l u e s represented. T h i s i n f o r m a t i o n must then be passed to the p o l i t i c a l l e v e l f o r b a r g a i n i n g and decision-making. V TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: . INTRODUCTION 1 2: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: MODELS AND 4 CRITERIA 2:1 The Pla n n i n g Process 4 2.11 Issue Formulation 4 2.12 Information Gathering 4 2.13 E v a l u a t i o n 5 2.14 D e c i s i o n 5 2.15 Implementation 6 2.2 The Models 6 2.21 T e c h n i c a l A n a l y s i s 7 2.22. Agency-Public J o i n t P l a n n i n g 10 2.2 3 General Purpose Representa^- 11 t i v e 2.24 P l u r a l i s t i c Model 13 2.3 C r i t e r i a 14 2.31 Opportunity t o P a r t i c i p a t e 14 2.32 Information System 15 2.33 Time 17 2.34 B a r g a i n i n g Opportunity 18 2.35 E f f i c a c y , 18 2.36 E f f i c i e n c y 18 2.37 Summary ]' 2 0 Chapter 3: THE VANCOUVER INTERNATIONAL 22 AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS 3:1 The S e t t i n g 24 3:2 The A c t o r s 2 8 3.21 F e d e r a l 28 3.22 P r o v i n c i a l 32 3.23 Regional and M u n i c i p a l 32 3.24 T r i - L e v e l 34 3.25 P u b l i c and Industry 34 3.26 A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee 36 3.3 The APC Process 39 3.31 E s t a b l i s h i n g the Process, 41 Jan. 1973 to Feb. 1974 3.32 The T r i - L e v e l Meeting, 47 Nov. 1974 v i 3.33 F o r e c a s t s 49 3.34 Sorry About the Noise, 52 Feb. 1975 3.35 R e s i g n a t i o n of the Chairman, 54 May 1975 3.36 New P r o p o s a l , J u l y 1975 56 3.37 Information, Agreements, and 58 Issues, Nov. 1975 3.38 Deadlines and Delays 65 3.39 The F i n a l Report, March 1976 68 3.34 A f t e r the F i n a l Report 71 Chapter 4: EVALUATION OF THE AIRPORT PLANNING 7 3 PROCESS 4.1 Opportunity to P a r t i c i p a t e 73 4.2 Information System 76 4.3 Time 86 4.4 B a r g a i n i n g Opportunity 8 7 4.5 E f f i c a c y 90 4.6 E f f i c i e n c y 92 4.7 Summary 94 Chapter 5: DISCUSSION OF THE COMMITTEE PROCESS 96 AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 5.1 I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the APC Process 96 5.11' B a s i c C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 98 5.12 F a i l u r e or Success 109 5.2 On P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n 111 5.21 The Role of P u b l i c P a r t i c i - 114 p a t i b n 5.22 Conclusions* from the APC 114 Experience 5.23 On C o n f l i c t 116 Chapter 6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 119 6.1 P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n 119 6.2 The APC 119 6.3 The Future 120 v i i BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDIX 1: APPENDIX 2: CHRONOLOGY OF LIST OF AREAS ISSUES IN APC EVENTS OF AGREEMENT FINAL REPORT 122 127 AND 150 APPENDIX 3: A PROGRAM FOR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN 156 THE WORK OF THE AIRPORT PLANNING COMMITTEE v i i i LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Major Events of the APC Process i x LIST OF FIGURES Fi g u r e 1: Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t : 25 Runway - Community R e l a t i o n s h i p s F i g u r e 2: Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t : 26 Proposed P a r a l l e l Runway Concepts F i g u r e 3: Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t 2 7 Expansion - Concept 1 X ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To the members of the APC, and Gordon Stead i n p a r t i c u l a r , f o r i n t e r e s t and c o o p e r a t i o n . To my a d v i s o r s , I r v i n g Fox and Brahm Wiesman, f o r g u i d i n g me through the fl a m i n g hoops. To U.B.C. and C.M.H.C. f o r a l l those peanut b u t t e r sand-wiches . To a l l who supported my sense of p e r s p e c t i v e (almost w i t h s u c c e s s ) . I t i s not d e a t h l e s s prose, but i t i s done. Thank-you. PREVIOUSLY COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL ON LEAF x i NOT MICROFILMED. A c a r t o o n from PUNCH, November 5 1975, 1. 805. , x i NATIONAL AIRLINES "Of course by not having a runway we avoid all the noise of landings and take-offs." 1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION V o l u n t a r i l y o r i n v o l u n t a r i l y a g r o w i n g number o f g o v e r n -m e n t a l a g e n c i e s a r e i n v o l v i n g t h e p u b l i c a t some s t a g e o f t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s . S uch p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s a t t i m e s q u i t e s u c c e s s f u l . T h e r e a r e , however, numerous c a s e s where t h e s u c c e s s o f t h e p r o c e s s i s i n d o u b t . The p r o p o s e d e x p a n s i o n o f t h e V a n c o u v e r I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t (VIA) i s one s u c h d o u b t f u l c a s e . An i n t e r - a g e n c y c o mmittee w h i c h i n c l u d e d d i r e c t c i t i z e n i n v o l v e m e n t was e s t a -b l i s h e d i n 1973. A f t e r t h r e e y e a r s no d e c i s i o n h a s b e e n a n n o u n c e d , and t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s a r e h i g h l y s u s p i c i o u s o f one a n o t h e r . The r e c o r d t o d a t e i s i n an e x t r a o r d i n a r y p l a n n i n g document - t h e A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee F i n a l R e p o r t (March 19 76) - i n w h i c h t h e t h r e e d e c i s i o n o p t i o n s were p r o p o s e d , and i n w h i c h f u n d a m e n t a l c o n f l i c t s among t h e a g e n c i e s a r e d i s p l a y e d . I n t h e r e p o r t p o i n t s o f a g r e e m e n t among t h e a c t o r s a r e r e l a -t i v e l y t r i v i a l i n n a t u r e , b u t i s s u e s o f c o n t e n t i o n a r e numerous and f u n d a m e n t a l . What d i d t h i s e x p e r i m e n t a l c ommittee a c c o m p l i s h , and what went wrong? Is- i t a p r a c t i c a l o r an a c c e p t a b l e model f o r t h e f u t u r e ? T h i s t h e s i s d i s c u s s e s t h e s e t o p i c s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e c o m m i t t e e i t s e l f . No a t t e m p t i s made t o j u d g e t h e i s s u e o f w h e t h e r e x p a n s i o n o f t h e a i r p o r t s h o u l d o r s h o u l d n o t o c c u r . I n s t e a d t h e f o c u s i s on p r o c e s s , on t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n , t h e a c t o r s , t h e i n t e r a c t i o n s , and t h e s e q u e n c e o f e v e n t s . C i t i z e n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s were among t h e most a c t i v e , t h e most f o r c e f u l , and t h e most c o n t r o v e r s i a l o f a l l c o m m i t t e e 1 2 members. This t h e s i s s p e c i a l l y emphasizes t h e i r r o l e , but i n the context of the e n t i r e committee; In the f i n a l chapter c o n c l u s i o n s w i l l be drawn r e l a t i n g to both p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a -t i o n , and to the committee s t r u c t u r e i n g e n e r a l . Without doubt p e r s o n a l i t i e s of i n d i v i d u a l members had an e f f e c t on the process to be s t u d i e d here. These p e r s o n a l i t i e s have not been s t u d i e d i n and of themselves, but i t has not been p o s s i b l e to ignore them. A judgement about t h e i r e f f e c t w i l l be found i n Chapter 5. The c o n t r o v e r s y over expansion i s not r e s o l v e d as t h i s study i s w r i t t e n . The F i n a l Report marks the c u l m i n a t i o n of one stage, but has been f o l l o w e d by a f u l l year of f u r t h e r study and q u i e t manoeuvring. A second stage of f o r m a l i z e d p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s under c u r r e n t d i s c u s s i o n , but i t s scope and o r g a n i z a t i o n are matters of debate. T h i s study focuses on the process up to the p r o d u c t i o n of the F i n a l Report, w i t h some r e f e r e n c e to subsequent events. I t i s too e a r l y t o e v a l u a t e the subsequent events themselves. The o r g a n i z a t i o n of the study i s as f o l l o w s : Chapter 2.presents f o u r models of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The f o u r d i f f e r i n t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the agents i n v o l v e d i n b a r g a i n i n g and decision-making. The models are f o l l o w e d by a number of c r i t e r i a which are used to ev a l u a t e the p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n program. In Chapter 3 the case study i s presented. The s e t t i n g i s o u t l i n e d and the sequence of a c t o r s and events e x p l a i n e d . P o s i t i o n s are summarized, and the p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n sketched. 3 C h a p t e r 4 i s the a p p l i c a t i o n o f the s p e c i f i c c r i t e r i a t o the case s t u d y . Here c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e model i s d i s c u s s e d and e v a l u a t e d . C h a p t e r 5 o f f e r s a more g e n e r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the p r o c e s s . A number o f fundamental i s s u e s c o n c e r n i n g the com-m i t t e e and p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n a r i s e from t h i s d i s c u s s i o n . These l e a d t o r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e t h e o r y o f p u b l i c p a r t i -c i p a t i o n . C h a p t e r 6 draws c o n c l u s i o n s and makes recommendations based on t h e p r e c e d i n g m a t e r i a l . 4 CHAPTER 2: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: MODELS AND CRITERIA The p u r p o s e o f t h i s c h a p t e r i s t w o f o l d : f i r s t , t o p r e s e n t f o u r m o d e ls o f p u b l i c dec i s ion-^making, p r o c e s s e s 1 : w h i c h ex-~ p r e s s a r a n g e o f o p i n i o n on t h e r o l e and p o t e n t i a l o f p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n ; s e c o n d , t o p r e s e n t a number o f c r i t e r i a a g a i n s t w h i c h t h e A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee p r o c e s s c a n be e v a l u a t e d . I t i s u s e f u l t o b e g i n t h i s d i s c u s s i o n w i t h a b r i e f o u t l i n e o f t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . 2.1 The P l a n n i n g P r o c e s s S e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t o u t l i n e s o f t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s c o u l d be p r e s e n t e d . They d i f f e r n o t i n c o n c e p t , b u t i n l e v e l o f d e t a i l . Some i d e n t i f y more s e q u e n t i a l s t e p s t h a n o t h e r s ; t h e d i v i s i o n s a r e u n c l e a r b e c a u s e t h e p r o c e s s c a n move back and f o r t h ( o r a r o u n d and aroun d ) as c o n d i t i o n s demand. The e s s e n t i a l e l e m e n t s a r e as f o l l o w s : 2.11 I s s u e F o r m u l a t i o n : T h i s s t a g e . i s f a i r l y s e l f - e v i -d e n t . I n d i v i d u a l s o r g r o u p s p e r c e i v e p r o b l e m s o r o p p o r t u n i t i e s , and g r a d u a l l y s h a r p e n t h e i r a r t i c u l a t i o n o f t h e i s s u e . I t i s o b v i o u s l y i m p o r t a n t t h a t t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e i s s u e be c o r r e c t f o r t h e r e s u l t o f a c t i o n t o be a p p r o p r i a t e . T h i s p e r c e p t i o n , however, i s n e v e r f i x e d , b u t i s c o n s t a n t l y a d j u s t e d as t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s p r o c e e d s . 2.12 I n f o r m a t i o n G a t h e r i n g . I n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e a c t u a l s i t u a t i o n and t h e p r o b a b l e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f a c t i o n must be c o l l e c t e d , a n d s y n t h e s i z e d i n t o a number o f a l t e r n a t i v e s . 5 O f t e n t h i s s t a g e w i l l have two p a r t s . I n t h e f i r s t b a s i c i n -f o r m a t i o n i s c o l l e c t e d , w h i c h a l l o w s a p r e l i m i n a r y s e l e c t i o n o f a l t e r n a t i v e s . I n t h e s e c o n d more d e t a i l e d i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e s e l e c t e d a l t e r n a t i v e s i s c o l l e c t e d . L o g i c a l l y t h e p r o c e s s c a n be r e p e a t e d numerous t i m e s , e a c h t i m e n a r r o w i n g t h e number t o be more c a r e f u l l y i n v e s t i g a t e d . I n p r a c t i c e , however, t h e o b j e c t i v e i s t o come q u i c k l y t o a s e l e c t i o n o f r e l e v a n t a l t e r -n a t i v e s w h i c h e x p r e s s t h e r a n g e o f s o c i a l v a l u e s . The r a n g e i s e s t a b l i s h e d by e x p l i c i t c r i t e r i a as much as p o s s i b l e , and s h o u l d i n c l u d e a l t e r n a t i v e s p r o p o s i n g t h e s t a t u s quo, maximum n e t r e t u r n s , t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n e t h i c , and t h e most e q u i t a b l e outcome (Fox, 1975, .1-19). T h e s e r e l e v a n t a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e t h e n i n t e n s i v e l y s t u d i e d . 2.13 E v a l u a t i o n . The t h i r d s t a g e i s t o e s t i m a t e t h e c o s t s and b e n e f i t s o f t h e s e l e c t e d a l t e r n a t i v e s , b o t h i n mon-' e t a r y and n o n-monetary t e r m s . I n o t h e r words t a n g i b l e , q u a n t i f i a b l e v a l u e s and i n t a n g i b l e , u n q u a n t i f i a b l e v a l u e s s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d . I n t a n g i b l e v a l u e s m i g h t be e x p r e s s e d i n t e r m s o f t h e c o s t t h e i r a c h i e v e m e n t w i l l impose on c o n f l i c t i n g t a n g i b l e v a l u e s ( o p p o r t u n i t y c o s t ) , w i t h t h e f i n a l j udgement l e f t t o . t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s . 2.14 D e c i s i o n . A t some p o i n t some p e r s o n o r g r o u p must d e c i d e t o p r o c e e d w i t h a p l a n s e l e c t e d f r o m t h e p r o p o s e d a l t e r n a t i v e s ( o r d e r i v e d f r o m them). T h i s i s a p o l i t i c a l s t a g e i n t h e p r o c e s s , i n v o l v i n g t r a d e - o f f s and j u d g e m e n t s o f v a l u e . The d e c i s i o n i s l i k e l y n o t t o f o l l o w t h e e x p l i c i t , t e c h n i c a l 6 e v a l u a t i o n o f c o s t s and b e n e f i t s , f o r the p o l i t i c i a n i s charged with a c t i n g i n the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t , and h i s weighting of un-c e r t a i n f a c t o r s i s not n e c e s s a r i l y the weighting* choseri-by t e c h n i c i a n s . 2.15 Implementation. Plans or p o l i c i e s are r a r e l y im-plemented e x a c t l y as they were conceived because of. u n a n t i c i -pated consequences, new i n f o r m a t i o n , and changing c o n d i t i o n s ( i n c l u d i n g changing v a l u e s ) . How and when adjustments are made i s an important problem, and may be the s t a r t of the f o r m u l a t i o n of a new i s s u e , and the r e p e t i t i o n of the process. T h i s i s why p l a n n i n g i s i d e a l l y continuous and f l e x i b l e . In many ways the c r e a t i o n of a p l a n i s onl y the beginning of pl a n n i n g . 2.2 The Models The models presented i n t h i s s e c t i o n summarize f o u r p e r c e p t i o n s of the r o l e of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The p e r c e p t i o n s are presented i n a s i m p l i f i e d form, without exhaustive d i s c u s s i o n of the nuances t h a t are found i n a c t u a l p r a c t i c e . The purpose i s to p r o v i d e a p e r s p e c t i v e a g a i n s t which to view the case study t h a t i s t o be presented. Many models of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the p l a n n i n g process c o u l d be presented. The f o u r d i s c u s s e d here have been s e l e c t e d because they vary i n t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of who should be i n v o l v e d i n b a r g a i n i n g and decision-making (the f o u r t h stage of the p l a n n i n g process as o u t l i n e d above). The emphasis i s on b a r g a i n i n g , or t r a d i n g o f f v a l u e s , i n p a r t i c u l a r . In a l l mod-7 e l s v a l i d a t i o n of the r e s u l t ( d e c i s i o n - t a k i n g as d i s t i n g u i s h e d from decision-making) r e s t s with the p o l i t i c i a n o n l y . The model f i r s t presented i s a c l e a r extreme not found i n p r a c t i c e . I t serves the purpose of h i g h l i g h t i n g some of the d i f f i c u l t i e s o f the c u r r e n t p o l i t i c a l system i n order to s e t the stage f o r the other three models. C r i t i c i s m s of the o t h e r three models are very b r i e f ; the i n t e n t i s not to thoroughly c r i t i q u e them, but to p r e s e n t them as p o s s i b l e r e a l l i f e a l t e r -n a t i v e s t o the f i r s t . 2.21 T e c h n i c a l A n a l y s i s . The u n d e r l y i n g p h i l o s o p h y of t h i s model i s t h a t a t e c h n i c a l s o l u t i o n can be found to a decision-making problem. Improvement i n the g e n e r a t i o n and a n a l y s i s of i n f o r m a t i o n , i t i s assumed, can i n d i c a t e with c o n s i d e r a b l e accuracy which d e c i s i o n i s the ' r i g h t ' one. Of course t h a t i s an extreme statement of the p o s i t i o n , but i t does i n d i c a t e the t h r u s t of b e n e f i t c o s t a n a l y s i s and o t h e r decision-making t o o l s . In t h i s model the decision-making process i s a t e c h n i c a l one which p l a c e s extreme r e l i a n c e on the e x p e r t s . P o l i t i c i a n s and experts share i n the f o r m u l a t i o n of i s s u e s ; the experts are then r e q u i r e d to gather i n f o r m a t i o n and e v a l u a t e a l t e r n a -t i v e s . Assuming t h a t the i n f o r m a t i o n was adequate and the a n a l y s i s s o p h i s t i c a t e d , a c l e a r p r e f e r e n c e should emerge which the p o l i t i c i a n can v a l i d a t e i n h i s d e c i s i o n . I f the informa-t i o n i s poor or b i a s e d the p o l i t i c i a n may choose another a l t e r n a t i v e . The expert i s then expected to implement the d e c i s i o n . 8 T h e r e i s no r o l e f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e i d e a l f o r m o f t h i s m o d e l . The i m p a c t s on t h e p u b l i c c a n i n t h e o r y be t e c h n i c a l l y d e t e r m i n e d , and t h e p r e f e r e n c e s o f t h e p u b l i c a r e i n c l u d e d i n t h e p r o c e s s t h r o u g h t h e e l e c t e d p o l i t i c i a n . No n e e d f o r d i r e c t i n p u t seems t o be n e c e s s a r y . I n i t s e x t r e m e f o r m t h e model a l s o has no p l a c e f o r p o l i -t i c a l b a r g a i n i n g . G i v e n t h e n e c e s s a r y i n f o r m a t i o n on i m p a c t s and on s o c i a l p r i o r i t i e s , t h e optimum s o l u t i o n c a n be t e c h n i c -a l l y d e t e r m i n e d , u s u a l l y t h r o u g h e c o n o m i c and m a t h e m a t i c a l a n a l y s i s . The n e e d f o r d e b a t e between d i f f e r e n t p e o p l e who r e p r e s e n t d i f f e r e n t i n t e r e s t s d i s a p p e a r s . I t must be made c l e a r t h a t t h e e x t r e m e f o r m o f t h e model i s s e l d o m i f e v e r recommended as t h e most d e s i r a b l e model i n p o l i t i c a l t e r m s . I t d o e s , i n f a c t , r u n c o u n t e r t o a number o f d e e p l y h e l d v a l u e s o f democracy, as e x p l a i n e d below. The ex t r e m e model i s p r e s e n t e d h e r e as a n e c e s s a r y f o i l a g a i n s t w h i c h t o compare o t h e r s . T h r e e m a j o r c r i t i c i s m s c a n be made o f t h i s a p p r o a c h t o d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g . The f i r s t i s a n o r m a t i v e c r i t i c i s m : t h e model t h r e a t e n s t h e a c c o u n t a b i l i t y w h i c h i s a f o u n d a t i o n o f d e m o c r a t i c government. I n a complex s o c i e t y s u c h a s o u r own th e p o l i t i c i a n i s l i k e l y n o t t o have t i m e t o d e c i d e c a r e f u l l y on a l l p o l i c i e s and p r o g r a m s ; he i s l i k e l y t o a c c e p t t h e a d v i c e o f h i s a s s i s t a n t s , e i t h e r f o r m a l l y t h r o u g h d e l e g a t i o n o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , o r i n f o r m a l l y t h r o u g h * r u b b e r s t a m p i n g 1 . T h e r e f o r e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a g e n c i e s now have g r e a t power i n i n t e r p r e t i n g , - ' a p p l y i n g , and even c r e a t i n g p o l i c y . The c o n -c e n t r a t i o n o f power i n t h e b u r e a u c r a c i e s , c o m b i n e d w i t h t h e 9 scope of t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s and e f f e c t s , and wit h t h e i r c h a r a c -t e r i s t i c s e c recy, leads to a l i e n a t i o n of the c i t i z e n r y . They come to f e e l t h a t government i s n e i t h e r r e s p o n s i v e , nor r e s -p o n s i b l e t o t h e i r needs. N e i t h e r i s the c i t i z e n a b l e t o see, nor to i n f l u e n c e , the workings of government which a f f e c t him. In democratic theory the b u r e a u c r a c i e s are accountable to the e l e c t e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , who i s accountable to the p u b l i c . In p r a c t i c e the c o n c e n t r a t i o n of e x p e r t i s e and power i n the b u r e a u c r a c i e s t h r e a t e n s t h i s system. C l o s e l y r e l a t e d to a c c o u n t a b i l i t y i s the i s s u e of r e p r e -s e n t a t i v e n e s s . The bureaucracy and the p o l i t i c i a n s are o f t e n d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y i n f l u e n c e d by c e r t a i n powerful i n t e r e s t groups, l e a v i n g both the l e s s motivated (the s i l e n t m a j o r i t y ) and the disadvantaged (such as e t h n i c , poor, and unorganized) groups under-represented. By a b i l i t y or by d e f a u l t e s t a b l i s h e d s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t s g a i n the ear and sympathy of government t o the detriment of oth e r i n t e r e s t s . A second aspect of r e p r e s e n t a t i v e n e s s concerns e x t e r n a l consequences o f p o l i c i e s which are in a d e q u a t e l y e v a l u a t e d i n the policy-making p r o c e s s . Often because of inadequacies i n the l e g a l system a f f e c t e d i n t e r e s t s may have n e i t h e r r e p r e -s e n t a t i o n before the d e c i s i o n , nor compensation nor recourse to the c o u r t s afterward (See Lucas, 1976, f o r a summary of Canadian law on t h i s p o i n t ) . The t h i r d major c r i t i c i s m i s more sophisticated,. Informa-t i o n about p u b l i c values and p r i o r i t i e s cannot be determined t e c h n i c a l l y . Nor are p o l i t i c a l o p i n i o n l e a d e r s n e c e s s a r i l y 10 good i n d i c a t o r s of p u b l i c values on a p a r t i c u l a r t o p i c , because of time pr e s s u r e s on r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , because of the r e l a t i v e i n f r e q u e n c y of e l e c t i o n s , and because of the complexity and r a t e o f change of s o c i e t y . M a j o r i t y votes do not imply maj-o r i t y support f o r every p o s i t i o n taken by the candidate or pa r t y . Information on a s p e c i f i c i s s u e can o n l y be ob t a i n e d from the p u b l i c d i r e c t l y . The e f f e c t of a l l o f these c r i t i c i s m s i s the same. Because of a number of problems the i n t e r e s t s of the p u b l i c are not a c c u r a t e l y f e d i n t o the decision-making p r o c e s s . The informa-t i o n i n p u t i s f a u l t y . The important p o i n t with r e s p e c t to the model above i s t h a t t e c h n i c a l improvements i n i n f o r m a t i o n management without p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i l l not s o l v e these problems. Accurate i n f o r m a t i o n on p u b l i c v a l u e s can o n l y come from the p u b l i c . The next three models are a l t e r n a t i v e s o l u t i o n s t o the problems posed i n t h i s d i s c u s s i o n . 2.22 Agency-Public J o i n t P l a n n i n g . I f the problem i s t h a t the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i s not being a c c u r a t e l y f e d i n t o the d e c i -sion-making process, one s o l u t i o n i s to d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e members of the p u b l i c i n t h a t decision-making. O b v i o u s l y not every member of the p u b l i c c o u l d become i n v o l v e d , so i t would be reasonable to s e l e c t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f those p u b l i c i n t e r -e s t s which would be a f f e c t e d by a p a r t i c u l a r i s s u e , and p l a c e them i n a pr o b l e m - s o l v i n g group w i t h r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r choosing a p o l i c y . ( S e e Graham, 1976, f o r a more d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of t h i s model.) The group would i n c l u d e l o c a l p o l i t i c i a n s and 11 a d m i n i s t r a t o r s from a l l r e l e v a n t government agencies as w e l l as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of a f f e c t e d p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s . Although wide r e p r e s e n t a t i o n would be c r u c i a l to the l e g i t i m a c y of the group, the i d e a l s i z e would be l e s s than 15 members f o r reasons of group dynamics.. The group would have the resources t o h i r e t h e i r own experts as necessary, and to a d m i n i s t e r themselves. They would themselves be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r making recommendations to an e l e c t e d p o l i t i c a l body, r a t h e r than r e f e r r i n g the matter back to an agency or agencies. " C o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n should be the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the members w i t h i n these groups, not of some f i n a l a r b i t e r above the process. . . . The u l t i m a t e aim . . . i s to forge a consensus among a l l p a r t i c i -pants i n v o l v e d . The r e s u l t s of the p l a n n i n g process would be sub-m i t t e d as recommendations t o an e l e c t e d body (or bodies) f o r f i n a l a p p r o v a l . Assuming a consensus i s reached and assuming the a c t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n by concerned government o f f i c i a l s throughout the p l a n -ning stage, t h i s f i n a l step may w e l l be a f o r m a l i t y " (Graham, 1976, 109). The important c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h i s model i s t h a t i t i n v o l v e s members of the p u b l i c d i r e c t l y i n b a r g a i n i n g , i n the formation of consensus. As s t a t e d i n the q u o t a t i o n , the r o l e of the p o l i t i c i a n i s i d e a l l y to v a l i d a t e a d e c i s i o n which has been formed w i t h i n the pro b l e m - s o l v i n g group. 2.23 The General Purpose R e p r e s e n t a t i v e . To meet the problems of the modern decision-making process the pr e v i o u s model suggested c r e a t i o n of a s m a l l p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g group r e s p o n s i b l e f o r b a r g a i n i n g and consensus. By c o n t r a s t , t h i s model proposes a s t r e n g t h e n i n g of the o r i g i n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e system, i n which b a r g a i n i n g and consensus are r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the e l e c t e d p o l i t i c i a n . T h i s model i s w e l l expressed by 12 H a e f e l e (1976). " T h i s new e m p h a s i s on c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n , on w i d e n i n g t h e number o f i n t e r e s t s and g r o u p s , i s doomed t o f a i l u r e . The b u r e a u c r a t ' s room s i m p l y i s n o t b i g enough t o accomodate a l l , 'and he has ho c r i t e r i o n (nor c a n he have any) t o s e l e c t f r o m c o m p e t i n g c l a i m s t o h i s a t t e n -t i o n " ( H a e f e l e , 1976, 127-128). I n t h i s model a t t e m p t s t o i n v o l v e t h e p u b l i c and t h e b u r e a u c r a t s d i r e c t l y i n b a r g a i n i n g a r e s e e n as a f u n d a m e n t a l e r r o r . The s o l u t i o n t o d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o b l e m s i s : " I n s t e a d o f a c i t i z e n h a v i n g many d i f f e r e n t men r e p r e s e n t him - one on t h e s h o o l b o a r d , a n o t h e r i n t h e s a n i t a r y d i s t r i c t , a t h i r d i n t h e c i t y o r s u b u r b a n c o u n c i l , a f o u r t h on t h e p l a n n i n g commi-s i o n , and so on - t h e c i t i z e n s h o u l d have one man, a g e n e r a l p u r p o s e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , r e p r e s e n t him i n a l l t h o s e g o v e r n m e n t a l b o d i e s " ( H a e f e l e , 1976, 128). T h e r e a r e two main a d v a n t a g e s t o t h i s s y s t e m . One i s t h a t i t f o c u s e s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y on. one man who i s r e a l and i d e n t i f i a b l e . B o t h t h e p u b l i c and t h e b u r e a u c r a c y know w i t h whom t o d e a l . A l s o t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , b e c a u s e he i s v i s i b l e , has i n c e n t i v e t o d i s c o v e r p u b l i c p r e f e r e n c e and a c t on i t . The s e c o n d a d v a n t a g e i s t h a t t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e c a n n o t recommend p o l i c i e s i n i s o l a t i o n , b u t must r e s o l v e c o n f l i c t s between u n r e l a t e d p o l i c i e s ( s u c h a s a highway and a sewage t r e a t m e n t s y s t e m ) . He i s aware o f t h e c o n s t r a i n t s on a c t i o n and must g i v e some p o l i c i e s h i g h e r p r i o r i t y t h a n o t h e r s . T h i s model e x p l i c i t l y removes t h e p u b l i c f r o m b a r g a i n i n g and d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g . However t h e r e i s s t i l l a r o l e f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e m o d e l : p r o v i d i n g d i r e c t i n f o r m a -t i o n on p u b l i c v a l u e s t o t h e e l e c t e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . Programs w h i c h i n one way o r a n o t h e r e l i c i t a, r e s p o n s e f r o m t h e p u b l i c 13 on a p a r t i c u l a r i s s u e c a n i m p r o v e t h e s e t t i n g o f p o l i t i c a l p r i o r i t i e s w h i c h f r a m e s any t e c h n i c a l a n a l y s i s . Knowledge o f p u b l i c v a l u e s and g o a l s i s i m p o r t a n t t o t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s . 2.24 P l u r a l i s t i c M o d e l . The f o u r t h m odel i n c l u d e s p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n among a w i d e r a n g e o f i n t e r e s t s i n t e r a c t i n g on a c o n t i n u i n g b a s i s on a number o f i s s u e s . A l l o f t h e r e l e v a n t g o v e r n m e n t a l a g e n c i e s , p l u s a l l t h e l o c a l e l e c t e d r e p r e s e n t a -t i v e s , p l u s a l l t h e r e l e v a n t p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s s h o u l d i d e a l l y be i n v o l v e d i n t h e s e r i e s o f n e g o t i a t i o n s and t r a d e - o f f s r e q u i r e d t o r e a c h a d e c i s i o n . I n o r d e r f o r t h e b e s t d e c i s i o n s t o be made, i t i s n e c e s s a r y t h a t t h e a c t o r s r e p r e s e n t as many i n t e r e s t s as t h e r e a r e a f f e c t e d by t h e d e c i s i o n t o be made. The more t h e p l a n n i n g s y s t e m i s p l u r a l i s t i c , t h e c l o s e r t h e d e c i s i o n w i l l a p p r o a c h t h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . T h i s m odel i s d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m t h e p r e v i o u s two m o d e ls by i t s t r e a t m e n t o f b a r g a i n i n g . I n t h e j o i n t - p l a n n i n g model b a r g a i n i n g t o o k p l a c e w i t h i n a s m a l l p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g g r o u p w h i c h i n c l u d e d a g e n c y , p u b l i c and p o l i t i c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I n t h e g e n e r a l p u r p o s e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e m odel b a r g a i n i n g t o o k p l a c e i n t h e e l e c t e d l e g i s l a t u r e s o n l y . I n t h e p l u r a l i s t i c model b a r g a i n i n g t a k e s p l a c e a c r o s s a w i de r a n g e i n a number o f ways. I t i s n o t l i m i t e d t o a p a r t i c u l a r g r o u p ; i n f a c t i t i s e s s e n t i a l t h a t as many g r o u p s as p o s s i b l e be i n v o l v e d . A l -t h o u g h t h e p l u r a l i s t i c model i s h a r d e r t o v i s u a l i z e t h a n t h e o t h e r two, i t i s a c t u a l l y c l o s e r t o a c t u a l d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r a c t i c e i n s i t u a t i o n s where numerous a g e n c i e s must i n t e r a c t on t h e same i s s u e o r i s s u e s . 14 2.3 C r i t e r i a . In order to e v a l u a t e a p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n program i t i s necessary to e s t a b l i s h standards of performance. These stand-ards r i s e from the philosophy of democracy which u n d e r l i e s our system of government, and from the p r a c t i c a l n e c e s s i t y of r e a c h i n g a d e c i s i o n a t some stage i n order to a c t . The l i s t here i s m o d i f i e d from l i s t s of other authors, i n p a r t i c u l a r O'Brien (1973). There are s i x major c a t e g o r i e s , with a number of s u b s i d i a r y requirements: 1) O p p o r t u n i t y to P a r t i c i p a t e , 2) Information System, 3) Time, 4) B a r g a i n i n g Opportunity, 5) E f f i c a c y , and 6) E f f i c i e n c y . They w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n sequence. 2.31 Opportunity to P a r t i c i p a t e . T h i s i s o b v i o u s l y the most b a s i c requirement f o r without i t p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n would not e x i s t . Three d e t a i l e d c r i t e r i a are d i s c u s s e d ; two are adopted; the other i s beyond the scope of t h i s study. 1) There w i l l be a l i b e r a l d e f i n i t i o n of those c i t i z e n s who can demonstrate an i n t e r e s t (who have l e g a l s t a n d i n g ) . A l l a f f e c t e d i n t e r e s t s w i l l be able to p a r t i c i p a t e , i n c l u d i n g those •newly/ p e r c e i v e d and expressed as p l a n n i n g proceeds. 2) The i n t e r e s t e d c i t i z e n w i l l have the o p p o r t u n i t y from the e a r l i e s t stages to p r e s e n t h i s reasons f o r or a g a i n s t the p r o p o s a l . The t i m i n g i s important i n t h i s c r i t e r i o n . Oppor-t u n i t y must not be c o n f i n e d t o one stage, e i t h e r e a r l y or l a t e , i n the p r o c e s s , but must be extended throughout the process i n order f o r p u b l i c i n p u t to be e f f e c t i v e , and to appear to be e f f e c t i v e . One reason f o r t h i s i s t h a t a c t i v e c i t i z e n p a r t i -15 c i p a n t s w i l l i n most cases need to f a m i l i a r i z e themselves with the t e c h n i c a l i s s u e s and t h e i r consequences be f o r e they can be e f f e c t i v e i n p r e s e n t i n g and defending t h e i r i n t e r e s t s . T h i s e d u c a t i v e process i s f r u s t r a t e d by o p p o r t u n i t y a t one stage only. A t h i r d c r i t e r i o n f o r o p p o r t u n i t y i s t h a t an a p p r o p r i a t e procedure f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i l l be e s t a b l i s h e d . The 'appropriateness' of the procedure i s a whole s u b j e c t of i n q u i r y i n i t s e l f . (See Carney, 1977, f o r a g e n e r a l d i s c u s s i o n . ) I t i n c l u d e s r e f e r e n c e to the type of i s s u e i n q u e s t i o n (immediate/ long range, l o c a l / g e n e r a l , e t c . ) , the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the r e l e v a n t p u b l i c (organized/unorganized, knowledgeable/ignorant, e t c . ) , the t i m e - s c a l e of the response of techniques necessary, and so on. T h i s c r i t e r i o n i s not d i s c u s s e d or e v a l u a t e d i n t h i s study. These three c r i t e r i a r e l a t i n g to o p p o r t u n i t y are o b v i o u s l y designed to maximize the r e p r e s e n t a t i v e n e s s of the p l a n n i n g pro-cess. 2.32 Information System. T h i s i s the most c r i t i c a l and the most complex s e t of c r i t e r i a f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . I f r e p r e -s e n t a t i v e n e s s i s accomplished by having adequate o p p o r t u n i t y , there i s s t i l l an immense p o t e n t i a l f o r m a n i p u l a t i o n of the pro-cess through c o n t r o l of. i n f o r m a t i o n . 1) The i n t e r e s t e d c i t i z e n w i l l be made aware of i s s u e s and t h e i r consequences. T h i s i m p l i e s an o b l i g a t i o n on the p a r t of a proponent of an a c t i o n to i n f o r m those who are l i k e l y to be a f f e c t e d . F u l l y s a t i s f y i n g t h i s c r i t e r i o n i s l i k e l y to be d i f f i c u l t f o r the proponent f o r two r e l a t e d reasons. F i r s t , 16 t e c h n i c a l l y o r i e n t e d proponents are u n l i k e l y to be able to s e t down i s s u e s c l e a r l y . Second, the very reason f o r i n v o l v i n g c i t i z e n s i n the process i s t h a t they w i l l see th i n g s t h a t others have missed. The very d i f f i c u l t y of t h i s problem serves to emphasize i t s importance i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . 2) T e c h n i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n w i l l be generated i n such a way t h a t the r i s k s , u n c e r t a i n t i e s , c o s t s and b e n e f i t s are simply and c l e a r l y expressed, to al l o w the p u b l i c to understand t h e i r i m p l i c a t i o n s . 3) There w i l l be d i s c u s s i o n of questions of value judgement, not j u s t t e c h n i c a l d e t a i l s . 4) There w i l l be r e a l debate and d i a l o g u e , i n c l u d i n g d i s -c u s s i o n of assumptions. One-way i n f o r m a t i o n flow i s p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s , not p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n , and i s not adequate. 5) Information w i l l be f u l l y d i s c l o s e d and widely dissem-i n a t e d from the e a r l i e s t stages of the p l a n n i n g process. T h i s i s an important c r i t e r i o n , f o r secrecy of i n f o r m a t i o n can be a major device to dominate a process. The c r i t e r i o n does not mean, however, t h a t there i s no p l a c e f o r c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y i n the process. On the c o n t r a r y , the a b i l i t y of a c t o r s i n the process to contemplate and n e g o t i a t e i n p r i v a t e i s necessary. The process of the t a k i n g of a p o s i t i o n r e q u i r e s c o n f i d e n -t i a l i t y , but - and t h i s i s important - the data on which the p o s i t i o n i s based must be a v a i l a b l e to a l l a c t o r s . 6) A l t e r n a t i v e s o l u t i o n s which express the range of values of a l l i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s w i l l be generated. T h i s a l s o i s an important c r i t e r i o n , both f o r the f a c t t h a t a l t e r n a t i v e s are 17 produced, and t h a t these a l t e r n a t i v e s cover the f u l l range of values i n v o l v e d , and are not merely t e c h n i c a l m o d i f i c a t i o n s . In cases where a s e t of values i s not expressed i n an a l t e r n a -t i v e , the r e l e v a n t i n t e r e s t group must be g i v e n the resources necessary t o generate t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e and to c r i t i q u e o t h e r s . Note, however, t h a t the c r i t e r i o n i s not t h a t every group have the r e s o u r c e s , but t h a t every value s e t be expressed. 7) Data and analyses necessary f o r these a l t e r n a t i v e s w i l l be generated i n time to be used i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . T h i s i s c l e a r l y necessary i f the a l t e r n a t i v e s are to be comparable i n accuracy and d e t a i l . 8) There w i l l be a means of knowing what d e c i s i o n s have been made i n l i g h t of p u b l i c i n p u t , and why. In t h i s model the p u b l i c i s not i n v o l v e d i n the a c t u a l d e c i s i o n , but s t i l l must be made aware of t h a t d e c i s i o n . The c r i t e r i a f o r the i n f o r m a t i o n system are designed f i r s t ( o b v i o u s l y ) , to improve the q u a l i t y of i n f o r m a t i o n used, and second, to maximize the a c c o u n t a b i l i t y of the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . As much as p o s s i b l e the workings o f the process are made v i s -i b l e t o the p u b l i c , who by the pre v i o u s s e t of c r i t e r i a have the chance to p a r t i c i p a t e and i n f l u e n c e the pr o c e s s . 2 « 3 3 Time. T h i s c r i t e r i o n , though very simply s t a t e d , i s i n p r a c t i c e very d i f f i c u l t to meet. 1) S u f f i c i e n t time must be a v a i l a b l e i n the p l a n n i n g pro-cess f o r adequate .information to be generated on which a d e c i s i o n may be based. 18 2.34 B a r g a i n i n g Opportunity. The c r i t e r i o n o f b a r g a i n i n g o p p o r t u n i t y r e l a t e s p r i m a r i l y to the go a l of c o n f l i c t r e s o l u -t i o n , which i s perhaps the most thorny t h e o r e t i c a l t o p i c i n p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . F u l l d i s c u s s i o n of i t w i l l . a w a i t Chapter 5, but one simple c r i t e r i o n can be s t a t e d here. 1) Procedures must be a v a i l a b l e f o r a r e s o l u t i o n of d i f -f e r e n c e s . 2.35 E f f i c a c y . The e f f i c a c y i n q u e s t i o n here i s not th a t of the output of the p l a n n i n g process, but of p a r t i c i p a -t i o n i n the process i t s e l f . 1) P a r t i c i p a n t s must know t h a t t h e i r e f f o r t s are of some val u e , i . e . t h a t they can have some d e s i r a b l e e f f e c t . T h i s i m p l i e s t h a t proponents (and opponents) are not r i g i d l y com-m i t t e d t o t h e i r p r o p o s a l , but are w i l l i n g t o modify t h e i r p o s i t i o n . T h i s i s important to the success of any p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n program, f o r one' t h a t i s merely ornamental to a f i r m d e c i s i o n w i l l not accomplish the goals of p u b l i c p a r t i c i -p a t i o n , and i s l i k e l y to c r e a t e rather/ than r e s o l v e c o n f l i c t , . 2.36. E f f i c i e n c y . E f f i c i e n c y i s a very important c r i t e r i o n i n a l l program e v a l u a t i o n s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y i t i s a very d i f f i -c u l t concept to d e f i n e c l e a r l y once i t goes beyond simple measurement of values c o n v e r t i b l e t o money. The allowances t o be made f o r i n t a n g i b l e v a l u e s , and f o r the element o f r i s k are h i g h l y p r o b l e m a t i c . For example, i t seems:treasonable, t h a t a p l a n t h a t cannot be implemented i s not e f f i c i e n t . I t i s i m p o s s i b l e , however, to be a b s o l u t e l y c e r t a i n i n advance 19 t h a t any g i v e n p l a n c a n be i m p l e m e n t e d . To be e x c e s s i v e l y c a u t i o u s i s n o t e f f i c i e n t e i t h e r . Two c r i t e r i a o f e f f i c i e n c y w i l l be p r o p o s e d h e r e ; t h e n two more w i l l be d i s c u s s e d and r e j e c t e d . 1) P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i l l n o t u n d u l y hamper t h e n o r m a l f u n c t i o n i n g o f g overnment. T h i s does n o t mean t h a t t h e u l t i -mate d e c i s i o n must be y e s ( o r no) t o t h e p r o p o s a l b e c a u s e t h a t w o u l d be n o r m a l f o r t h e p r o p o s i n g a g e n c y . R a t h e r t h e c r i t e r i o n means t h a t o t h e r p rograms n o t i n v o l v e d i n t h e i s s u e a t hand w i l l n o t be c u r t a i l e d by l o s s o f f u n d s o r p e r s o n n e l t o t h e i s s u e i n q u e s t i o n . N o r m a l o p e r a t i o n s s u c h as m o n i t o r i n g and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n w i l l be a b l e t o c o n t i n u e . 2) P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i l l n o t be o u t r a g e o u s l y e x p e n s i v e i n t e r m s o f t i m e and money compared t o t h e b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d f r o m i t . T h i s seems t o be common s e n s e a t f i r s t s i g h t , -b u t i t i s i n f a c t a c o m p l i c a t e d i s s u e . I f t h e c o s t s o f n o t h a v i n g p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n a r e b e l i e v e d t o be v e r y h i g h (be-c a u s e a damaging p r o p o s a l w i l l t h e n be i m p l e m e n t e d ) , t h e n t h e b e n e f i t s t o be g a i n e d f r o m p a r t i c i p a t i o n ( t h e r e j e c t i o n o r m o d i f i c a t i o n o f t h e p r o p o s a l ) w i l l be s e e n t o be h i g h , and h i g h e x p e n s e s f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i t s e l f w i l l be j u s t i f i e d . A p o s s i b l e t h i r d c r i t e r i o n o f e f f i c i e n c y w o u l d be t h a t t h e p r o c e s s aims t o p r o d u c e t h e most e f f i c i e n t p l a n . Such a c r i -t e r i o n begs t h e q u e s t i o n o f what e f f i c i e n c y i s , b u t i m p l i e s t h a t i t i s s o m e t h i n g m e a s u r a b l e i n t e r m s o f q u a n t i f i a b l e i n p u t and o u t p u t . T h i s i s one common v a l u e s e t . However i t i s n o t a t a l l c e r t a i n t h a t t h e most e f f i c i e n t p l a n i s a l s o t h e b e s t 20 p l a n . The decision-maker must determine t h a t . T h e r e f o r e t h i s c r i t e r i o n i s not a p p r o p r i a t e . A p o s s i b l e f o u r t h c r i t e r i o n would be t h a t the process serve to approach or achieve the goals f o r which i t was e s t a b l i s h e d . T h i s i s l o g i c a l , except t h a t i t presupposes a c l e a r statement of goals a t the o u t s e t of the process which i s ve r y r a r e , and of q u e s t i o n a b l e v a l u e . Such a c l e a r g o a l statement i s recommended by many observers i n order to reduce c o n f l i c t and f r u s t r a t i o n i n l a t e r stages of the proc e s s . However " (goals) change and one of the important f u n c t i o n s of i n s t i t u t i o n s i s t o a d j u s t the course being pur-sued i n accord with the changing p r i o r i t i e s of s o c i e t y . Since performance cannot be assessed i n terms of g o a l s , we must make our assessment i n terms of the process by which the course of a c t i o n i s decided upon. This i n f a c t " i s the way we have a l -ways judged i n s t i t u t i o n s " (Fox, 1976). There are advantages to l e a v i n g goals vague': i t may pre -vent the d i r e c t i o n of the process from becoming too r i g i d ; i t may r e l e a s e time and energy f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f the i s s u e i t -s e l f ; i t may permit c o n s i d e r a b l e areas o f agreement and accomplishment to develop before u n d e r l y i n g c o n f l i c t s h a l t the proce s s . Therefore the measurement of e f f i c i e n c y by goals i s not adopted i n t h i s t h e s i s . 2-37 Summary. For convenience o f r e f e r e n c e a l l the c r i -t e r i a are l i s t e d here. Each i s condensed t o a s h o r t phrase which can be remembered,.For d i s c u s s i o n , p l e a s e r e f e r back t o the p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n s . Opportunity to P a r t i c i p a t e : 1) A l l a f f e c t e d i n t e r e s t s can p a r t i c i p a t e . 21 2) Opportunity from the e a r l i e s t stages. Information System 1) I n t e r e s t e d c i t i z e n made aware. 2) T e c h n i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n c l e a r . 3) D i s c u s s i o n of v a l u e s . 4) Real debate and d i a l o g u e . 5) F u l l d i s c l o s u r e from e a r l i e s t stages. 6) A l t e r n a t i v e s express f u l l range of values, 7) Necessary data generated when needed. 8) D e c i s i o n s and r a t i o n a l e known. Time 1) S u f f i c i e n t Time w i l l be a v a i l a b l e . B a r g a i n i n g Opportunity 1) Procedures f o r r e s o l u t i o n of d i f f e r e n c e s . E f f i c a c y 1). P a r t i c i p a n t s e f f o r t s of v a l u e . E f f i c i e n c y 1) Normal f u n c t i o n i n g unhampered. 2) Cost not outrageous. 22 CHAPTER THREE THE VANCOUVER INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS The events surrounding the p r o p o s a l to expand the Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t are complex and lengthy. I t i s d i f f i c u l t to present them i n an order t h a t i s e a s i l y understandable to one not a l r e a d y f a m i l i a r with the s u b j e c t . T h i s chapter attempts to p r o v i d e the i n f o r m a t i o n one step a t a time, a s t y l e which r e s u l t s i n a long e x p o s i t i o n . The reader who becomes confused about dates, or who wishes more i n f o r m a t i o n , i s encouraged to r e f e r to Appendix 1: Chronology of Events, f o r c l a r i f i c a t i o n . S e c t i o n 3.1 d e s c r i b e s the s e t t i n g . S e c t i o n 3.2 i n t r o -duces and b r i e f l y d i s c u s s e s the a c t o r s i n the drama. S e c t i o n 3.3 s e t s out the process, the events and the r e a c t i o n s of the a c t o r s . T h i s s e c t i o n c o n t a i n s much of the data on which Chapters 4 and 5 depend. S e c t i o n 3.4 i s a b r i e f i n t e r p r e t a -t i o n of events s i n c e March 1976, but these are s t i l l i n the making, so are not emphasized i n the e v a l u a t i o n to f o l l o w . The s e l e c t i o n of events to d i s c u s s has been a problem i n p r e p a r i n g t h i s chapter. S e v e r a l sources were used: w r i t t e n r e p o r t s of the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee, Minutes of a l l committee meetings (but not of a l l sub-committee meet-ings) , documents t a b l e d at the meetings and attached to the Minutes, r e l a t e d correspondence and memoranda, r e p o r t s and r e s e a r c h notes of p a r t i c i p a n t s , and i n t e r v i e w s with the par-t i c i p a n t s themselves. A l l except the l a s t source were w r i t t e n , but the i n t e r v i e w s were s t i l l necessary to f i l l gaps 23 and to c l a r i f y c o n f u s i n g exchanges i n the w r i t t e n m a t e r i a l . ' The r e s u l t of t h i s e f f o r t was a massive accumulation o f data which had to be s y n t h e s i z e d . Such a s y n t h e s i s cannot be e n t i r e l y o b j e c t i v e , but p r e c a u t i o n s a g a i n s t b i a s were taken. An o u t l i n e of the im-p o r t a n t events was prepared from the w r i t t e n m a t e r i a l . T h i s was compared to the i n f o r m a t i o n from i n t e r v i e w s with e i g h t par-t i c i p a n t s from .seven •- agencies, i n c l u d i n g the e d i t o r of the r e p o r t . The most important events were mentioned r e p e a t e d l y i n the i n t e r v i e w s , o f t e n with opposing i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . Regardless of the agency p o i n t of view d u r i n g the process there was a hig h degree of agreement over the tone of the whole process ( d i s t r u s t and c o n f l i c t ) and which events were major or t y p i c a l . The events d i s c u s s e d were s e l e c t e d f o r the f o l l o w i n g reasons. F i r s t of a l l , they were a l l r e l a t e d to matters-oof process r a t h e r than to matters of substance, i n keeping w i t h the focus of t h i s study. Second, some were major events or c r i s e s i n the process which e i t h e r had important consequences f o r the r e s t of the pr o c e s s , or were climaxes of continued problems. These events are i n t u i t i v e l y obvious. T h i r d , some were t y p i c a l events, o f t e n repeated, which i n d i c a t e the ge n e r a l s t a t e of the process. Fourth, some are events which c l e a r l y bear upon the p r e v i o u s l y d e r i v e d c r i t e r i a f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n , events which must be i n c l u d e d i f these p a r t i -c u l a r c r i t e r i a are to be used i n e v a l u a t i o n . 24 3.1 The S e t t i n g In the Vancouver m e t r o p o l i t a n r e g i o n l i v e more than one m i l l i o n people, approximately h a l f the p o p u l a t i o n o f B.C. The urbaniz e d area i s bounded on the nor t h by the coa s t mountains, on the west by the sea, on the south by the American border. On the e a s t l i e s the f e r t i l e lower F r a s e r v a l l e y , the farm-land of which i s now p r o t e c t e d by a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d r e s e r v e s . W i t h i n 35 mi l e s of downtown Vancouver are o n l y 70 0 square m i l e s of p o t e n t i a l urban l a n d . By comparison, Toronto has 1500 square m i l e s , and Montreal 3000 square m i l e s w i t h i n 35 mil e s of t h e i r c e n t r e s (APC March, 1976, 3). As w e l l as the p h y s i c a l l i m i t s to the amount of land a v a i l a b l e , g r e a t e r Vancouver faces s p e c i a l problems of s e n s i -t i v i t y o f the land. T h i s i s p a r t i c u l a r l y t r u e i n the e s t u a r y and d e l t a of the F r a s e r R i v e r , which reaches the sea immed-i a t e l y south of the c i t y . The' F r a s e r s t i l l c o n t a i n s the l a r g e s t run of salmon i n the world, d e s p i t e competing uses of the v i t a l lower reaches by the l a r g e urban p o p u l a t i o n . The Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t i s p a r t i c u l a r l y c o n s t r a i n e d by these f a c t o r s (see F i g u r e s 1 to 3). I t i s l o c a t e d a t the mouth of the North Arm of the F r a s e r , adjacent to both Vancouver and the urbanized p a r t s of Richmond, and pressed a g a i n s t the est u a r y which i s so important an e c o l o g i -c a l r e s o u r c e . A l l e x t e n s i v e l a n d uses are c o n s t r a i n e d by the la c k of land. A i r p o r t f u n c t i o n s are e s p e c i a l l y c o n s t r a i n e d because of the need f o r f l a t t e r r a i n and f o r adequate a i r space r e l a t i v e to other a i r p o r t s . FIGURE No. 1 Vancouver International Airport Proposed Parallel Runway Concepts CITY OF VANCOUVER \ ^ — lona Island r~- N . ' * < i f I \ \ Sturgeon Bank-. Sea Island »•« > " CONCEPT t _ 3 Approx-70 Acre fill on-Sturgeon Bank. Middle Arm RICHMOND Figure 2: Vancouver International A i r p o r t : Proposed P a r a l l e l Runway Concepts Source: A i r p o r t Planning Committee F i n a l Report FIGURE 3 VANCOUVER INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT EXPANSION - CONCEPT 1 Source: Summary Report of the E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee ' * 28 As p a r t of i t s normal p l a n n i n g f u n c t i o n i n the face of growing demand f o r a i r s e r v i c e s , the f e d e r a l M i n i s t e r y of Transport developed a p l a n to c o n s t r u c t a new runway p a r a l l e l to the e x i s t i n g main runway, but 5700 f e e t t o the n o r t h . The p a r a l l e l runway system would g r e a t l y i n c r e a s e c a p a c i t y and f l e x i b i l i t y of a i r s e r v i c e i n the r e g i o n . A number of concepts f o r the new runway were proposed. The d i f f e r e n c e s between concepts were b a s i c a l l y the l e n g t h of the runway, and i t s pos-i t i o n on an east-west a x i s . The d i f f e r e n t concepts had v a r y i n g impacts on the amount of f i l l r e q u i r e d i n the e s t u a r y and the amount of n o i s e generated over u r b a n i z e d areas,'as w e l l as o t h e r e f f e c t s . By 1975 o n l y concept 1 was s t i l l under a c t i v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n (see F i g u r e s 2 and 3). The other concepts had c a l l e d f o r runways f u r t h e r to the west, which would have r e q u i r e d both more dredging and more f i l l i n the e s t u a r y . These plans f o r a i r p o r t expansion caused concern i n other agencies, p a r t i c u l a r l y the Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t which was i n v o l v e d i n a p l a n n i n g e x e r c i s e (the L i v a b l e Region Program) which was p o t e n t i a l l y i n c o m p a t i b l e with the plans f o r the new runway. These concerns l e d i n 19 73 to the c r e a t i o n of an i n t e r - a g e n c y body, the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee, to study the whole problem. 3.2 The A c t o r s 3-21 F e d e r a l . The f o l l o w i n g are agencies of the F e d e r a l Government i n Ottawa which p l a y e d a r o l e i n Vancouver a i r p o r t p l a n n i n g . 29 M i n i s t r y of T r a n s p o r t (MOT): MOT i s the t r a n s p o r t a t i o n agency of the F e d e r a l Government, with o p e r a t i o n a l , r e g u l a t o r y and developmental f u n c t i o n s . I t s major component, concerned w i t h a i r t r a n s p o r t , i s the Canadian A i r T r a n s p o r t A d m i n i s t r a -t i o n (CATA). Throughout the process a l l a c t o r s r e f e r r e d to MOT r a t h e r than to CATA; t h i s s m a l l t r a d i t i o n i s continued here. However, no other branch of MOT became i n v o l v e d . MOT p o l i c y , as s t a t e d i n the paper Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n -a l A i r p o r t , Master Pl a n n i n g P r o j e c t , March 27, 1974, i s "to ensure t h a t n a t i o n a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p o l i c y i n f l u e n c e s and responds to the o b j e c t i v e s and programs of the p u b l i c and p r i v a t e s e c t o r s . " CATA p o l i c y i s "on a c o s t - r e c o v e r a b l e b a s i s to the maximum p r a c t i c a b l e extent, to p r o v i d e s a f e and e f f i -c i e n t f a c i l i t i e s and s e r v i c e s f o r the support of a e r o n a u t i c s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the p r o t e c t i o n o f the environment." L a t e r i n the p r o c e s s , i n response to s p e c i f i c g u e r i e s , MOT p o l i c y was r e s t a t e d : " I t i s the p o l i c y of the M i n i s t r y to accommodate the p u b l i c demand f o r a i r t r a v e l , n e i t h e r to encourage i t nor to discourage i t " ( A i r p o r t P lanning Committee, Minutes, Dec. 5, 19 74). Note t h a t there i s an i n h e r e n t c o n t r a d i c t i o n between t h i s p o l i c y and the o v e r a l l p o l i c y s t a t e d f i r s t . The l a s t s t a t e d p o l i c y makes no mention of o b j e c t i v e s of the p u b l i c or p r i v a t e s e c t o r s . P o t e n t i a l c o n f l i c t w i t h c e r t a i n p u b l i c o b j e c t i v e s (such as the L i v a b l e Region Program) was one of the b a s i c reasons f o r e s t a b l i s h m e n t of the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee, and became the s u b j e c t of study by one of i t s sub-committees, as e x p l a i n e d below. 30 MOT i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the Canadian a i r system and thus i s the agency which i n i t i a t e d the p r o p o s a l to expand VIA. A s p e c i a l p l a n n i n g group w i t h i n the M i n i s t r y was e s t a b l i s h e d f o r t h i s s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t , the Vancouver A i r p o r t Master Pl a n n i n g Team (VAMPT). T h i s group had much c o n t a c t w i t h , but no r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o , the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee. Department of the Environment (DOE): T h i s f e d e r a l agency a d m i n i s t e r s environmental p o l i c y i n most of i t s aspects. There are numerous branches a d m i n i s t e r i n g f i s h e r i e s , a i r , i n l a n d water, lands, and so on. C r i t i c a l to the o p e r a t i o n of DOE i s the "Environmental Assessment and Review Process" (EARP), e s t a b l i s h e d by F e d e r a l Cabinet D i r e c t i v e on Dec. 20, 1973. "EARP a p p l i e s to those p r o j e c t s which are i n i t i a t e d by F e d e r a l Departments or by agencies which u t i l i z e F e d e r a l funds, or which i n v o l v e F e d e r a l lands. For any development which can have adverse e f f e c t s on the environment, an environmental impact study i s t o be undertaken and the r e s u l t s submitted to Department of the Environment f o r review, b e f o r e committments are made. . . . EARP was designed to leave the conduct of the environmental assessment i n the hands of the proponent. However, the prepar-a t i o n of environmental impact assessment g u i d e l i n e s , which determines the scope and comprehensiveness of the r e q u i r e d assessment, i s the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of DOE, as i s the f i n a l review of the r e s u l t s of the completed study" ( E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee, Jan. 1976, p. 16). The A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee was e s t a b l i s h e d before EARP, so the a i r p o r t p r o j e c t was not o f f i c i a l l y r e q u i r e d t o f o l l o w the pro c e s s . However, the study design of the a i r p o r t p r o j e c t d i d show much of the same phi l o s o p h y as EARP, and was f i n a l i z e d i n e a r l y 1974, a f t e r EARP came i n t o e f f e c t . In a d d i t i o n to the r e g u l a r employees of DOE, the M i n i s t e r 31 e s t a b l i s h e d , i n Feb. 1974, a S p e c i a l A d v i s o r y P a n e l " f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f r e v i e w i n g and i d e n t i f y i n g gaps i n t h e i m p a c t s t u d y o f t h e p r o p o s e d e x p a n s i o n o f V a n c o u v e r I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t , and m a k i n g recom-m e n d a t i o n s t o t h e M i n i s t e r . . . The P a n e l . . . c o n s i s t s o f p e r s o n s w e l l known f o r t h e i r c o n c e r n f o r e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s s u e s " ( S p e c i a l A d v i s o r y P a n e l , M a r c h 22, 1 9 76). T h i s was s t r i c t l y a m o n i t o r i n g g r o u p , w i t h no d i r e c t p a r t i c i -p a t i o n i n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . M i n i s t r y o f S t a t e f o r U r b a n A f f a i r s (MSUA). T h i s a g e n c y c o o r d i n a t e s f e d e r a l p o l i c i e s w h i c h a f f e c t u r b a n a r e a s , and was c o n c e r n e d w i t h a i r p o r t e x p a n s i o n b e c a u s e o f i t s s e c o n d o r d e r e f f e c t s on t h e V a n c o u v e r u r b a n s y s t e m . MSUA was an a c t i v e member o f t h e T r i - L e v e l Committee and o f t h e A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee, b u t was n o t as much a f f e c t e d as MOT o r DOE. MSUA was a l s o t h e s o u r c e o f f u n d i n g f o r t h e G r e a t e r V a n c o u v e r R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t and t h e Community Forum. D e p a r t m e n t o f P u b l i c Works (DPW)• T h i s a g e n c y i s t h e r e a l e s t a t e arm o f t h e government and i m p l e m e n t s c a p i t a l works p r o j e c t s o f o t h e r f e d e r a l a g e n c i e s . I t s ' i n v o l v e m e n t i n p o l i c y p l a n n i n g i t s e l f i s n e g l i g i b l e , b u t i t i s r e s p o n s i b l e - f o r b r i d g e c o n s t r u c t i o n t o t h e a i r p o r t , d r e d g i n g f o r c h a n n e l m a i n t e n a n c e and f i l l , and e x p r o p r i a t i o n . The f i r s t c o n f l i c t i n t h e a i r -p o r t p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s c o n c e r n e d e x p r o p r i a t i o n o f r e s i d e n c e s f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e new A r t h u r L a i n g B r i d g e t o t h e a i r p o r t . 3.22 p r o v i n c i a l . The p r o v i n c e has not been prominent i n any p a r t of the process. There was one p r o v i n c i a l r e p r e -s e n t a t i v e on the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee. The r e p r e s e n t a -t i v e came from the Department of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s or the Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and Communication at d i f f e r e n t stages (and d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s ) i n the p r o c e s s . A more a c t i v e r o l e of the p r o v i n c e might have been ex-pected based on the i n t e r e s t s at stake. The stance taken seems to have r e s u l t e d from a r e c e n t change of government ( i n 1972), which gave the a i r p o r t i s s u e a r e l a t i v e l y low p r i o r i t y . A l s o the p r o v i n c e was content t o l e t the l o c a l m u n i c i p a l o r g -a n i z a t i o n s , which are r e s p o n s i b l e to the p r o v i n c i a l government, take the l e a d i n p r e s e n t i n g p r o v i n c i a l i n t e r e s t s . 3.23 Regional and M u n i c i p a l . These agencies are l e g i s -l a t e d c r e a t i o n s of the P r o v i n c i a l Government, under the M u n i c i p a l Act and the Vancouver C h a r t e r . C i t y of Vancouver. The North Arm of the F r a s e r R i v e r separates Vancouver from Sea I s l a n d where the a i r p o r t i s l o c a t e d . A i r c o r r i d o r s t o and from the a i r p o r t c r o s s the c i t y . Much of the commercial a c t i v i t y i n the r e g i o n occurs w i t h i n the c i t y boundaries. The main access route to the a i r -p o r t connects d i r e c t l y w i t h Vancouver. One of i t s expensive r e s i d e n t i a l areas, and one of i t s major parks are l o c a t e d near the a i r p o r t . T h e r e f o r e Vancouver would bear many of the i n -d i r e c t c o s t s (noise, reduced p r o p e r t y v a l u e s , i n c r e a s e d ground t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , reduced park use) and some of the b e n e f i t s ( i n c r e a s e d commercial a c t i v i t y ) a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a i r p o r t expan-33 s i o n . M u n i c i p a l i t y of Richmond. The a i r p o r t i s l o c a t e d w i t h i n Richmond, and i s i t s major i n d u s t r y , and i t s major source o f tax revenue. Richmond a l s o s u f f e r s from a i r p o r t n o i s e more than any oth e r m u n i c i p a l i t y , i n c l u d i n g Vancouver. G r e a t e r Vancouver Region a l D i s t r i c t (GVRD). T h i s agency a d m i n i s t e r s a number of s e r v i c e s and programs t h a t a f f e c t the e n t i r e u r b a n i z e d area and f r i n g e s surrounding Vancouver, such as water supply and drainage, parks, waste d i s p o s a l , and r e g i o n a l p l a n n i n g . I t i s made up of members of l o c a l c o u n c i l s who were a l s o d i r e c t l y e l e c t e d by the v o t e r s as members of GVRD. Thus the members are a l s o members of another c o u n c i l , but do not r e p r e s e n t t h a t c o u n c i l i n GVRD. Rather they rep-r e s e n t the v o t e r s d i r e c t l y . The GVRD a l s o has i t s own a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a f f , independent of other agencies. In 19 71 GVRD i n i t i a t e d an e x t e n s i v e p l a n n i n g program c a l l e d "The L i v a b l e Region", to s e t o b j e c t i v e s and p r i o r i t i e s i n forthcoming p o l i c i e s f o r the r e g i o n . P a r t of t h i s program was a very e x t e n s i v e p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n program. The pro-gram culminated i n 19 75 w i t h the p r o d u c t i o n of The L i v a b l e  Region 1976/1986, which advocated the management ( r e d i s t r i -bution) of growth i n t o a m u l t i - c e n t r e d urban r e g i o n . From 1972 GVRD was concerned w i t h the p o s s i b l e e f f e c t s of a i r p o r t expansion on t h e i r then-developing L i v a b l e Region p o l i c i e s . Because of t h i s concern they i n s e r t e d themselves i n the a i r p o r t p l a n n i n g process i n a s u b s t a n t i a l way. In f a c t the i n s t i t u t i o n s and processes which f o l l o w e d can i n l a r g e measure be a t t r i b u t e d to t h i s GVRD i n i t i a t i v e . 34 3.24 T r i - L e v e l Greater Vancouver T r i - L e v e l Committee. T r i - l e v e l committees are intergovernmental bodies which e x i s t f o r most urban regions i n Canada. MSUA i n i t i a t e d them f o r the purpose of c o - o r d i n a t i n g f e d e r a l , p r o v i n c i a l , and r e g i o n a l p o l i c i e s f o r each urban area. Each area a c t u a l l y has two committees. The P o l i t i c a l Committee i s composed of e l e c t e d . r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s ; the S t a f f Committee has no p o l i t i c a l members. Membership i s f l e x i b l e , v a r y i n g a c c o r d i n g to the agenda of a p a r t i c u l a r meeting. The G r e a t e r Vancouver T r i - L e v e l P o l i t i c a l Committee met f o r the f i r s t time on March 31, 1973. A i r p o r t expansion had been p l a c e d on the agenda by the GVRD, and the est a b l i s h m e n t of the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee was approved i n p r i n c i p l e . At f o l l o w i n g s t a f f l e v e l meetings the terms of r e f e r e n c e were d e f i n e d . 3.25 P u b l i c and Industry. In a sense both of these c a t e g o r i e s are p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s , i n as much as n e i t h e r i s d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e d i n government or policy-making. As the process developed these two i n t e r e s t s were shown to be r a d i -c a l l y opposed, so i t i s convenient to keep them separate i n the a n a l y s i s . A i r C a r r i e r s . T h i s a i r i n d u s t r y group i n c l u d e s a l l com-panies w i t h r e g u l a r scheduled s e r v i c e s and passenger c h a r t e r s . As with the B.C. A v i a t i o n C o u n c i l , t h i s group has c o - o r d i n a -t i o n and lob b y i n g f u n c t i o n s i n the i n d u s t r y . 35 B.C. A v i a t i o n C o u n c i l (B.C.Av.C). T h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n r e p r e s e n t s the c l a s s o f a c t i v i t y known as General A v i a t i o n . I t i n c l u d e s a l l p r i v a t e a i r c r a f t , and non-scheduled commercial f l y -i n g . Examples of the l a t t e r are a e r i a l photography, f o r e s t f i r e f i g h t i n g , and a i r c r a f t f o r h i r e . Community Forum on A i r p o r t Development (CF). T h i s was the p u b l i c a c t i o n group which developed out of concerns f o r n o i s e and e c o l o g i c a l damage. I t was a c t i v e l y sponsored and promoted by the GVRD. At the T r i - L e v e l meeting which e s t a b l i s h e d the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee, GVRD was s p e c i f i c a l l y charged w i t h o r g a n i z i n g a community group. Funding came from MSUA through GVRD. Despite t h i s CF was not bound by p o l i c y statements o f e i t h e r agency, and acted as a f r e e agent i n the pr o c e s s . The f i r s t formal meeting o f the CF was Nov. 8, 1973, but ad hoc members were a c t i v e on the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee from Aug. 2, 1973. CF adopted these statements as i t s terms of r e f e r e n c e : "1) To p a r t i c i p a t e i n i n f o r m i n g the p u b l i c of the r a m i f i c a t i o n s of a i r p o r t development. 2) To s t i m u l a t e , c o l l e c t , and convey c i t i z e n s ' con-cern on a i r p o r t development t o the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee and a l l l e v e l s o f government. 3) To p a r t i c i p a t e a c t i v e l y i n the a i r p o r t p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . 4) To p a r t i c i p a t e i n r e s e a r c h i n g v a r i o u s aspects o f a i r p o r t development and o t h e r r e l a t e d develop-ments" (CF Newsletter, n.d.). CF was giv e n three r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s on the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee, i n r e c o g n i t i o n of three major p u b l i c o r g a n i z a t i o n s t h a t c o n t r i b u t e d to i t : the B.C. W i l d l i f e F e d e r a t i o n , the Gre a t e r Vancouver C i t i z e n s ' Committee on Noise Abatement, and the Richmond Ratepayers A s s o c i a t i o n (Bridgeport Chapter). CF 36 was not a c o a l i t i o n , however, f o r the S t e e r i n g Committee was e l e c t e d a t l a r g e , r a t h e r than having each c o n s t i t u e n t group pro-v i d e a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . Other o r g a n i z a t i o n s and u n a f f i l i a t e d i n -d i v i d u a l s d i d become a c t i v e i n CF, but these three i n t e r e s t s continued t o make up the bulk of the o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s active^mem-b e r s h i p . 3.26 The A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee (APC). The terms o f re f e r e n c e o f the APC were d e f i n e d by the T r i - L e v e l S t a f f Commi-teee on A p r i l 16, 19 73. The APC was "to a d v i s e on s t u d i e s needed to ensure t h a t the proposed development of the Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t i s compatible w i t h the p l a n n i n g of the v a r i o u s l e v e l s of government and the concerns of the p u b l i c i n the communi-t i e s i n v o l v e d ; to c o n s i d e r and make recommendations on the s t u d i e s undertaken" (APC, March, 1976, 1). The F i r s t meeting was h e l d on June 6, 1973. I t met c o n t i n -uously f o r three years:, on an average, o f once every three weeks ( l e s s i n summer). The- f i n a l meeting was on Feb. 19, 1976. The APC i t s e l f . d e t e r m i n e d the s t u d i e s i t would undertake and the l i m i t a t i o n s on i t s a c t i o n s . Although membership of the APC v a r i e d a c c o r d i n g to the need f o r s p e c i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s , there was a standard core membership. MOT had f o u r members, i n c l u d i n g the chairman. CF had three r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s ; GVRD had two. The A i r C a r r i e r s , B.C. A v i a t i o n C o u n c i l , DOE, DPW, MSUA, Richmond, the P r o v i n c e , and Vancouver had one each. T h i s was a represen-t a t i o n of 17 members from 11 agencies. A d d i t i o n a l members attended f o r lengthy periods of time. The APC was not funded as a u n i t i t s e l f , but s p e c i a l funds were put a s i d e by p a r t i c i p a t i n g agencies t o fund t h e i r own involvement. MOT s u p p l i e d most of the funding, amounting e v e n t u a l l y t o $760,000, and a l l the necessary s e r v i c e s such as. s e c r e t a r i a l support and p u b l i s h i n g . DOE a l s o had a l a r g e 37 budget, amounting to $470,000. Most of t h i s went i n t o the e c o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s . MSUA funded both GVRD and - i n d i r e c t l y -CF, to a t o t a l of $125,000. Because membership i n the APC was not r i g i d , and because i t was not p o s s i b l e to assess the r e l a t i v e importance of each p o i n t of view re p r e s e n t e d , the committee proceeded by consen-sus and d i s s e n t r a t h e r than by m a j o r i t y vote. I t took some time f o r the consensus procedures to be c l a r i f i e d ( f o r example the method of agency comments d i s c u s s e d below), but once e s t a b l i s h e d they were g e n e r a l l y f o l l o w e d t i l l the end. The APC was supposed t o r e p o r t back to the T r i - L e v e l P o l i t i c a l Committee a f t e r completion of i t s a c t i v i t i e s , ad-v i s i n g t h i s body what a c t i o n s were recommended. Thus i t d i d not r e p o r t back through any p a r t i c u l a r agency, but d i r e c t l y to a j o i n t ' p o l i t i c a l body. In a d d i t i o n , members r e p o r t e d back to t h e i r own agencies. These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n d i c a t e t h a t the APC was essen-t i a l l y an implementation of the second model of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n , , ianechapt&bl2.cagericiy-publiic.njpint p l a n n i n g . In m a t e r i a l promoting the formal e s t a b l i s h m e n t of the CF, GVRD had t h i s comment on the APC: "The A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee i s the f i r s t j o i n t p l a n n i n g process among three l e v e l s of government and the ge n e r a l p u b l i c t h a t has been attempted i n Canada. No other proposed a i r p o r t development has. been approached t h i s way. Consequently, the process has l o t s of 'kinks' to be worked out of i t . Since the Committee came i n t o e x i s t e n c e l a s t summer, the major order of business has been t o t r y to work out those, 'kinks' and prove t h a t c o o p e r a t i v e p l a n n i n g , r a t h e r than u n i l a t e r a l a c t i o n on the p a r t of one l e v e l of government, can produce s o l u t i o n s which meet the needs of l o c a l as w e l l as n a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t " (GVRD, Oct. 26, 1973). 38J T h i s can be compared t o an MOT statement concerning the pr e v i o u s p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , made i n a l e t t e r from I. Jones (MOT) to G. Waddell (CF), June 18, 1974: " P r i o r to the formation of the APC and i t s open p l a n n i n g process which p r o v i d e s f o r d i r e c t c i t i z e n involvement, the M i n i s t r y had undertaken a i r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f a c i l i t y p l a n n i n g l a r g e l y i n -house. T h i s was not t o t a l l y without involvement of l o c a l governments and m u n i c i p a l i t i e s through t h e i r e l e c t e d or p l a n n i n g s t a f f r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , i n t h i s . r e s p e c t / i n s o f a r as VIA i s concerned, a l o c a l c o n s u l t a t i v e committee was i n being i n 1969 c o n s i s t i n g of M i n i s t r y and l o c a l agencies through which the plans and i n t e n t i o n s of the M i n i s t r y i n r e s p e c t of the second p a r a l l e l run-way were communicated. Through t h i s c o n s u l t a t i v e committee and other c o n t a c t s over the ye a r s , the f o l l o w i n g l o c a l government and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l bodies were l a r g e l y aware of the M i n i s t r y ' s plans and i n t e n t i o n s i n t h i s area: Government of B.C., C i t y o f Vancouver, M u n i c i p a l i t y o f Richmond, Lower Mainland Regional P l a n n i n g Board, Lower Mainland A i r p o r t C o n s u l t a t i v e Committee." The APC developed a study design w i t h the a s s i s t a n c e of a c o n s u l t a n t from B.C. Research. The same c o n s u l t a n t even-t u a l l y wrote the APC F i n a l Report. The study d e s i g n i n v o l v e d the c r e a t i o n o f s i x sub-committees. The sub-committees i n c l u d e d some members who d i d not s i t on the APC i t s e l f , but the chairman of each sub-committee was r e q u i r e d to be an APC member. At f i r s t CF r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s were not to be a c t i v e members of sub-commi-t t e e s , but t h i s was changed i n Dec. 19 73. The APC F i n a l Report (p. 11) o u t l i n e s the d u t i e s of each sub-committee. A i r p o r t F a c i l i t i e s Sub-Committee: to take i n v e n t o r y of presen t a i r p o r t f a c i l i t i e s i n the Vancouver r e g i o n and to c a r r y out demand-capacity s t u d i e s f o r these a i r p o r t f a c i l i -3? A i r p o r t s System Sub-Committee: to examine a l t e r n a t i v e means of accommodating f o r e c a s t a i r t r a f f i c i n the Vancouver r e g i o n . E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee: to assess the impact of a i r p o r t developments on the n a t u r a l environment. F o r e c a s t i n g - a n d Economic Sub-Committee: to agree upon a range of a i r t r a f f i c f o r e c a s t s f o r the Vancouver area, and to assess the economic impact of a i r p o r t s on the r e g i o n . Noise and S o c i a l Impact Sub-Committee: l a t e r the Noise Sub-Committee: to assess the e f f e c t s of a i r c r a f t n o i s e and to determine the impact of a i r p o r t s on the human environment, ( i . e . l i v a b i l i t y ) . In Nov. 1974 the s o c i a l impact r e s p o n s i -b i l i t i e s were t r a n s f e r r e d t o the PRMD sub-committee, whose d e s c r i p t i o n f o l l o w s . P r o v i n c i a l , R e g i o n a l , and M u n i c i p a l Development Sub-Committee (PRMD): to take i n v e n t o r y of e x i s t i n g r e g i o n a l plans and programs and to determine the impact of a i r p o r t s on these. To determine the impact of the a i r p o r t on r e g i o n a l ground t r a n s p o r t a t i o n ( S o c i a l impact added i n Nov. 1974). 3.3 The APC Process T h i s s e c t i o n focusses on s p e c i f i c aspects of the process, and the major c o n t r o v e r s i e s which arose, more or l e s s i n sequence. The w r i t t e n minutes and correspondence are not always s u f f i c i e n t to e x p l a i n what o c c u r r e d , so some r e l i a n c e i s p l a c e d on o r a l and w r i t t e n memories of p a r t i c i p a n t s . The major events around which the f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n i s s t r u c -t u r e d , are summarized i n Table 1. 40 TABLE 1: 1972 Sept./Oct. Nov./Dec. 19 73 Jan./Feb. M a r . / A p r i l May/June July/Aug. Sept./Oct. Nov./Dec. 1974 Jan./Feb. M a r . / A p r i l May/June July/Aug. Sept./Oct. Nov./Dec. 1975 Jan./Feb. M a r . / A p r i l May/June July/Aug. Sept./Oct. Nov./Dec. 19 76 Jan./Feb. MAJOR EVENTS OF THE APC PROCESS MOT f i l e d n o t i c e of i n t e n t t o e x p r o p r i a t e on Sea I s l a n d . E x p r o p r i a t i o n hearings took p l a c e . The APC was c r e a t e d by the T r i - L e v e l P o l i -t i c a l Committee, March 31. The f i r s t meeting of the APC was h e l d , June 6. P r o v i s i o n a l p u b l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s were seated on the APC, Aug. 2. The f i r s t meeting of the Community Forum took, p l a c e Nov. 8. The n o i s e c o n t r a c t c o n t r o v e r s y took place, The Study Design was adopted, Feb. 21. The main runway a t VIA was c l o s e d f o r three months f o r r e p a i r s . The GVRD r e l e a s e d i t s S t a f f P o s i t i o n Paper, Oct. 23. A T r i - L e v e l S t a f f meeting was h e l d to review progress of the APC. Controversy erupted over MOT's pamphlet: Sorry About the Noise. Controversy f o r c e d the APC Chairman to r e s i g n , May 30. MOT's new p r o p o s a l was r e j e c t e d by the APC. CF threatened to leave the APC over the d r a f t i n g of the F i n a l ; Report. The f i n a l meeting of the APC took p l a c e , Feb. 19. March The F i n a l Report was p u b l i s h e d . 41 3.31 E s t a b l i s h i n g the Process, Jan. 1973 to Feb. 1974. The immediate cause of the APC process was a c o n f r o n t a -t i o n over the e x p r o p r i a t i o n of l a n d on Sea I s l a n d f o r a i r p o r t expansion. T h i s l e d to e x p r o p r i a t i o n hearings (January and February 1973) a t which the p u b l i c presented arguments a g a i n s t the e x p r o p r i a t i o n . Convinced t h a t the r e s i d e n t s had a j u s t case a g a i n s t e x p r o p r i a t i o n , the GVRD presented a b r i e f sup-p o r t i n g t h a t view. F u r t h e r GVRD i n i t i a t i v e caused a change i n the process of environmental s t u d i e s by DOE, announced i n February 1973, to one of j o i n t p l a n n i n g among a number of agencies and d i r e c t p u b l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . Two r e l a t e d p o i n t s on t h i s f i r s t stage need emphasis. F i r s t , MOT had i n essence made the d e c i s i o n to proceed. T h i s i s c l e a r both from the completion of e x p r o p r i a t i o n proceedings, and from the p o l i c y announced on A p r i l 13, 1973, t h a t the runway would be b u i l t unless major damage were demonstrated. Second, t h i s p o l i c y was i n t e r p r e t e d w i d e l y as meaning "we're going to do i t anyway, unless you can stop us'. T h i s meant th a t the process began i n an atmosphere of d i s t r u s t of MOT, and d i s b e l i e f of t h e i r commitment to t r u e p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n and j o i n t p l a n n i n g , as opposed to p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s . T h i s l a c k of t r u s t proved s u b s t a n t i a l i n many r e s p e c t s from ot h e r a c t o r s ' p o i n t s of view, perhaps p a r t l y as a s e l f - f u l f i l l i n g prophesy. Throughout the process MOT adhered to t h i s p o l i c y without m o d i f i c a t i o n . I t was r e a f f i r m e d i n a l e t t e r , J u l y 2, 1974 (Jones to Spencer), when the a l t e r n a t i v e of no-expansion of 42 runway f a c i l i t i e s was r e j e c t e d , unless the new runway were proved too damaging. I t was r e a f f i r m e d on Sept. 30, 19 74 i n another l e t t e r (Lenahan to Jones) which urged the APC to work (q u i c k l y ) to i t s terms of r e f e r e n c e . The terms of r e f e r e n c e of the APC r e f e r to the "proposed development" of VIA. MOT c o n s i s t e n t l y i n t e r p r e t e d t h i s to mean the proposed p a r a l l e l runway. Other agencies, n o t a b l y GVRD and CF, c o n s i s t e n t l y i n t e r p r e t e d t h i s to mean any pro-posed development, of which the runway was not the o n l y p o s s i b i l i t y . Thus other agencies i n s i s t e d on d i s c u s s i n g o t h e r a l t e r n a t i v e s and other p o l i c i e s f o r management of growth i n a v i a t i o n demand which MOT i n s i s t e d were beyond the terms of r e f e r e n c e of the APC. Ther APC Minutes of Sept. 12, 1974 c l e a r l y s t a t e t h i s p o s i t i o n : "The Chairman suggested t h a t the APC i s not the forum to debate MOT p o l i c i e s . He reminded members t h a t the terms of r e f e r e n c e of the APC were 'to advise on s t u d i e s needed to ensure t h a t the proposed development of the Vancouver- I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t i s compatible w i t h the v a r i o u s l e v e l s of Government and the concern of the p u b l i c i n the communities i n v o l v e d ' ; and a l s o the M i n i s t e r ' s statement t h a t the runway would pro-ceed p r o v i d i n g there was no major environmental or urban impact. Any c o n s i d e r a t i o n of r a d i c a l a l t e r n a -t i v e s which a f f e c t b a s i c M i n i s t r y p o l i c y would only take p l a c e , and i n a d i f f e r e n t forum, where such con-s i d e r a t i o n was a F i n a l Committee recommendation f o r m i t i g a t i d n a l easement r e l a t i v e to the c o m p a t a b i l i t y i s s u e . The Chairman continued, s t a t i n g t h a t the M i n i s t r y i n the Study Design went beyond the terms of r e f e r e n c e of the APC thereby showing the M i n i s t r y ' s w i l l i n g n e s s to demonstrate c l e a r l y the requirement f o r the runway and to demonstrate t h a t compromise a i r p o r t develop-ment s o l u t i o n s c o u l d be a t t a i n e d from F i n a l Committee recommendations w i t h i n the c o n s t r a i n t s of the Committee's terms of r e f e r e n c e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the M i n i s t r y d e s i r e to become an accepted community neighbour." 43 Such a statement, while c l e a r , h a r d l y reduced c o n f l i c t f o r i t says nothing of the p o s s i b i l i t y of demonstrating t h a t the runway i s not r e q u i r e d , and i t p l a c e s c o n s i d e r a t i o n of p o l i c y a l t e r n a t i v e s i n the i n d e f i n i t e f u t u r e . (These p o l i c i e s i n c l u d e d spreading d a i l y peaks by changing schedules or c h a r g i n g d i f f e r e n t i a l f a r e s , improving a i r c o n t r o l c a p a c i t y w i t h more s o p h i s t i c a t e d equipment, changing a i r con-t r o l procedures which gave absolute p r i o r i t y t o a r r i v i n g a i r -c r a f t , a l l o c a t i n g g e n e r a l a v i a t i o n (GA) to other a i r p o r t s , i n c r e a s i n g a i r c r a f t l o a d f a c t o r s , and p o s s i b l y r e d u c i n g demand through tax a t i o n . ) T h i s d i f f e r e n c e . i n values had been p u r p o s i v e l y obscured i n the terms of r e f e r e n c e of the APC: "As w i t h a l l . n e g o t i a t e d avoidance of c o l l i s i o n , i t s terms of r e f e r e n c e i n v o l v e d compromise and the eva-s i o n of i s s u e s which would have' r e a c t i v a t e d the con-f r o n t a t i o n . They are t h e r e f o r e g e n e r a l and wide enough to accomodate a l l views. . . . I t was essen-t i a l to get the process s t a r t e d . The problem has been t h a t d i f f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s have been put on such terms of r e f e r e n c e " (Stead, March 23, 1975). The f i r s t meeting of the APC was h e l d on June 6, 19 73. (No minutes were kept of the f i r s t meeting.) In these f i r s t few months MOT made known i t s d e s i r e s to l i m i t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n on the committee to one for. each agency and f o u r f o r MOT, i n -c l u d i n g the chairman. Other p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the e a r l y meetings were d e s c r i b e d i n MOT-produced minutes as ' s p e c i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s ' . However, the f l e d g l i n g CF i n . t h i s p e r i o d c o n s i s t e d of separate areas, of i n t e r e s t , and was allowed, a f t e r argument, to seat three r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . "Out of these d i s c u s s i o n s about numbers came the understanding t h a t the members o f t e n stood f o r 44 i n t e r e s t s w i t h i n each agency's area o f concern and t h a t the numbers from each agency bore no necessary r e l a t i o n to the importance of t h e i r concerns. T h i s , i n t u r n , l e d to i t being e x p l i c i t t h a t i s s u e s were not to be decided by vote" (Stead, Jan. 23, 1977). MOT had wanted a v o t i n g committee, and t r i e d a t v a r i o u s p o i n t s to b r i n g the APC to a vote, without success ( f o r example, J u l y 4, 1975: see Appendix 1). In the F i n a l Report, MOT s t a t e d : "One s i g n i f i c a n t departure from the u s u a l procedure was the agreement to attempt to reach d e c i s i o n s w i t h -out v o t i n g and without empowering anyone to make de-c e s i o n s . T h i s l e d to endless argument and a r e g u l a r f a i l u r e to meet commitments to work schedules" (p. 109). P r o v i s i o n a l c i t i z e n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s were seated on the APC on Aug. 2, 1973, and i n d u s t r y groups on Sept. 13. A f t e r exten-s i v e p r e p a r a t i o n s . a n d p u b l i c i t y by GVRD, the CF was o f f i c i a l l y i naugurated on Nov. 8, 1973, and the p r o v i s i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s were made o f f i c i a l . From.November 1973.to February 1974 most APC e f f o r t s went i n t o developing.a formal, w r i t t e n study design to guide f u t u r e a c t i v i t i e s . A s t r u c t u r e of s i x sub-committees to guide the v a r i o u s s t u d i e s was.developed i n November. MOT wished to pro-v i d e chairmen f o r a l l of.the. sub-committees, i n accordance with c i v i l s e r v i c e t r a d i t i o n , but had not the man-power to provide a person knowledgeable.in each study area. They "acquiesced with e v i d e n t m i s g i v i n g s " , a c c o r d i n g t o Stead (Jan. 23, 1977). In the end MOT chaired- the A i r p o r t F a c i l i t i e s Sub-Committee, and t h e . A i r p o r t s System.Sub-Committee;.other agencies c h a i r e d the other f o u r sub-committees. The formal study design was adopted.on Feb. 21, 1974. I t i n c l u d e d formal r u l e s o f procedure c o v e r i n g c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y , press c o n t a c t , and disagreements within.uthe committee. The 45 f o r m a l i z i n g of these r u l e s of procedure i n d i c a t e s the g e n e r a l l a c k of t r u s t w i t h i n the APC, and flows d i r e c t l y from the n o i s e c o n t r a c t c o n t r o v e r s y . The n o i s e s t u d i e s were among the f i r s t to begin, and they were c o n t r o v e r s i a l to the end. In August 1973 MOT c a l l e d f o r p r o p o s a l s on a n o i s e impact study, embracing two elements. F i r s t , an a n a l y s i s of o p e r a t i o n a l and developmental a l t e r n a t i v e s , i n o t h e r words a t e c h n i c a l a v i a t i o n study. Second, an a s s e s s -ment of n o i s e impact. The second aspect was s e v e r e l y c r i t i c i z e d by l o c a l members of the APC, who doubted the r e l e v a n c e of the noi s e u n i t (NEF) to be used f o r measurement. "NEF", meaning Noise Exposure F o r e c a s t , measures simulated v i b r a t i o n l e v e l s (a s imulated p h y s i c a l measure), but does not take i n t o account normal n o i s e l e v e l s i n the c i t y , a c t u a l t e s t s under d i f f e r e n t atmospheric c o n d i t i o n s , ground a c t i v i t i e s (such as engine t e s t -ing) , or a c t u a l annoyance of people. Furthermore i t i s an average which tends to.obscure the e f f e c t of w i d e l y spaced loud n o i s e s . Subsequent events cannot.be b e t t e r s t a t e d than i n a lengthy quote from a l e t t e r by. a. GVRD r e p r e s e n t a t i v e to §• s e n i o r MOT o f f i c i a l i n Ottowa, (Stead to Winsor, Jan. 26, 1974). "This i s not a mere matter of the o c c a s i o n a l adminis-t r a t i v e breakdown . . . I t has shown a c o n s i s t e n t p a t t e r n t h a t can only be- read one way. . . . I t was e v i d e n t from the beginning t h a t any c o n s u l t a n t com-petent i n one of the two areas would be u n l i k e l y to be able t o handle the other one. T h i s i s i n f a c t how i t turned out . . . . . . Ar£' (a meeting) on October 15th and 16th, both s i d e s gave some ground and an agreement was reached which was recorded. I t recommended t h a t the c o n t r a c t . . . be reduced to omit the assessment of n o i s e impact . . . This s h i f t i n emphasis was to be f u r t h e r r e f l e c t e d i n a change i n . t h e t i t l e of the p r o j e c t t o " A n a l y s i s of Operational/Development A l t e r n a t i v e s a t the Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t " and by removing 46 Noise S t u d i e s . I t was e x p l i c i t l y agreed t h a t a d e t a i l e d work statement was to be prepared a c c o r -d i n g l y , to be l a i d b e f o r e the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee before the c o n t r a c t was signed. T h i s was never done. . . . When the Noise Sub-Committee next met MOT i n s i s t e d on i n c l u d i n g f u t u r e as w e l l as p r e s e n t NEF's even i f o u t s i d e the scope of the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee. The meeting concluded w i t h a motion be put before, the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee bef o r e the c o n t r a c t was signed. T h i s was never done. A week l a t e r Tony Beak came out and we had another meeting ofttheNNoiseSSub-Committee. He i n s i s t e d on the f u t u r e NEF's' d e s p i t e the p r o s p e c t of not having access to GVRD's computer program on demographic p a t t e r n s . He a l s o made i t c l e a r t h a t MOT would pro-ceed w i t h the omitted items on the assessment of n o i s e impact. In h i s summing up o f the sense of the meeting, the chairman noted t h a t the sub-committee d i d not approve the i n c l u s i o n of the n o i s e impact elements, but t h a t i n any case, f i n a l a pproval of the c o n t r a c t would r e s t w i t h the A i r p o r t . P l a n n i n g Committee, as agreed p r e v i o u s l y on s e v e r a l occa-s i o n s . T h i s was never done. At every meeting of the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee s i n c e then we have asked about the work statement. The answers have been e v a s i v e . Then, a t the meeting on January 3rd, i t i s announced t h a t the c o n t r a c t has been signed! About a week ago we are g i v e n the work.statement to f i n d i t i s i d e n t i c a l w i t h the o r i -g i n a l . " Subsequent events.are r e c a l l e d i n Stead's noted (Jan. 23, 1977). "Tackaberry r e t u r n e d from Ottawa and r e p o r t e d to Nancy [Cooley] on the phone t h a t McLeish had ex-pressed r e g r e t and had agreed to r e - n e g o t i a t e the c o n t r a c t to e l i m i n a t e the o f f e n d i n g p o r t i o n s . At the subsequent APC meeting (7 February, 1974) there was no h i n t of an apology and I had to drag the d e t a i l s out of.Jones item by item, but they d i d add up to what had been agreed i n the f i r s t p l a c e . At a Noise Sub-Committee meeting 8 February, Beak turned up and r e f u s e d to honour t h i s commitment, agreeing o n l y a f t e r a long, argument to w i t h h o l d i n g the c o n t e n t i o u s items f o r the time being, with no apparent awareness of the e f f e c t on MOT c r e d i b i l i t y . 11 In a d d i t i o n to the obvious a b r o g a t i o n of process here, two f u r t h e r p o i n t s deserve mention. F i r s t , GVRD threatened w i t h h o l d demographic data i n order to b a r g a i n a g a i n s t MOT. 47 Most i n f o r m a t i o n problems i n the process i n v o l v e d MOT, es-p e c i a l l y the f o r e c a s t i n g c o n t r o v e r s y d i s c u s s e d below. Second, one MOT o f f i c i a l r e p o r t e d something on the phone which was very d i f f i c u l t l a t e r to c o n f i r m i n an o f f i c i a l meeting, and was i n any case r e j e c t e d by another MOT r e p r e s e n t a t i v e a t another meeting. A f t e r a p e r i o d of time CF r e f u s e d to r e c e i v e or r e s -pond to any i n f o r m a t i o n by phone, and i n s i s t e d t h a t e v e r y t h i n g be i n w r i t i n g . GVRD sent l e t t e r s back to MOT r e c o r d i n g the understood substance of any telephone c a l l , and a s k i n g f o r c o n f i r m a t i o n (which u s u a l l y was not g i v e n ) . Other examples of MOT 'double t a l k ' are d i s c u s s e d below. 3.32..The T r i - L e v e l Meeting, Nov. 1974. Minor i r r i t a t i o n s p e r s i s t e d , but no s e r i o u s c o n t r o v e r s y erupted d u r i n g the s p r i n g and summer of 1974. I t was becoming i n c r e a s i n g l y c l e a r to a l l actors,, as the s t u d i e s continued, t h a t the d e a d l i n e c o u l d not be maintained, and t h a t a consensus p o s i t i o n of the APC c o u l d not be reached. MOT was s t a t i n g i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the terms of r e f e r e n c e very c l e a r l y (see q u o t a t i o n i n Appendix 1, Sept. 12, 1974), and GVRD was moving toward a c o n f r o n t a t i o n . The s t a f f of GVRD.prepared a p o s i t i o n paper which emphasized the a c c e p t a b l e (to them) sequence o f a c t i o n s and s t u d i e s which had to be f o l l o w e d i n order t o demonstrate the need f o r the run-way. P o l i c i e s which MOT would n o t c o n s i d e r were emphasized. The need f o r MOT to r e - e s t a b l i s h t r u s t i n the APC by i n t r o d u c i n g measures to m i t i g a t e the e x i s t i n g . n o i s e s i t u a t i o n was s t r e s s e d . The' paper was r e l e a s e d to the p u b l i c on Oct. 23, 1974, and brought a v i o l e n t d e n u n c i a t i o n by MOT the f o l l o w i n g day i n the p r e s s . 48 A l s o on Oct. 23, but not d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to the GVRD p o s i t i o n paper, was the announcement by the Chairman, t h a t a T r i - L e v e l meeting would be h e l d to d e a l w i t h problems i n the APC proc e s s . T h i s move seems to have been d i s c u s s e d by v a r i o u s agencies, c e r t a i n l y by GVRD, a t i n f o r m a l meetings, but there was o p p o s i t i o n because the T r i - L e v e l Committee had been e s t a b l i s h e d as an inter-governmental body on l y . CF was not allowed t o at t e n d . They never d i d accept any of the r e s u l t s o f t h a t meeting, which they regarded as unacceptable backroom accomodations among bu r e a u c r a t s , without p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The meeting took p l a c e on Nov. 14,, 1974. The e s s e n t i a l d e c i s i o n s of the meeting were the f o l l o w i n g . F i r s t , only those s t u d i e s a l r e a d y underway were to be completed. Other s t u d i e s p r o v i d e d f o r i n the study design but not y e t commenced were.to be abandoned. T h i s i n c l u d e d , most s i g n i -f i c a n t l y , the e v a l u a t i o n of f i n d i n g s and a l t e r n a t i v e s . Second, t h a t a new t i m e t a b l e be adopted,.with completion scheduled f o r . A p r i l .15,. 1975, T h i r d , t h a t a GVRD o u t l i n e of the f i n a l r e p o r t be approved i n p r i n c i p l e . The r e p o r t was to i n c l u d e c l e a r .statements of d i f f e r i n g views and the de-velopment of a l t e r n a t i v e , d e c i s i o n o p t i o n s , .a s e c t i o n on p o l i c y and. management, and a s e c t i o n on an on-going c o n s u l -t a t i v e p r o c e s s . Fourth., the t a k i n g by agencies of p u b l i c posisi-ons p r i o r to the r e l e a s e o f the f i n a l r e p o r t was to be avoided. CF was p a r t i c u l a r l y upset w i t h the abr o g a t i o n of process 49 which they f e l t the T r i - L e v e l meeting re p r e s e n t e d , and with the t r u n c a t i o n of the study design, e s p e c i a l l y the l o s s o f the e v a l u a t i o n s which they f e l t were e s s e n t i a l to d e c i s i o n making. In p r o t e s t , they r e f u s e d t o take any stand on the proposed o u t l i n e . Other agencies ( p a r t i c u l a r l y GVRD) f e l t t h a t funds f o r the APC were not going to be extended, and consensus de-s i s i o n s were not going to be reached. They f e l t t h a t the s t u d i e s a l r e a d y underway would produce enough i n f o r m a t i o n to be passed t o the p o l i t i c a l l e v e l f o r a d e c i s i o n on whether or not to a c t . F u r t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n c o l l e c t i o n and a n a l y s i s was not going to change the outcome of the APC, because the b a s i c c o n f l i c t was o v e r . p o l i c i e s which MOT would not qu e s t i o n , which re p r e s e n t e d fundamental value d i f f e r e n c e s . No amount of t e c h n i c a l study c o u l d r e s o l v e t h i s impasse i n the view of the agencies. 3.33 F o r e c a s t s . F o r e c a s t i n c r e a s e s i n demand were the ev i d e n t b a s i s of the MOT p r o p o s a l f o r the p a r a l l e l runway. D e t a i l e d f o r e c a s t i n g . i n f o r m a t i o n was r e q u i r e d as a b a s i c i n -put i n t o s e v e r a l of the s t u d i e s being.done.. GVRD attempts to get these data began i n March 1973, befo r e the APC had even been e s t a b l i s h e d . At t h a t time a s e n i o r MOT o f f i c i a l promised to make the i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e . Numerous r e p e t i t i o n s of the 50 request and the promise f o l l o w e d . Some examples were a meeting on J u l y 9, 1973, a l e t t e r on J u l y 16 f o l l o w i n g , another l e t t e r on Sept. 10, and another meeting on Oct. 2, 1973. The i n f o r -mation was s u p p l i e d on Jan. 14, 1974, one month a f t e r the o r i g i n a l scheduled date of completion of the study. Even then not a l l of the i n f o r m a t i o n which had been requested was i n c l u d e d . That which was s u p p l i e d appeared to be " b a s i c a l l y s i m i l a r to those ( f i g u r e s ) c o n t a i n e d i n the 19 71 study which concluded t h a t a second p a r a l l e l runway was'ano t r e q u i r e d " ( l e t t e r , Cooley to Jones., A p r i l 16, 1974). "What we wanted was d i s a g g r e g a t e d data, demand e l a s t i c i t i e s , income groups, the e f f e c t of f u e l p r i c e s on a i r f a r e s , how and when e x p o n e n t i a l growth might e v e n t u a l l y be c o n s t r a i n e d , e t c . I t l a t e r turned out the MOT d i d not have a l o t of t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n , but what they had - q u i t e a l o t . . . - was slow i n coming . . . My l o g . . . records repeated promises to p r o v i d e c e r t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n or to d i s c u s s the a p p r o a c h t t o f f o r e -c a s t i n g , o n l y to as o f t e n experience delays which c l e a r l y suggested t a l k i n g t o us on t h i s s u b j e c t was low p r i o r i t y as there was n o t h i n g to d i s c u s s " (Stead, Jan. 23, 1977). The meeting to d i s c u s s the data f i n a l l y took p l a c e on May 9, 1974. During the summer of 1974 the Chairman of the F o r e c a s t i n g and Economic Sub-Committee (Stead, GVRD) prepared a r e p o r t , which, i n the f a l l , was r e j e c t e d by f o u r of seven agencies on the sub-committee. A second r e p o r t was d r a f t e d , but the f i r s t became the Annex to the r e p o r t of the sub-committee, p r e s e n t i n g a view d i s s e n t i n g from MOT. The e s s e n t i a l p o l i t i c a l elements of the sub-committee r e p o r t were 51 II t h a t i t should f a i r l y r e p r e s e n t a l l points of view w i t h i n the sub-committee and t h a t o n l y those whose p a r t i c u l a r views were being expressed c o u l d i n s i s t on changes i n my d r a f t - they c o u l d not demand changes i n the d e s c r i p t i o n of opposing views. These f e a t u r e s . . . had been agreed t o by the sub-committee. . . . MOT attempted t o add an Annex II to rebut my Annex a f t e r the sub-committee had completed i t s work on t h i s s u b j e c t and our r e p o r t had been t a b l e d w i t h APC, without the sub-committee ever having c o n s i d e r e d i t . Apart from MOT, t h i s approach was unanimously r e j e c t e d i n APC and the substance was l a t e r i n s e r t e d l e g i t i m a t e l y as agency comments. Much l a t e r , when the f i n a l sub-committee r e p o r t s were p r i n t e d and bound f o r p u b l i c r e l e a s e , t h i s r e p o r t came out w i t h my Annex separated from the c o v e r i n g r e p o r t of which i t was e x p l i c i t l y a p a r t and put i n the back of the book as i t were mere agency comment. T h i s again was overturned i n APC" (Stead, Jan. 23, 1977). In a d d i t i o n to t h i s manoeuvering, the Chairman of the APC wrote to the S e n i o r Planner at GVRD suggesting a "minor r e - s t r u c t u r i n g " of the l a s t page of the F o r e c a s t i n g Report. ". . . w i t h the suggested modest adjustments, the A i r p o r t Planning Committee as a whole can r e a d i l y accept t h i s r e p o r t without f u r t h e r time-consuming debate and p o t e n t i a l e x t e n s i o n of both the Sub-Committee and the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee's involvement" (Jones to F a r r y , Dec. 30, 1974). T h i s was not done. In commenting on the F o r e c a s t i n g Report (APC, Jan. 1975), an MOT r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f f e r e d the f o l l o w i n g p e r s p e c t i v e on the MOT p o s i t i o n . He emphasized "the s i n g u l a r a c c o u n t a b i l i t y the M i n i s t r y has, as i t s mandate, to meet f u t u r e f a c i l i t y requirements, t h a t can only be p r e d i c a t e d on the b e s t f o r e c a s t i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e . . . . The c o n t e n t i o n t h a t a c t i o n to respond to reasonably demonstrated f u t u r e needs should not be taken u n t i l . . . 'a requirement becomes p l a i n l y e v i d e n t . . .'> i s tantamount to suggesting t h a t l e v e l s of s e r v i c e i n the p u b l i c a i r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n system would have to become degraded, p o s s i b l y even to the p o i n t of n e g l e c t i n g s a f e t y i n f l u e n c e s , 52 b e f o r e any l a y and unaccountable i n d i v i d u a l s o r agencies might f i n d a i r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f a c i l i t y needs ' p l a i n l y e v i d e n t ' " (Tackaberry t o Jones, Jan. 20, 1975). On the substance of t h i s argument, i t begs the q u e s t i o n of whether or not MOT would be abl e to r e c o g n i z e 'major en-vironmental or urban impact', which they r e p e a t e d l y s t a t e d would h a l t the runway. In f a c t damages which DOE c o n s i d e r e d major MOT s t r e n u o u s l y o b j e c t e d t o because they were of l i t t l e s i g n i f i c a n c e . T h i s l e a d s , once again, to a q u e s t i o n of value s which u n d e r l i e s MOT's ' a c c o u n t a b i l i t y ' argument. Every government agency was as accountable as MOT, but wit h r e s p e c t to d i f f e r -ent v a l u e s . CF a l s o f e l t accountable - d i r e c t l y t o the p u b l i c - f o r the p o s i t i o n s they took i n APC debates, although t h e i r l i v e l i h o o d was not at stake. The p o i n t i s t h a t no agency was a c t i n g i r r e s p o n s i b l y i n terms of i t s mandate or i t s v a l u e s , but there was an i n h e r e n t c o n f l i c t i n these mandates and va l u e s . The APC was an attempt t o b r i d g e these c o n f l i c t s . A c c o u n t a b i l i t y i s d i s c u s s e d f u r t h e r i n Chapter 5. 3.34 Sorry About the Noise, Feb. 1975. A f t e r the T r i -L e v e l meeting (Nov. 14, 1974), the next major c o n t r o v e r s y concerned an MOT i n f o r m a i t o n pamphlet, p u b l i s h e d i n January, 1975, c a l l e d Sorry About the Noise. The pamphlet was d i s t r i -buted t o the p u b l i c , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n response to no i s e complaints. MOT's o p i n i o n was t h a t the pamphlet was p a r t of a normal, even commendable, i n f o r m a t i o n program. "The Brochure i s an attempt to overcome [the l a c k of communication] and I hope w i l l be the f o r e -runner of many i n i t i a t i v e s i n t h i s area where, as 5 3 I b e l i e v e you know, we have been c r i t i c i z e d . . . . I t r u s t t h a t the f o r e g o i n g e x p l a n a t i o n s are s a t i s -f a c t o r y . . . and t h a t you w i l l r e c o g n i z e our s i n c e r e d e s i r e to both improve the n o i s e c o n t r o l p r a c t i c e s and communicate our program to a l l con-cerned c i t i z e n s " ( l e t t e r Neales to Tyhurst, March 6, 19 75)."' Others i n the APC b e l i e v e d i t was l e s s v i r t u o u s . " I t drew to a minor extent on the on-going Noise S t u d i e s , but was f u l l of g r o s s l y exaggerated, m i s l e a d i n g and even erroneous statements . . . In s h o r t , i t was a propaganda p l a y " ( S t e a d , Jan. 23, 1977)." Controversy erupted i n the APC meeting of Feb. 27, 19 75. A motion was adopted t h a t "The APC was not i n v o l v e d i n the p r e p a r a t i o n of the MOT pamphlet Sorry About the Noise of January 19 75, and cannot take a p o s i t i o n on the statements i t cont a i n e d " (APC Minutes) . "' mm MaisacasMe^iwhether- they! *attfflS^M*ltd£aw }:T Mt-hef pamphlet, cease d i s t r i b u t i o n , or i n s e r t the APC motion i n i t . MOT f e l t t h a t the pamphlet d i d not breach APC procedures as agreed a t the T r i - L e v e l meeting, and were not prepared to cease d i s t r i b u t i o n . The s p e c i f i c answers to the s p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n s asked appeared i n the f o l l o w i n g minutes, r a t h e r than the minutes of t h i s meeting. MOT s t a t e d t h a t they would not i n s e r t the motion i n the pamphlet. T h i s c o n t r o v e r s y was one example of a constant i r r i t a t i o n i n the process over the q u a l i t y of Minutes. Minutes were prepared by MOT. "As a whole they are bland and i n no way r e f l e c t the t e n s i o n and dogged b a t t l i n g t h a t went on con-t i n u a l l y . T h i s was the most t r y i n g s e r i e s of meetings I ever attended, but one does not get t h i s out of the Minutes . . . There are examples where c l e a r i n t e n t to a v o i d compromising s t a t e -ments i n p r i n t i s e v i d e n t " (Stead, Jan. 23, 1977).'' In the case of the n o i s e pamphlet c o n t r o v e r s y , o n l y p o i n t e d q u e s t i o n s a t the time of the adoption of minutes from the p r e v i o u s meeting served to get the MOT answers c l e a r l y recorded. 3.35 R e s i g n a t i o n of the Chairman, May 19 75. Throughout the APC process the Chairman had two r o l e s , one as chairman of the APC, the other as MOT r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . He was r e p e a t e d l y charged wi t h being p a r t i a l to the MOT r o l e , g i v i n g i t (complete) p r i o r i t y , and t h e r e f o r e undermining the j o i n t - p l a n n i n g nature of the APC. One example was h i s attempt to a l t e r the c o n c l u -s i o n s of the F o r e c a s t i n g Report. In the s p r i n g of 1975 most of the s t u d i e s were being completed; the sub-committees were adopting them and t a b l i n g them f o r d i s c u s s i o n at the APC. The e c o l o g i c a l study was among the l a s t t o be d r a f t e d , i n l a t e A p r i l 1975. I t con-s i s t e d of a number of lengthy t e c h n i c a l r e p o r t s , and a summary r e p o r t (APC, J u l y 1975b) which attempted to draw the t e c h n i c a l r e p o r t s together. The c o n c l u s i o n s of the summary r e p o r t were g e n e r a l , and i n some cases appeared to c o n t r a d i c t the f i n d i n g s of s p e c i f i c component r e p o r t s . The o v e r a l l recommendation was a moratorium on f u r t h e r major c o n s t r u c t i o n , and the prepara-t i o n of a comprehensive management p o l i c y f o r the F r a s e r e s t u a r y and d e l t a . " S p e c i f i c a l l y i n c l u d e d should be the expan-s i o n of Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t as p r e s e n t l y proposed. ( E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee, Jan. 1976, v/, emphasis i n o r i g i n a l ) . " When t h i s became known, the APC Chairman, i n a l e t t e r to the Chairman of the E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee, made some' h i g h l y 55: c r i t i c a l statements, from the MOT p o i n t of view. "We cannot agree t h a t the a i r p o r t development i s s u e , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n context of Concept One of the  M i n i s t r y ' s P r o p o s a l s , should become a secondary  i s s u e to t h a t of a F r a s e r E s t u a r y / D e l t a management  p o l i c y and a Moratorium on a l l p r o s p e c t i v e e s t u a r y  developments• We b e l i e v e t h a t the use of the a i r -p o r t development i s s u e (Concept One) through d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e i n f l a t i o n and t r a n s l a t i o n of  concerns as a means of a c h i e v i n g such a p o l i c y d i s c r e d i t s the Report which was to assess the impact of a i r p o r t development. . . . Those who seek a wider a u t h o r i t y f o r environmental p r o t e c t i o n are very t r a n s p a r e n t l y u s i n g t h i s o c c a s i o n and t h i s Report through some d i s t o r t i o n s and q u e s t i o n a b l e judgements to achieve t h a t end. . . . i t i s suggested t h a t a l l major F r a s e r E s t u a r y / D e l t a development p r o p o s a l s be reviewed i n some depth p r i o r to the a p p r o v a l of any s i n g l e component p r o p o s a l . T h i s recommendation i s p h i l o -s o p h i c a l l y sound but p r a g m a t i c a l l y q u e s t i o n a b l e . . . In any study t i m e t a b l e , the p r o s p e c t i v e l o c a t i o n s , scope and t i m i n g of 'proposed develop-ments' are v a r i a b l e s s u b j e c t to change by the v a r i o u s bodies and j u r i s d i c t i o n s a c t i n g as proponents which would probably f r u s t r a t e the o b j e c t i v e of such a task. . . . I must express,our i n t e n s e disappointment w i t h the Report. I do not b e l i e v e i t a p p r o p r i a t e l y  conveys the r e s p e c t e d i n p u t of many of the E n v i r o n - ment Canada's t e c h n i c a l s t a f f who c o n t r i b u t e d much to the Report's intended purpose of a s s e s s i n g the impact of a i r p o r t development and which i n my view has been subverted. I b e l i e v e t h i s Report c o n t a i n s imputations w h i c h d o not s u b s c r i b e to a f a i r a s s e s s -ment of Concept One which i s the s t a t e d M i n i s t r y of T r a n s p o r t development p r o p o s a l " ( J o n e s to Romaine, May 6, 1975, emphasis i n o r i g i n a l ) . " A storm erupted over t h i s l e t t e r , which l e d to i t s w i t h -drawal and replacement w i t h a second l e t t e r . For the most p a r t the second l e t t e r was the same, although the c o n c l u d i n g paragraph was r e d r a f t e d as f o l l o w s : "I must express our i n t e n s e disappointment w i t h  the r e p o r t . I do not b e l i e v e t h a t i t a p p r o p r i a t e l y conveys a f a i r assessment of the environmental impact of the a i r p o r t development concepts, p a r t i -c u l a r l y w i t h r e s p e c t to Concept One which i s the M i n i s t r y ' s p r i n c i p a l p r o p o s a l f o r f u t u r e expansion" (Jones to Romaine, May 23, 1975, emphasis i n o r i -g i n a l ) . ' 5 6: DOE and CF immediately prepared a r e b u t t a l of the p o i n t s made i n the MOT l e t t e r . T h i s was f o l l o w e d by a t h i r d MOT l e t t e r , along w i t h a c o v e r i n g l e t t e r s t a t i n g " i t i s q u i t e c l e a r t h a t our l e t t e r of May 23 was i l l a d v i s e d , should not be c i r c u l a t e d , and I r e s p e c t f u l l y request t h a t i t be r e t u r n e d to me (Jones to Romaine, May 24, 1975)." The s p e c i f i c comments i n the t h i r d l e t t e r were e x c e p t i o n a l l y b r i e f , con-s i s t i n g of two s h o r t paragraphs s t a t i n g t h a t more emphasis c o u l d have been p l a c e d on Concept One, and t h a t the a i r p o r t expansion should not be covered by a moratorium f o r i t was not a major development. The request to withdraw the second l e t t e r was denied by the E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee, and the Chairman r e s i g n e d w i t h -out n o t i c e on May 30, 1975. He was r e p l a c e d w i t h a new MOT r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . 3.36 New P r o p o s a l s , J u l y 1975. In May 1973, j u s t as the APC was being e s t a b l i s h e d , MOT p r o v i d e d f o r study f o u r concepts f o r the p a r a l l e l runway, concepts A to D. On Nov. 27, 1973 these were r e p l a c e d by concepts one to f i v e . A l l of these concepts i n c l u d e d an 11,000 f o o t runway, but i t s east-west placement v a r i e d , as d i d the amount of e s t u a r y to be f i l l e d f o r the runway and r e l a t e d developments, and the amount of dredging necessary to o b t a i n the f i l l . These f i v e concepts were the b a s i s of APC study u n t i l June 18, 1974, when concepts f o u r and f i v e were dropped. Concepts one* to three were r e t a i n e d . Changes i n these p r o p o s a l s i n J u l y 1975, a f t e r a l l the s t u d i e s were complete, p r e c i p i t a t e d the f i r s t c r i s i s f o r 57 the new chairman. In June, when MOT was w r i t i n g the f i r s t d e c i s i o n o p t i o n , i t became known t h a t they were c o n s i d e r i n g a runway of 10,600 f e e t , i n the p o s i t i o n of t h a t i n Concept One, but s h o r t e r . T h i s caused some c o n f u s i o n , but was f o l l o w e d on J u l y 17, 1975, with an o r a l p r e s e n t a t i o n of the 10,600 f o o t runway p r o p o s a l to the APC. The f o l l o w i n g day, J u l y 18, 1975, however, MOT d i s t r i b u t e d a memorandum, s a i d to be " s e l f - e x p l a n a t o r y , " which proposed a runway wholly w i t h i n the Sea I s l a n d dyke, which not even the 10,6 00 f o o t runway accomplished. " F o l l o w i n g the recommendation of the E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee t h a t no runway should be b u i l t on Sturgeon Bank u n t i l a f t e r f u r t h e r s t u d i e s on the impact of such a c t i o n and my d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h S e n i o r Regional DOE o f f i c i a l s , I have i n s t r u c t e d the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Team to r e v i s e i t s plans a c c o r d i n g l y and'to proceed w i t h a p r e - d e s i g n and e n g i n e e r i n g p r o p o s a l f o r a runway w i t h i n the dyke. . . . T h i s d e c i s i o n i n no way p r e j u d i c e s the f u t u r e e x t e n s i o n of t h i s runway to f u l l redundancy c a p a c i t y , should DOE s t u d i e s determine there w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t e c o l o g i c a l impact and should the demand f o r such a runway p e r s i s t " (Neales to APC Chairman). • Controversy and lengthy d i s c u s s i o n f o l l o w e d a t an APC meeting on J u l y 31, 1975. The new p r o p o s a l was presented i n w r i t t e n form; i t was f o r a runway 9,250 f e e t i n l e n g t h which d i d not penetrate the dyke. D i s c u s s i o n a t the meeting r e v o l v e d around the q u e s t i o n of whether t h i s new p r o p o s a l c o n s t i t u t e d a moving of the g o a l p o s t s , or only a m o d i f i c a t i o n of Concept One. I t was e v e n t u a l l y agreed t h a t the p r o p o s a l c o u l d not be c o n s i d e r e d by the APC and would not be d i s c u s s e d i n the F i n a l Report. The concept to be d i s c u s s e d i n the d e c i s i o n o p t i o n s was to be the 10,600 f o o t p r o p o s a l o n l y , with 58 the 9,250 f o o t p r o p o s a l d e f e r r e d to a second stage of study. Everyone was very c a r e f u l to get, and r e a f f i r m , e x p l i c i t statements of t h i s understanding; these are c l e a r l y recorded i n the Minutes. Of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t i n t h i s c o n t r o v e r s y are the " d i s -c u s s i o n s with S e n i o r Regional DOE o f f i c i a l s . " A t the APC meeting c a l l e d to d i s c u s s the p r o p o s a l , the Chairman s t a t e d t h a t "(1) MOT and DOE met to d i s c u s s i f runway was s h o r t -ened by 9,250 f t . would i t meet DOE requirements? (2) He p e r s o n a l l y was unaware t h a t MOT were l o o k i n g at a runway wholly w i t h i n the dyke" (APC Minutes, J u l y 31, 1975). C l e a r l y the p r o p o s a l was a compromise which had the acquiescence, i f not the a c t i v e involvement, o f r e g i o n a l DOE s t a f f . C l e a r l y a l s o the two r e g i o n a l s t a f f s were o p e r a t i n g without the f u l l knowledge of t h e i r own r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s on the APC. The statement of the Chairman, and the f a c t t h a t an MOT r e p r e s e n t a t i v e c o u l d p r e s e n t an a p p a r e n t l y f i n a l p r o p o s a l , on J u l y 17, to be f o l l o w e d o n l y one day l a t e r by an unannounced p r o p o s a l , i n d i c a t e s t h i s l a c k of c o - o r d i n a t i o n . The same comment a p p l i e s t o DOE, f o r t h e i r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e d i d not support the p r o p o s a l a t the APC. 3.37 Information, Agreements, and Issues, Nov. 19 75. The' t i m i n g , q u a l i t y , d i s t r i b u t i o n , and form of i n f o r m a t i o n were i r r i t a n t s throughout the process. A l r e a d y . i n t h i s s e c t i o n many examples have been g i v e n : the keeping of minutes, delays i n f o r e c a s t i n g r e p o r t i n g format, the threatened w i t h h o l d i n g of computer f i l e s by GVRD, a 'propaganda' pamphlet, the content 5 9 of the noise studies, and release of the GVRD position paper. There were numerous other cases. The f i r s t one even preceded the APC i t s e l f . The Hearing O f f i c e r of the expro-p r i a t i o n hearings made t h i s comment i n his report: "(The) complaint about non-disclosure of pertinent data as to the reasons f o r the expropriation was related and documented so often during the hearing that I was obliged i n the interests of time to cut short the r e p e t i t i o n of what I then considered a well-established complaint. . . . I conceded that the Association had estab-lished beyond doubt i t s v a l i a n t attempts to get data and that i t had been ignored" (Fisher, Jan. 20, 1973). The Demand/Capacity Analysis of the Runway System at the  Vancouver International Airport (APC, July 1975a) was c r u c i a l information f o r MOT'S' case for a new runway. If capacity were not reached, new f a c i l i t i e s would not be required. This study, however, became available only i n June r 19 75, a f t e r a l l other studies were already complete. This can be related back to the APC meeting of A p r i l 18, 1974, i t s e l f one f u l l year afte r the APC was established, when MOT stated that they were at that point ready to begin documenting the case f o r the new runway. On a s i m i l a r subject, GVRD on March 14, 1975 requested an updated cost estimate for the new runway. MOT refused to prepare 1 t h i s estimate, claiming that m i t i g a t i o n a l recommenda-tions i n the F i n a l Report would a f f e c t the cost. GVRD and CF claimed that the p o l i t i c i a n s could not decide without knowing the costs. Others, including MOT, agreed, but f e l t that the cost information was not immediately needed. This whole exchange i s t y p i c a l of the manoeuvres that 60 c o n t i n u a l l y took p l a c e . E v a l u a t i o n of pr o p o s a l s had been abandoned a t the T r i - L e v e l meeting of Nov. 14, 1974, so c o s t estimates would not seem to be a p p r o p r i a t e . However c o n s t r u c -t i o n c o s t s were e s c a l a t i n g a t an unprecedented r a t e , and the r e q u i r e d expenditure, i f c l e a r l y s t a t e d , was l i k e l y to decide p o l i t i c i a n s a g a i n s t the runway. In t h i s case the manoeuvre was stalemated. Another case of co n t r o v e r s y over the form of r e p o r t s was t h a t of the A l t e r n a t i v e A i r p o r t S i t e S t u d i e s (APC, A p r i l 1975) completed i n Nov. 1974. T h i s r e p o r t e l i m i n a t e d a l l a l t e r n a -t i v e s to VIA on the b a s i s of some combination of a i r s p a c e con-s t r a i n t s , b i r d hazard, and environment concerns. There were, however, s e r i o u s m e t h o d o l o g i c a l doubts, e s p e c i a l l y on the p a r t of GVRD. Despite t h i s d i s s e n s i o n the Chairman of the A i r p o r t s System Sub-Committee d i d not i n c l u d e the oth e r views i n the r e p o r t , on the model of the Annex to the F o r e c a s t i n g Report. "I o f f e r e d to d r a f t an i n s e r t s i n c e he claimed not to be able to express our views. T h i s o f f e r was accepted. When the r e p o r t appeared, my d r a f t had been appended s p e c i f i c a l l y as a comment r a t h e r than as p a r t o f the r e p o r t . CF and DOE comments were added i n l a t e r d r a f t s and, i n the case of CF, there was added a r e b u t t a l by the Chairman, which was a t no time p r o v i d e d f o r and never t r i e d a t any oth e r time" (Stead, Jan. 23, 1977). A f i n a l example of attempts t o change the form of r e p o r t s concerned the F i n a l Report i t s e l f . With the r e p e a t e d l y delayed d e a d l i n e s l i p p i n g a g a i n , i n Jan. 16, 1976 the Chairman c i r c u -l a t e d a memo suggesting t h a t the r e p o r t should be i s s u e d i n two volumes, the d e c i s i o n o p t i o n s and agency comments t o be p u b l i s h e d a f t e r the f i r s t s e v e r a l s e c t i o n s . T h i s was s t r o n g l y 61 r e s i s t e d by APC members, such as GVRD. "We s t r o n g l y urge you NOT to accede to whatever demands are being made to p u b l i s h the report, i n two volumes. To do so o f f e r s no advantages except a few days i n time, and would e f f e c t i v e l y d e s t r o y the coherence of the r e p o r t t h a t a l l members have worked hard to achieve" (Fawcett to Hosgood, Jan. 23, 1976). The r e p o r t was e v e n t u a l l y p u b l i s h e d i n a s i n g l e volume. Numerous and i r r i t a t i n g though a l l the examples of i n f o r -mation management were, they d i d not compare i n s e v e r i t y with the f i n a l major c r i s i s of the APC, which concerned the s e c t i o n o f the F i n a l Report on areas of agreement and i s s u e s which had a r i s e n from APC work. T h i s c o n f l i c t simmered through September and October, and erupted i n November 1975. In the study d e s i g n adopted i n February7'19£;4etheg?gswas pro-v i s i o n f o r a s e c t i o n s e t t i n g out d i f f e r e n c e s i n view among APC members. The e x i s t e n c e of such a s e c t i o n was r e a f f i r m e d i n the d r a f t o u t l i n e adopted a t the T r i - L e v e l meeting,November 19 74 I t was mentioned o f t e n i n the course of APC b u s i n e s s , and d r a f t i n g of i t began i n J u l y 1975, under the t i t l e "Areas of Agreement and Issues." The procedure f o l l o w e d i n ' l i s t i n g these was f a i r l y simple. I f a statement was opposed by no member of the APC, i t became an area of agreement. I f opposed by one or more - but one was s u f f i c i e n t - i t became an i s s u e . These r u l e s of procedure were used, of course, by c r i t i c s of MOT's i n f l e x i b l e p o l i c y p o s i t i o n to i n t r o d u c e to the r e p o r t i s s u e s which they had not succeeded i n c o v e r i n g i n the s t u d i e s . The e d i t o r completed the f i r s t d r a f t of t h i s s e c t i o n i n August 19 75, and comments were requested. GVRD responded on Sept. 3. 62 "The b a s i c i s s u e i s whether a v i a t i o n i s one f u n c t i o n among many s e r v i n g s o c i e t y w i t h i t s needs determined by b a l a n c i n g p r i o r i t i e s or whether a v i a t i o n has p r i o r c l a i m on s o c i e t y with o t h e r f u n c t i o n s a d j u s t i n g as best they m a y " ( l e t t e r , F a r r y to Roberts, Sept. 3, 1975). The l e t t e r a l s o suggested a d d i t i o n s to the l i s t of i s s u e s , and r e v i s i o n s of some items from the l i s t of agreements t o the l i s t of i s s u e s , because GVRD di s a g r e e d . Most i n t e r e s t i n g , however, i s the proposed a d d i t i o n o f seven areas of agreement. These had never been f o r m a l l y s t a t e d , but GVRD f e l t t h a t they had been t a c i t l y accepted a t pr e v i o u s meetings. A t l e a s t no o p p o s i t i o n had been o f f e r e d . Of these t a c i t agreements, o n l y two remained agreed once put i n w r i t i n g . The others became i s s u e s because of the o b j e c t i o n s (mainly) o f MOT. "Throughout the process there were numerous i n s t a n c e s where MOT o f f i c e r s would say thing.ssto GVRD rep r e s e n -t a t i v e s (and, no doubt to others) t h a t they l a t e r r e f u s e d t o confirm. . . . (In t h i s case our comments) p o i n t e d out the absence from (the e d i t o r ' s ) d r a f t of seven areas of agreement, i n c l u d i n g the f a c t of too much no i s e w i t h with pres e n t c o n f i g u r a t i o n , the halving o f f of GA,, the abandonment of the cross-wind, p u b l i c access t o for e s h o r e f o r r e c r e a t i o n and o t h e r s . . . . A l l but two unimportant areas became i s s u e s when thus brought out i n t o the open" (Stead, Jan. 23, 1977). The main c o n t r o v e r s y , however, was y e t to come. At an APC meeting on Oct. 20, MOT proposed combining the 'Issues' s e c t i o n with the d e c i s i o n o p t i o n s . GVRD thought t h i s would be a d i s s e r v i c e to the reader, t h a t the 'Issues' s e c t i o n was important, and t h a t i t should be s t r o n g l y and c l e a r l y worded (APC Minutes, Oct. 20, 1975). Subsequently two s p e c i a l work-shops were h e l d on Oct. 23 and 29, a t which the l i s t of areas of agreement and i s s u e s was examined i n d e t a i l . 6 3 The c o n t r o v e r s y broke i n t o the open on Nov. 13, 19 75, i n an APC meeting. Very lengthy and.stormy d i s c u s s i o n took p l a c e on the q u e s t i o n of how best to present the Issues s e c t i o n i n the F i n a l Report. "The Chairman summarized t h a t the d r a f t s e c t i o n on Issues appeared to have been r e j e c t e d by a m a j o r i t y of the people. A l t e r n a t i v e s suggested were to i n c l u d e the i s s u e s i n the d e c i s i o n o p t i o n s , a separate appendix or i n agency comments. . . . D i s c u s s i o n then c e n t r e d around the i s s u e s of whether or not a change i n the process was o c c u r r i n g . . . . D i s c u s s i o n f o l l o w e d on the matter of dropping the S e c t i o n F of the d r a f t as i t stands and the m a t e r i a l being i n c l u d e d elsewhere, e i t h e r i n the D e c i s i o n Options or i n the Agency Comments - i n o t h e r words i t i s removed from the Report as a whole. Mr. P a u l i k f e l t the process was changing and p r e v i o u s agreement was not being f o l l o w e d . He suggested on b e h a l f of CF t h a t they recommend CF no longer p a r t i -c i p a t e f o r reasons g i v e n e a r l i e r . "The r u l e s are being changed, so we would l i k e to take our leave at t h i s time. 1 . . . The Community Forum r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s then l e f t the meeting. . . . Mr. Romaine f e l t he must take the matter under advisement back to DOE to determine the f u t u r e a c t i o n i n view of the "major s h i f t i n p r o c e s s . ' . . . TheGGVRD s t a f f p o s i t i o n was t h a t removal of the Issues s e c t i o n c o n s t i t u t e d a major s h i f t i n the process and they d i s a g r e e d w i t h t h a t s h i f t . . . . Mr. Macleod (DPW) s t a t e d i t was not a change i n process but a r e s t r u c t u r i n g to make the Report understandable by those not c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the problems" (APC Minutes, Nov. 13, 1975). The statement by DPW was s i m i l a r to others by MOT, Richmond, Vancouver, A i r C a r r i e r s , and MSUA, t h a t i s , t h a t no change i n process was o c c u r r i n g . The f o l l o w i n g day the A c t i n g Chairman of the CF wrote a very c r i t i c a l l e t t e r t o the Chairman of the APC. I t o u t l i n e d the development of APC t h i n k i n g r e g a r d i n g a s e c t i o n on Issues, and s t r e s s e d the c o n t i n u a l APC acceptance of the need of such ""'.'64 a s e c t i o n , from the Nov. 14, 19 74 T r i - L e v e l S t a f f meeting to the Issues workshops on Oct. 23 and 29, 1975. "We simply d i d not b e l i e v e and s t i l l do not b e l i e v e t h a t those r e s p o n s i b l e f o r making a d e c i s i o n c o u l d reasonably do so without being p r o v i d e d w i t h a s p e c i f i c s e c t i o n i n the f i n a l r e p o r t t h a t s e t s out the i s s u e s t h a t have emerged a f t e r two years of study by a l l the agencies i n -vol v e d . . . . a t no time . . . was the need f o r t h i s s e c t i o n s e r i o u s l y q u e s t i o n e d at the APC. The main problem has been the l a c k of s u f f i c i e n t a t t e n t i o n to i t . . . . I t i s not unreasonable to suggest t h a t the r e v e r s a l of p o s i t i o n by MOT r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s appeared o n l y as i t became more and more c l e a r t h a t t h i s p a r t i c u l a r s e c t i o n was a r t i c u l a t i n g both s i d e s of the argument conneetedd w i t h a i r p o r t expansion; . . . I t i s p a r t i c u l a r l y r e g r e t t a b l e t h a t you, the Chairman, have p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h i s on a p a r t i s a n b a s i s as an employee of the MOT r a t h e r than as an i m p a r t i a l chairman of the APC and the c u s t o d i a n of i t s procedures and pro c e s s e s " ( l e t t e r , S t a r l i n g to Hosgood, Nov. 14, 19 75). T h i s l e t t e r , p a r t i c u l a r l y the paragraph q u e s t i o n i n g the i n t e g r i t y of the chairman, l e d to threatened l e g a l a c t i o n ( l i b e l ) , which was never a c t u a l l y a c t ed upon. The vehemence of t h i s c o n t r o v e r s y seems to the observer to be s t r a n g e l y out of p r o p o r t i o n to the i s s u e at stake. A l -though MOT were accused of attempting to e l i m i n a t e the Issues s e c t i o n , s t r i c t l y speaking t h i s was not the suggestion. MOT's-proposed format would, however, have made the Issues much l e s s c l e a r to an o u t s i d e reader or p o l i t i c i a n . Had they been com--bined w i t h e i t h e r the d e c i s i o n options (which had been w r i t t e n by s p e c i f i c agencies) or the agency comments they would have appeared under the name of a s i n g l e agency, r a t h e r than under the name of the APC i t s e l f . 65 The violence of the reaction must be related to the high l e v e l of suspicion and tension that had been maintained throughout the process for over two years. The APC was born of a confrontation over expropriation, and i t lurched from c r i s i s to c r i s i s u n t i l the end. Between cr i s e s was not peace, but a state of cold war. CF was often tempted to leave the APC, but f e l t they could not maintain t h e i r c r e d i b i l i t y unless they did so over a very s p e c i f i c issue which the public could quickly grasp. They were hypersensitive throughout to v i o l a -tions of procedure, both major and minor, for they often f e l t that the bureaucrats were coming to secret accomodations behind t h e i r backs. This was obviously a s e l f - r e i n f o r c i n g cycle, for CF 1s extreme suspicion alienated them from others, who continued t h e i r business, which j u s t i f i e d CF's suspicion. The outcome of the Issues controversy was that the sec-tion remained i n the report, and CF returned to the APC. Keeping the section i n probably delayed the F i n a l Report by a month or two. 3.38 Deadlines and Delays. Time was another constant i r r i t a t i o n i n the APC process. It i s , of course, necessary to have deadlines, but they may be r e a l i s t i c or u n r e a l i s t i c , and they may be played for strategic advantage by any actor. This c e r t a i n l y was the case i n the APC. The slippage of deadlines i s indicated by the following sequence. In A p r i l 1973, when the APC was established, a deadline of July 1974 was set. MOT aimed f o r this date, but claimed they would not i n s i s t on i t at the expense of the 66 of the q u a l i t y of s t u d i e s . In Feb. 1974, when the study design was adopted, the d e a d l i n e was extended to Nov. 1974. To the observer t h i s i s a very s h o r t time i n which to complete the s t u d i e s planned, p a r t i c u l a r l y e c o l o g i c a l ones. Some were a l r e a d y underway however, and. delays i n o b t a i n i n g i n f o r m a t i o n on others were not a n t i c i p a t e d . In Oct. 1974 the d e a d l i n e was r e s e t by the chairman at Jan. 1975. A month l a t e r , i n Nov. 19 74, a t the T r i - L e v e l meeting, the d e a d l i n e was extended to A p r i l 15, 1975. There was a s t r o n g i m p l i c a t i o n t h a t the p o l i t i c i a n s simply would not p r o v i d e time or funds to continue beyond t h a t date, and more p r e s s u r e began to be a p p l i e d . In A p r i l 19 75 most of the s t u d i e s were complete, but the d e a d l i n e had to be r e l a x e d again f o r review purposes, to J u l y 19 75. C o n s i d e r a b l e pressure was e x e r t e d to meet t h i s d e a d l i n e , but a f t e r the two c r i s e s of the r e s i g n a t i o n of the chairman and the new p r o p o s a l , t h i s proved i m p o s s i b l e to m a i n t a i n . A l s o at t h i s p o i n t CF announced t h a t they were going to d r a f t a t h i r d de-c i s i o n o p t i o n , which had been d i s c u s s e d but not acted on. R e l u c t a n t l y the d e a d l i n e was changed to Oct. 1975. T h i s proved i m p o s s i b l e to meet when the Issues c o n f l i c t arose 1, so the d e a d l i n e again was delayed to e a r l y 1976. The APC a c t u a l l y completed i t s business on Feb. 19, 1976, and the r e p o r t was p u b l i s h e d i n e a r l y March. There was a d e f i n i t e f e e l i n g on the p a r t of MOT's c r i t i c s , p a r t i c u l a r l y CF, t h a t the d e a d l i n e s unacceptably p r e j u d i c e d the process. The s t u d i e s which they f e l t were necessary simply c o u l d not be done- i n the time-frame allowed. Furthermore, they a l l had to s t a r t s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , whereas some were l o g i c a l l y 67 p r i o r to others. Also, too l i t t l e time was allowed for review of drafts and addition of comments. F i n a l l y , there were recurrent and ominous statements from MOT that l i t t l e or no time would be a l l o t e d for public discussion and review a f t e r the F i n a l Report, which had been agreed to from the very establishment of the APC i n March 19 73. For example, on Dec. 11, 19 74 the Minister of Transport announced i n a press release that the expected date of completion was mid A p r i l 19 75, and the "Federal Government expects to announce i t s decision on the runway based on the Committee recommendations by the end of next A p r i l . " MOT's point of view was d i f f e r e n t , of course. From the beginning they f e l t that the APC was to consider only the p a r a l l e l runway proposal and no other p o l i c y matters. There-fore the scope of studies necessary was much more r e s t r i c t e d , and the time-frame not unreasonable. There was also the underlying assumption, stated above (page 42 ) that the stu-dies were to "demonstrate c l e a r l y the requirement for the runway," with no b e l i e f that i t might conceivably demonstrate anything d i f f e r e n t . MOT was consistently boggled when other members of the APC questioned the assumptions of t h e i r experts. These were technical matters which should not be t r i f l e d with. To MOT the repeated questioning of these assumptions was bar-gaining i n bad faithv So MOT responded accordingly, .with, strategic actions, which, of course, made the s i t u a t i o n worse. One example of t h i s loss of f a i t h a l l round d i r e c t l y con-cerned deadlines. In an interview with a CF representative i t 68 was s t a t e d t h a t as time went on, CF came more and more to d i s b e l i e v e and ignore time r e s t r i c t i o n s , because the e a r l y ones had been too r e s t r i c t e d and designed to favour MOT., In f a c t , as time wore on, CF l e a r n e d to manipulate time i t s e l f , and.did so knowingly. With two years a l r e a d y spent on the process, the s m a l l e x t r a d e l ays came to be l e s s and l e s s s i g -n i f i c a n t , so the power of time s h i f t e d more and more to CF and the other c r i t i c s of MOT. I t i s c l e a r t h a t many of these delays were l e g i t i m a t e w i t h r e s p e c t t o the accepted process, but i t i s a l s o c l e a r t h a t the delays served the p o l i c y purposes of CF, GVRD, and DOE, a t l e a s t . The p o i n t here i s n e i t h e r t o condone nor to condemn the manipulations of time on a l l s i d e s , but to emphasize the con-d i t i o n s which caused and r e i n f o r c e d these a c t i o n s . These were the i n i t i a l s h o r t time-frame, which was based on a fundamentally d i f f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the o b j e c t i v e and scope of the APC. 3.39 The F i n a l Report, March 1976. In the F i n a l Report two.sections were devoted t o areas of agreement and i s s u e s . The f i r s t concerns those items which arose from the work of the sub-committees and the APC. The second s e c t i o n concerns broader items, "which bear on a number of study areas, or from fundamental d i f f e r e n c e s i n p e r c e p t i o n of the problem being addressed by the APC, or from d i f f e r e n c e s of o p i n i o n on p r o c e d u r a l matters d u r i n g the APC p r o c e s s " (APC, March 1976, 67). Areas of agreement and i s s u e s had the f o l l o w i n g d e f i n i t i o n s : "An Area of Agreement statement concerns a matter which has the unanimous agreement of a l l APC 69 member agencies. An Issue Statement concerns a matter on which there i s a d i f f e r e n c e of views w i t h i n the APC. I t i s o n l y necessary f o r one APC member agency to d i s a g r e e on some matter wi t h one o t h e r agency on the committee to c r e a t e an i s s u e " (APC, March, 1976, 57). Appendix 2 of t h i s t h e s i s l i s t s , without d i s c u s s i o n , a l l the areas of agreement and i s s u e s i n c l u d e d i n the r e p o r t . I t i s no s u r p r i s e t h a t areas of agreement are few and r e l a t i v e l y t r i v i a l , whereas i s s u e s are numerous and c r i t i c a l . The r e p o r t presented t h r e e d e c i s i o n o p t i o n s . The f i r s t o p t i o n , w r i t t e n by MOT, was to decide to b u i l d a p a r a l l e l runway at VIA. I t recommended t h a t "1. The M i n i s t r y of T r a n s p o r t should proceed w i t h the p l a n n i n g , d e s i g n , and c o n s t r u c t i o n of a p a r a l l e l runway at Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t . 2. A l l m i t i g a t i o n a l recommendations a r i s i n g from the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee s t u d i e s , con-s i s t e n t w i t h s a f e and e f f i c i e n t a i r t r a n s p o r t a -t i o n management and c o n c u r r e n t . p r o t e c t i o n of the environment, should be i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o the proposed runway de s i g n , c o n s t r u c t i o n and f u t u r e a i r p o r t o p e r a t i o n a l procedures. 3. A permanent c o n s u l t a t i v e process on i s s u e s of airport-community concerns and r e l a t i o n s h i p s should be e s t a b l i s h e d " (APC, March,, 1976, 78). T h i s d e c i s i o n o p t i o n was supported by the A i r C a r r i e r s , B.C. A v i a t i o n C o u n c i l , DPW, and Richmond. The second d e c i s i o n o p t i o n , prepared by GVRD, proposed t h a t the d e c i s i o n be postponed. In summary, i t s major recom-mendations were: 1. t h a t f e d e r a l a u t h o r i t i e s p u b l i c l y commit themselves to c o - o p e r a t i o n w i t h l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y to a c t i o n on the p r e s e n t n o i s e c l i m a t e , on r e s o l v i n g c o n f l i c t s among environmental and urban o b j e c t i v e s , and on e s t a b l i s h i n g an i n t e r - a g e n c y body (with p u b l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , and w i t h .70' a l i m i t e d l i f e - s p a n ) ; 2. t h a t the i n t e r - a g e n c y body d e a l with n o i s e abatement, impact on the F r a s e r e s t u a r y / d e l t a , r e c r e a -t i o n a l use o f Sea I s l a n d , the r a t e of a i r t r a f f i c growth, measures to make more e f f i c i e n t use of e x i s t i n g a i r p o r t f a c i l i -t i e s , and r e l a t e d p o l i c y c o n s i d e r a t i o n s (APC, March 1976, 86). T h i s d e c i s i o n o p t i o n was supported by Vancouver and MSUA. The t h i r d d e c i s i o n o p t i o n , prepared by CF, was f o r a d e c i s i o n not to proceed w i t h the p a r a l l e l runway now. Note t h a t the d i s t i n c t i o n between d e c i s i o n o p t i o n s two and three i s q u i t e s u b t l e . The second o p t i o n i s 'not to decide now;' the t h i r d o p t i o n i s 'to decide not to a c t now.' S p e c i f i c recommendations of the t h i r d o p t i o n were: 1. to implement and enforce e f f e c t i v e procedures to monitor and r e g u l a t e a i r p o r t n o i s e ; 2. to take a c t i o n on p r o t e c t i o n of the e s t u a r y , by d e c l a r i n g a moratorium and by d e v e l o p i n g a management p o l i c y ; 3. to c o l l e c t and use i n f o r m a t i o n on the APC process as a b a s i s f o r f u r t h e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n of t h i s s o r t ; 4. to develop p u b l i c understanding through p u b l i c h e a r i n g s ; and 5. to e s t a b l i s h the often-mentioned ongoing c o n s u l t a t i v e p r o c e s s . T h i s o p t i o n was not supported by any agencies other than CF. DOE o f f i c i a l l y supported none of the three o p t i o n s , but the moratorium recommendations i n the Summary Report of the E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee (APC, J u l y , 1975b) i n d i c a t e d t h a t they opposed the MOT o p t i o n . These three d e c i s i o n o p t i o n s were f o l l o w e d by f i n a l p o s i -t i o n statements by each member agency, emphasizing the p o i n t s i t f e l t were important i n each d e c i s i o n o p t i o n , and r e b u t t i n g p o i n t s i t f e l t were u n j u s t i f i e d . However no p o s i t i o n statement 71 r e b u t s any o t h e r p o s i t i o n s t a t e m e n t ; t h e y a r e f i n a l comments. 3.4 A f t e r t h e F i n a l R e p o r t T h r o u g h o u t t h e APC p r o c e s s two p o i n t s were made r e p e a t e d l y c o n c e r n i n g t h e p e r i o d a f t e r t h e F i n a l R e p o r t was r e l e a s e d . F i r s t , t h e r e w o u l d be ample t i m e f o r p u b l i c d i s c u s s i o n a n d r e v i e w by a l l a g e n c i e s b e f o r e t h e M i n i s t e r made h i s d e c i s i o n . S e c o n d , an o n g o i n g , c o n s u l t a t i v e body w o u l d be s e t up t o d e a l w i t h f u t u r e a i r p o r t / c o m m u n i t y i n t e r a c t i o n s . The e x a c t f o r m o f t h i s body was n e v e r s p e c i f i e d , b u t t h e p r i n c i p l e o f i t s e x i s t e n c e was o f t e n r e a f f i r m e d ( f o r example, a t t h e T r i - L e v e l m e e t i n g , Nov. 14, 19 7 4 ) . W i t h t h e r e l e a s e o f t h e F i n a l R e p o r t , t h e M i n i s t e r o f T r a n s p o r t , i n a p r e s s r e l e a s e d a t e d M a r c h 12, 1976 i n v i t e d p u b l i c comment " r e l a t i n g t o t h e p r o p o s a l t o c o n s t r u c t a runway t h a t e x t e n d s o n t o t h e Sea I s l a n d f o r e s h o r e , b u t more p a r t i c u l a r l y b e c a u s e he v i e w s i t as a b e t t e r s o l u t i o n , he w o u l d l i k e comments t o c o n c e n t r a t e on a i r r e l a t i v e l y r e c e n t p r o p o s a l . . . f o r a s h o r t e r runway w i t h i n t h e Sea I s l a n d dyke" ( P r e s s R e l e a s e No. 3 2 / 7 6 ) . The s h o r t e r runway, o f c o u r s e , was s p e c i f i c a l l y e x c l u d e d f r o m APC a n a l y s i s on J u l y 31, 1975, so t h e F i n a l R e p o r t s a i d n o t h i n g o f i t . The o p i n i o n t h a t i t was a " b e t t e r p r o p o s a l " was a t t a c k e d as p r e j u d g i n g an i s s u e t h a t s h o u l d be s u b j e c t e d t o f u l l s t u d y , p r e f e r a b l y by a body c o m p a r a b l e t o t h e APC. Sub-s e q u e n t l y , on A p r i l 6, 1976, MOT announced t h a t t h e s h o r t runway w o u l d be s t u d i e d u n d e r EARP. I n an i n t e r v i e w w i t h CF on May 15, 1976, t h e M i n i s t e r o f T r a n s p o r t s u g g e s t e d p r e - l o a d i n g ( s p r e a d i n g o f f i l l m a t e r i a l ) o f 72 t h e p r o p o s e d runway b e f o r e t h e d e c i s i o n had been made t o b u i l d i t , b e c a u s e t h i s w o u l d c o s t l i t t l e and w o u l d s a v e t i m e and money s h o u l d t h e d e c i s i o n be made t o go ahea d . T h i s , combined w i t h a p r i o r announcement by MOT on March 24, 1976 t h a t t h e y were p r o c e e d i n g w i t h t h e p l a n n i n g o f a s e c o n d t e r m i n a l b u i l d -i n g , r a i s e d t h e d e e p e s t s u s p i c i o n s o f t h e i r c r i t i c s t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n had been made t o p r o c e e d , b u t was s i m p l y n o t b e i n g a nnounced. T h i s b e l i e f was r e i n f o r c e d on Nov. 5,.1976, when a c a l l f o r t e n d e r f o r a m a s s i v e d r e d g i n g o p e r a t i o n was pub-l i s h e d i n t h e p a p e r . The i n d i c a t i o n s were t h a t MOT, h a v i n g f a i l e d t o a c h i e v e t h e r e s u l t i t d e s i r e d t h r o u g h t h e APC p r o c e s s , was g o i n g t o implem e n t i t i n s m a l l , b u t i r r e v e r s i b l e s t e p s , b e h i n d t h e s c e n e s , and w i t h o u t any p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The momentum b e h i n d t h e d e c i s i o n t o exp a n d was g a t h e r i n g a g a i n . As t h i s i s b e i n g w r i t t e n , i n March,, 1977, t h e r e i s s t i l l no c l e a r e v i d e n c e . C e r t a i n l y t h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e a t a l l t o i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e runway has been abandoned, o r t h a t a new p r o c e s s i n v o l v i n g t h e . p u b l i c i s a b o u t t o b e g i n . T h e r e i s c i r -c u m s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n t o b u i l d i s b e i n g made i n i n c r e m e n t a l s t e p s . The EARP com m i t t e e h a s been m e e t i n g , b u t none o f i t s r e s u l t s a r e p u b l i c . T h i s , however, i s f o r a n o t h e r t h e s i s . CHAPTER 4: EVALUATION OF THE AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS Th i s chapter a p p l i e s the c r i t e r i a developed i n Chapter 2 to the process d e s c r i b e d i n Chapter 3. The c r i t e r i a d i s c u s s e d below are i n the same order as presented i n Chapter 2. The e v a l u a t i o n d i r e c t l y covers what happened, with l i t t l e i n t e r -p r e t a t i o n of how and why these events happened. The l a t t e r i s the s u b j e c t of Chapter 5. 4.1 Opportunity to P a r t i c i p a t e 1) A l l a f f e c t e d i n t e r e s t s can p a r t i c i p a t e P r i o r to the e s t a b l i s h m e n t of the APC a l l a f f e c t e d i n t e r -e s t s d i d not have an o p p o r t u n i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a i r p o r t p l a n n i n g . There were two p u b l i c hearings on the i s s u e of e x p r o p r i a t i o n , but these were i n r e a c t i o n to a d e c i s i o n w i t h i n MOT to use t h a t l a n d f o r a i r p o r t f a c i l i t i e s r e g a r d l e s s of s p e c i f i c developments. C i t i z e n s were not encouraged to par-take i n the p l a n n i n g of the use of t h a t land, j u s t as they had no p a r t i n the d e c i s i o n to e x p r o p r i a t e . Presumably MOT planned to conduct t h e i r p l a n n i n g in-house, with r e f e r r a l s to other agencies, as d e s c r i b e d i n (Shapter 3.1, and an environmental study as announced i n the press r e l e a s e of Feb. 21, 1973 (see Appendix 1). The i n i t i a t i v e of GVRD to e s t a b l i s h the APC w i t h d i r e c t c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n d i d a l l o w a l l a f f e c t e d i n t e r e s t s t o be i n v o l v e d . I n v i t a t i o n s were sent to 139 l o c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s r e g a r d i n g the i n i t i a l CF meeting, Nov. 8, 1973. Of these 38 have maintained e i t h e r i n t e r e s t or involvement w i t h CF through-74 out the p r o c e s s . Many who l o s t i n t e r e s t were i n more d i s t a n t p a r t s of the r e g i o n , not d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d . Others seem to have d i f f e r e n t p o s i t i o n s from t h a t which CF developed, f o r example, the Richmond Chamber of Commerce. A r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the Richmond Chamber of Commerce attended some e a r l y meetings of the APC, i n f a c t , but t h i s r e p r e s e n t a -t i o n d i d not continue. The reasons f o r t h i s are not c e r t a i n , but i t appears t h a t the o r g a n i z a t i o n l o s t i n t e r e s t , or f e l t t h a t others were p r e s e n t i n g i t s views a t the APC. I t was, i n any case, not f o r c e d to withdraw. The CF r e p r e s e n t e d a wide range of - community o p i n i o n , but i t was not f u l l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of a l l of the community. The three CF members on the APC i n theory r e p r e s e n t e d three commu-n i t y views: Vancouver o p i n i o n , Richmond o p i n i o n (both e s p e c i a l l y concerned w i t h n o i s e ) , and e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t o p i n i o n . Because there was no way to measure the r e l a t i v e importance of these, or o t h e r , o p i n i o n s , the APC was e x p l i c i t l y a non-voting committee wi t h f l e x i b l e membership. T h i s appears to have been a disappointment to MOT, who wished a v o t i n g committee wi t h one member from each agency and f o u r from MOT. MOT a l s o appear to have been d i s a p p o i n t e d i n not s u p p l y i n g the chairmen f o r a l l of the sub-committees, as i s the t r a d i t i o n i n the c i v i l s e r v i c e . They d i d not have adequate or a p p r o p r i a t e manpower to do t h i s , and l o s t c o n s i d e r a b l e c o n t r o l over the process as a r e s u l t . T h e i r other a c t i o n s , p l u s unwritten comments at the time of the s e l e c t i o n of chairmen, i n d i c a t e t h a t MOT wanted t h i s c o n t r o l . 75' A f t e r the F i n a l Report, c i t i z e n s have not had an oppor-t u n i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . Numerous assurances have been gi v e n by p o l i t i c i a n s t h a t they w i l l be i n v o l v e d i n any f u t u r e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the i s s u e which might precede a p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n , but the s t a t e of such an i n v e s t -i g a t i o n i s u n c l e a r . In summary the o p p o r t u n i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e was not p r o v i d e d b e f o r e the APC. The APC c o n s i d e r a b l y improved the p l a n n i n g process by g r e a t l y i n c r e a s i n g the number of i n t e r e s t s p a r t i c i -p a t i n g . I t i s u n c e r t a i n whether a l l community i n t e r e s t s were repr e s e n t e d by the CF. Some, such as Chambers of Commerce may have been e f f e c t i v e l y p r e c l u d e d by the p o s i t i o n developed by the CF d u r i n g the p r o c e s s . 2) Opportunity from the e a r l i e s t stages. D i s c u s s i o n of the f i r s t c r i t e r i o n has a l r e a d y i n d i c a t e d t h a t there was not s a t i s f a c t o r y p a r t i c i p a t i o n before the APC was e s t a b l i s h e d . During the APC process o p p o r t u n i t y was p r o v i d e d , w i t h the p u b l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s having an equal v o i c e with a l l other members of the APC. Although the o r i g i n a l p l a n was f o r CF to have observers but no working members on sub-committees, t h i s was changed to a l l o w c i t i z e n r e p r e s e n t a * t i v e s f u l l a c t i v e membership (see Appendix 1, J u l y 5, 1973; and Dec. 13, 1973). A f t e r the APC, of course, no o p p o r t u n i t y has y e t been p r o v i d e d to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the study of the new p r o p o s a l f o r a 9,250 f o o t runway. 76 4.2 Information System 1) I n t e r e s t e d c i t i z e n made aware. During the APC process s e v e r a l i n f o r m a t i o n channels were maintained. Most important was the c r e a t i o n of CF, which was s t i m u l a t e d and o r g a n i z e d by GVRD. Once o r g a n i z e d i t was the s t e e r i n g committee of CF which was a c t i v e , but a number of p u b l i c meetings were h e l d as the process continued. CF a l s o d i s t r i b u t e d a n e w s l e t t e r a t i r r e g u l a r i n t e r v a l s . GVRD undertook to p u b l i s h the APC News wit h the f u l l support of the APC. Only three of these were ever completed, however. GVRD a l s o r e l e a s e d i t s P o s i t i o n Paper f o r p u b l i c comment, causing the c o n t r o v e r s y d i s c u s s e d i n S e c t i o n 3.32. MOT, a t the suggestion of the APC, opened a 24 hour t e l e -phone l i n e f o r n o i s e complaints i n A p r i l 1974. T h e i r informa-t i o n pamphlet, Sorry About the Noise, was d i s t r i b u t e d , i n p a r t , w i t h responses to complaints r e c e i v e d on t h i s l i n e . T h i s was, as d i s c u s s e d p r e v i o u s l y , h i g h l y c r i t i c i z e d by APC members as a propaganda p l o y . During the APC process an Ad-Hoc Information Sub-Committee was e s t a b l i s h e d to d e a l w i t h the problems of d i s t r i b u t i n g APC s u p p o r t i n g documents to i n t e r e s t e d members of the p u b l i c . The outcome of t h i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n was the e s t a b l i s h m e n t of the APC Information Centre a t the o l d (south) a i r p o r t t e r m i n a l b u i l d -i n g . The e x i s t e n c e of t h i s c e n t r e , which h e l d c o p i e s of p u b l i s h e d s t u d i e s p l u s numerous one-of-a-kind documents, was a d v e r t i s e d i n l o c a l papers. A l l sub-committee r e p o r t s were p u b l i s h e d i n the p e r i o d January t o J u l y 19 75. 77 The F i n a l Report was p u b l i s h e d i n March 1976, and was d i s t r i b u t e d to an i n i t i a l m a i l i n g l i s t . Remaining c o p i e s were to be s o l d f o r $7. CF gave a l l i t s copies away and requested more co p i e s from MOT f o r continued f r e e d i s t r i b u t i o n . MOT r e f u s e d to r e l e a s e the c o p i e s , s t a t i n g t h a t they c o u l d s t i l l be purchased a t the a i r p o r t . "Regarding the 123 copies earmarked 'Ad Hoc Request (F r e e ) , ' I have s t r i c t l y observed the i n t e n t of the APC i n r e l e a s i n g these c o p i e s . That i s they have been gi v e n only on request to news media, to l i b r a -r i e s and to u n i v e r s i t i e s and c o l l e g e s which e i t h e r were omitted from the o r i g i n a l l i s t or which requested an a d d i t i o n a l copy f o r a s p e c i f i c depart-ment or purpose" (Hosgood to Watchorn, Oct. 29, 1976). A f t e r the r e p o r t was r e l e a s e d , Vancouver h e l d a p u b l i c meeting ( A p r i l 6.) a t which the i s s u e s were d i s c u s s e d . GVRD had planned one f o r e a r l y f a l l , but c a n c e l l e d t h i s when the M i n i s t e r announced t h a t c o n s t r u c t i o n would not s t a r t b e f o r e 1978 i n any case ( i n a press r e l e a s e , Aug. 12, 1976). E v i d e n t l y a number of a c t i v e channels were used to a l e r t the i n t e r e s t e d p u b l i c , i n c l u d i n g p u b l i c meetings, n e w s l e t t e r s , a p o s i t i o n paper, t e c h n i c a l and summary r e p o r t s , and informa-t i o n pamphlets. The major newspapers a l s o gave e x t e n s i v e coverage of major c o n f l i c t s i n the APC. The e x t e n t and e f f e c t of these i n i t i a t i v e s are not known. For example, CF has been c r i t i c i z e d by other APC members f o r not h o l d i n g enough p u b l i c meetings, and l o s i n g touch w i t h p u b l i c o p i n i o n . The q u a l i t y of the i n f o r m a t i o n made a v a i l a b l e i s d i s c u s s e d i n the f o l l o w i n g c r i t e r i o n . 2) T e c h n i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n c l e a r . The c l a r i t y of i n f o r m a t i o n depends on two major f a c t o r s , 78' the s t y l e of p r e s e n t a t i o n , and the knowledge of the audience ( t r a n s m i s s i o n and r e c e p t i o n ) . The audience i n t h i s case c o u l d be taken to be the g e n e r a l p u b l i c , APC members, other e x p e r t s , or p o l i t i c i a n s . The f i r s t and l a s t category have l e s s s p e c i f i c knowledge, and r e q u i r e l e s s t e c h n i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n . APC members and o t h e r experts r e q u i r e more t e c h n i c a l , but s t i l l comprehensible i n f o r m a t i o n . T h i s i s a l s o t r u e of p u b l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s on the APC who have r e c e i v e d a f o r c e d and i n t e n s i v e t r a i n i n g i n a i r c o n t r o l t e c h -nology and procedures, f o r e c a s t i n g methods, economic a n a l y s i s , n o i s e measurement, e c o l o g i c a l assessment, and so on. These members are no longer complete laymen. " I f I've l e a r n e d any-t h i n g i t i s t h a t the smoke surrounding t e c h n i c a l i s s u e s i s genuinely smoke. The t e c h n i c a l i s s u e s are. not t h a t hard t o understand" (Tyhurst, Mar. 3, 1977). The r e p o r t s produced by the APC meet the demands of both audiences. The sub-committee r e p o r t s c o n t a i n methodology, data, analyses and c o n c l u s i o n s to a l l o w the expert to f o l l o w the argument. Each of these r e p o r t s i s summarized i n the APC F i n a l Report, g i v i n g the o u t l i n e of the argument, the c o n c l u -s i o n s , and the r e a c t i o n and c r i t i q u e of each agency to the r e p o r t . The l a s t i s important, f o r i t emphasizes the assump-t i o n s , u n d e r l y i n g v a l u e s , and l i m i t a t i o n s of each r e p o r t . The c l a r i t y of t r a n s m i s s i o n i s a l s o s a t i s f a c t o r y i n most cases. Some r e p o r t s had to be r e d r a f t e d f o r s t y l i s t i c reasons (eg. A l t e r n a t i v e A i r p o r t S i t e S t u d i e s , APC, A p r i l 1975), and are ( i f not e l e g a n t prose) a t l e a s t i n t e l l i g i b l e . 79 A n o t h e r a s p e c t o f c l a r i t y c o n c e r n s t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e message r a t h e r t h a n t h e s t y l e o f p r e s e n t a t i o n . Does t h e i n -f o r m a t i o n p r o d u c e d e x p l a i n what t h e e f f e c t s o f t h e p r o p o s a l w i l l be, f o r v a r i o u s r e l e v a n t a u d i e n c e s ? From t h i s p o i n t o f v i e w t h e APC r e s u l t s show some f a i l u r e s . R i s k s and u n c e r t a i n t i e s a r e e x p l a i n e d i n most o f t h e r e p o r t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e e c o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s and t h e f o r e c a s t s . I t i s p e r h a p s i n t h e n a t u r e o f t h e s e t o p i c s t o i d e n t i f y d o u b t s , f o r e c o l o g i c a l s y s t e m s a r e so complex t h a t f u l l i n f o r m a t i o n c a n n e v e r be a c h i e v e d , and f o r e c a s t s a r e n e c e s s a r i l y b a s e d on a s s u m p t i o n s w h i c h c a n be c h a l l e n g e d . The m a j o r f a i l u r e i n APC t e c h n i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n i s t h e l a c k o f any k i n d o f e v a l u a t i o n o f c o s t s , e i t h e r m o n e t a r y o r i n t a n g i b l e . The e c o n o m i c s t u d y w h i c h was done d i d n o t i n c l u d e c o s t s o f e x p a n s i o n , e i t h e r t h e c o s t s o f a i r p o r t f a c i l i t i e s , o r t h e c o s t s o f i n c r e a s e d s e r v i c e s ( e . g . g r o u n d t r a n s p o r t f a c i l i -t i e s ) demanded t h r o u g h o u t t h e r e g i o n . N e i t h e r d i d i t c o n s i d e r s o c i a l c o s t s s u c h as s t r e s s f r o m n o i s e , o r c h a n g e d p r o p e r t y v a l u e s , o r o t h e r i n d i r e c t e f f e c t s . I t was n o t a c o s t b e n e f i t a n a l y s i s i n any s e n s e (and d i d n o t c l a i m t o b e ) . T h e r e i s t h e r e f o r e a gap i n t h e u s e f u l n e s s o f t h e i n f o r m a -t i o n p r o d u c e d f o r t h e i n t e r e s t e d p u b l i c . The l i k e l y i m p a c t s on any g i v e n c i t i z e n a r e made much c l e a r e r by t h e r e p o r t s t h a n t h e y w o u l d be w i t h o u t them b e c a u s e numerous c o n s e q u e n c e s were i d e n t i f i e d w h i c h a r e n o t i n t u i t i v e l y o b v i o u s ( s u c h as t h e e f f e c t s o f d r e d g i n g and f i l l on s a l m on p o p u l a t i o n ) . However t h e m a g n i t u d e o f t h e s e i m p a c t s i s n o t a l w a y s c l e a r ( f o r example t h e e f f e c t s o f n o i s e on p r o p e r t y v a l u e s ) , and t h e c o s t s o f 80 a l t e r n a t i v e s o l u t i o n s are not d i s c u s s e d at a l l . Without t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n the c i t i z e n cannot determine which course of a c t i o n i s most p r e f e r a b l e from h i s p o i n t of view. 3) D i s c u s s i o n of values B a s i c v a l u e d i f f e r e n c e s underlay the whole APC pr o c e s s . I t i s worth r e p e a t i n g the a n a l y s i s of the e d i t o r of the F i n a l Report - not h i m s e l f an o f f i c i a l member of the APC and not a l i g n e d with any agency - as to what these val u e s were. "The f i r s t view . . . was t h a t the problem b e f o r e APC was to determine what adverse e f f e c t s , i f any, the proposed p a r a l l e l runway would have on the surrounding communities and the r e g i o n i n g e n e r a l ; and what m i t i g a t i n g a c t i o n would have t o be taken to make the runway compatible. . . . T h i s w i l l be r e f e r r e d t o as the 'proposed exp an s i o n ' view of the problem. The second view . . . was t h a t the problem before the APC was to assess the need f o r expanding the c a p a c i t y of a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n the Lower Mainland, to determine the a l t e r n a t i v e forms such expansion might take i f i t i s needed and to s e l e c t the a l -t e r n a t i v e s which are compatible w i t h r e g i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s . . . T h i s w i l l be r e f e r r e d t o as the ' r e g i o n a l ' view of the problem. . . . the f i r s t f ocusses d i r e c t l y on the 'compati-b i l i t y ' o f the p a r a l l e l runway at VIA, the second i s concerned with the more g e n e r a l q u e s t i o n of the need f o r , and l i k e l y impact o f , any expansion o r a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n the Lower Mainland. . . . A study program which would produce enough i n f o r m a t i o n to meet the requirements of the 'regi o n a l ' v i e w would be more than adequate to cover the needs of the 'proposed expansion' view. Thus d e s p i t e the measure of accomodation reached d u r i n g the development of the study de s i g n , the two p e r c e p t i o n s of the problem per-s i s t e d . The Community Forum view of the problem under-went f u r t h e r development a f t e r the study d e s i g n was accepted by the APC. . . . In t h e i r view q u e s t i o n s of the need to c o n s t r a i n a l l aspects of growth, of which the proposed expansion of VIA was only an example, should be taken i n t o account by the committee towards the develop-81-ment of a 'conserver' s o c i e t y . For convenience t h i s w i l l be r e f e r r e d to as the 'co n s e r v a t i o n ' view of the problem. . . . The d i f f i c u l t i e s were by no means as c l e a r to the committee w h i l e the APC was conducting i t s s t u d i e s as they may now appear i n r e t r o s p e c t " (APC, March, 1976, 9-10). D i s c u s s i o n of the wider values ( r e g i o n a l and c o n s e r v a t i o n views) was o f t e n f r u s t r a t e d by MOT's i n s i s t e n c e on r e s t r i c t i n g b usiness to the proposed expansion view. The u n s u c c e s s f u l attempts t o decide matters by vote, i n s t e a d of by consensus wi t h m i n o r i t y r e p o r t was another aspect of the s t i f l i n g of d i s c u s s i o n on v a l u e s . A t h i r d aspect was the r e s i s t a n c e and mani p u l a t i o n o f sub-committee r e p o r t s w i t h d i s s e n t i n g s e c t i o n s ( F o r e c a s t i n g , Jan. 1975, and A l t e r n a t i v e S i t e s , A p r i l 1975). A f o u r t h aspect was the attempted e l i m i n a t i o n o f the s p e c i f i c s e c t i o n on Issues and Areas of Agreement. Un d e r l y i n g the narrow i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of MOT and i t s a l l i e s on the q u e s t i o n of values was a b a s i c disagreement on the ob-j e c t i v e s of the APC i t s e l f . MOT's p o s i t i o n , which was completely l o g i c a l from t h e i r p o i n t of view, was t h a t the d e c i s i o n to b u i l d the runway was a p e r f e c t l y l e g i t i m a t e one but which needed mo-d i f i c a t i o n because of i t s impacts. Opponents of MOT b e l i e v e d the purpose o f the APC was more g e n e r a l ; i t was to i n v e s t i g a t e a l t e r n a t i v e s o l u t i o n s to the problem of growing demand. MOT d i d not b e l i e v e t h a t the wider s o l u t i o n s were r e l e v a n t to what they p e r c e i v e d to be the problem a t hand. T h i s d i f f e r e n c e of o p i n i o n i s a major theme i n the d i s c u s s i o n i n Chapter 5. 4) Real debate and d i a l o g u e . A l l members of the APC had an equal v o i c e i n i t s business 82 and i n i t s d e c i s i o n s (or d i s a g r e e m e n t s ) . Most p r o c e d u r a l d e b a t e s t o o k p l a c e i n t h e APC i t s e l f , w h i l e most s u b s t a n t i v e d e b a t e s t o o k p l a c e on t h e s u b - c o m m i t t e e l e v e l . An example o f t h e l a t t e r i s t h e d e b a t e o v e r t h e a p p r o p r i a t e n o i s e i n d i c a t o r , and t h e d e s i g n o f t h e n o i s e s t u d y . N o i s e E x p o s u r e F o r e c a s t s were c o n s i d e r e d t o o a r b i t r a r y t o d e s c r i b e a c t u a l c o n d i t i o n s and a c t u a l i m p a c t on p e o p l e . They were s e a r c h i n g l y c r i t i q u e d by members o f t h e N o i s e Sub-Committee. As d i s c u s s e d above, t h e r e s p o n s e o f MOT t o t h i s c r i t i q u e - a t t e m p t i n g t o s i g n t h e n o i s e s t u d y c o n t r a c t w i t h o u t APC a p p r o v a l o f i t s f o r m - l e d t o one o f t h e s e r i o u s c r i s e s i n t h e p r o c e s s . A s e c o n d example o f s u c h d e b a t e was t h e Annex t o t h e F o r e c a s t i n g R e p o r t (APC, J a n . 19 75) w h i c h o f f e r r e d an e x t e n -s i v e c r i t i q u e o f t h e f o r e c a s t i n g a s s u m p t i o n s and methods b e i n g u s e d . T h i s Annex was f i r s t d i s t r i b u t e d as an a g e n c y comment, n o t an o p p o s i n g v i e w w i t h i n t h e s u b - c o m m i t t e e . I n b o t h o f t h e s e c a s e s a t t e m p t s were made t o s t i f l e t h e d e b a t e . T h i s r e s u l t e d f r o m t h e b a s i c d i s a g r e e m e n t a b o u t t h e f u n c t i o n o f t h e APC. T h i s d i s a g r e e m e n t l e d t o many l e n g t h y arguments ( i n s t e a d o f d e b a t e s ) i n t h e APC and i t s s u b - c o m m i t t e e s , and l e d members t o manoeuvre f o r p o s i t i o n i n s t e a d o f d e b a t i n g t h e m e r i t s of. t h e i s s u e s . CF and GVRD were p a r t i c u l a r l y p e r s i s t a n t i n t h e i r q u e s t i o n -i n g o f a s s u m p t i o n s , t h o u g h t h e y were n o t a l w a y s s u c c e s s f u l i n h a v i n g them a n a l y z e d . I t was i m p o r t a n t t h a t t h e y (and a l l o t h e r a g e n c i e s ) were e q u a l l y i n v o l v e d i n d r a f t i n g t h e s t u d y d e s i g n and t h e terms o f r e f e r e n c e f o r e a c h s t u d y . W i t h o u t t h i s p a r -83' t i c i p a t i o n much of the debate t h a t d i d occur would have been f r u s t r a t e d . In summary, e f f e c t i v e debate proved very d i f f i c u l t because agencies d i s a g r e e d on the b a s i c f u n c t i o n o f the APC. 5) F u l l d i s c l o s u r e from e a r l i e s t stages. I t i s not necessary to d e t a i l t h i s t o p i c a g a i n , but i t i s c l e a r t h a t there were major f a i l i n g s on t h i s c r i t e r i o n i n the a i r p o r t p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The statement of the Hearing O f f i c e r (Jan. 20, 1973) r e g a r d i n g r e t e n t i o n of data by MOT i s the f i r s t example. GVRD's threatened w i t h h o l d i n g of demographic data i s another. The data on f o r e c a s t i n g and the demand/capacity a n a l y s i s of the a i r p o r t , v i t a l p i e c e s of i n f o r m a t i o n f o r MOT's d e s i r e to expand i n the f i r s t p l a c e , were the most c r i t i c a l examples. The f o r e c a s t i n g data were not s u p p l i e d t i l l Jan. 14, 1974, co u l d not be d i s c u s s e d with MOT b e f o r e May 9, 1974, and were judged incomplete a t t h a t time. Some of t h i s data e x i s t e d but was not made a v a i l a b l e f o r a long p e r i o d of time; some of i t d i d not e x i s t and had to be generated. In the same p e r i o d , A p r i l 18, 1974, MOT s t a t e d t h a t they were now ready to begin documenting the case f o r the new run-way. L o g i c a l l y , one and a h a l f years a f t e r the n o t i c e to e x p r o p r i a t e had been i s s u e d was r a t h e r l a t e t o begin to docu-ment the need f o r the p a r a l l e l runway which made the e x p r o p r i a -t i o n necessary i n the f i r s t p l a c e . In summary, some i n f o r m a t i o n r e q u i r e d f o r p l a n n i n g purposes was w i t h h e l d when r e q u i r e d . foSomeaother purposes = 84 i n f o r m a t i o n was n o t g e n e r a t e d when r e q u i r e d (see c r i t e r i o n s e v e n ) . 6) A l t e r n a t i v e s e x p r e s s f u l l r a n g e o f v a l u e s . W i t h o u t d o u b t t h i s was a m a j o r f a i l u r e o f t h e APC p r o c e s s . MOT c o n s i s t e n t l y r e f u s e d t o c o n s i d e r p o l i c y m o d i f i c a t i o n s w h i c h w o u l d t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t t h e v a l u e s o f GVRD and CF. O n l y a f t e r t h e s t u d i e s were c o m p l e t e d i d t h e y p r o p o s e t h e s h o r t runway a l t e r n a t i v e , w h i c h t h e y p e r c e i v e d ( i n c o r r e c t l y ) as e x p r e s s i n g t h e v a l u e s o f DOE. A l t e r n a t i v e s i t e s t o V I A were c o n s i d e r e d i n t h e A i r p o r t s S y s t e m R e p o r t (APC, A p r i l 19 75) , b u t t h e m e t h o d o l o g y on w h i c h o t h e r s i t e s were compared t o V I A and r e j e c t e d i s q u e s t i o n a b l e , and was un a c c e p t a b i &^to CF ,^DGVRD , . and DOE. Doubt l i n g e r s a b o u t a l t e r n a t i v e s i t e s , a l t h o u g h i t i s l i k e l y t h a t no p o l i t i c a l l y f e a s i b l e o r t e c h n i c a l l y s u p e r i o r s i t e i s a v a i l a b l e ( R o b e r t s , Mar. 9, 1977). A s s u m p t i o n s made i n t h e s t u d y ( t h a t t h e r e w o u l d be no m a j o r s h i f t i n t h e r o l e o f VIA) p r e c l u d e d a c l e a r a s s e s s m e n t o f o p p o s i n g v a l u e s on t h e m a t t e r o f a i r p o r t s i t e s . The a l t e r n a t i v e s t h a t were c o n s i d e r e d were c o n c e p t s one, two, and t h r e e . A s t u d y w h i c h t r u l y e x p r e s s e d o p p o s i n g v a l u e s w o u l d have a l s o s t u d i e d t h e s h o r t e r runway ( w i t h i n t h e dyke) p r o p o s a l , t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f b u i l d i n g no runway a t a l l ( m e e t i n g demand t h r o u g h p o l i c y a d j u s t m e n t s ) , and t h e p o s s i b l e u s e o f a n o t h e r a i r p o r t s i t e . The l a s t , i f i t were t o be e l i m i n a t e d f r o m c o n s i d e r a t i o n , w o u l d have t o be done on t h e b a s i s o f a s t u d y w h i c h d i d n o t p r e j u d g e t h a t i s s u e by i t s a s s u m p t i o n s and m e t h o d o l o g y . F u r t h e r m o r e , a l l t h e s e a l t e r n a t i v e s w o u l d have 85 had to be s t u d i e d from the beginning, not i n s e r t e d l a t e r i n the p r o c e s s . By the end of the APC process the number of a l t e r n a t i v e s had been reduced to one, a 10,600 f o o t runway r e q u i r i n g about 30 acres of f i l l i n the e s t u a r y . For the a c t o r s , f o r the p u b l i c , f o r the p o l i t i c i a n s t h i s i s a yes/no p o s i t i o n which does not a l l o w f o r r e s o l u t i o n of c o n f l i c t s . A t a k e - i t - o r - l e a v e -i t p r o p o s i t i o n can o n l y be expected to p o l a r i z e o p i n i o n , and i t c e r t a i n l y has. F i n a l attempts at r e c o n c i l i a t i o n are probably r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the s h i f t , i n the d e c i s i o n o p t i o n s , away from the a c t i o n i t s e l f , to the time at which i t should be decided. MOT wants the d e c i s i o n to be yes, now. GVRD wants no d e c i s i o n now (with other a c t i o n f i r s t - e s p e c i a l l y n o i s e abatement). CF wants a d e c i s i o n no, now (but with o p t i o n s f o r new p r o p o s a l s to be s t u d i e d i n f u t u r e ) . These are o n l y a l t e r n a t i v e s i n a p e c u l i a r sense of the word, one step removed from the r e a l problem a t hand, which i s to manage i n one way or another the demand f o r a i r s e r v i c e s . In summary a c r i t i c a l f a i l i n g of the APC process has been i t s l a c k of a l t e r n a t i v e s . I t has stemmed from a fundamental d i f f e r e n c e w i t h i n the APC about the r o l e of the committee. 7) Necessary data when needed Information r e l e v a n t to t h i s c r i t e r i o n has been d i s c u s s e d under ' f u l l d i s c l o s u r e , ' above. The q u e s t i o n a b l e value of the f o r e c a s t i n g data, and the l a t e p r o d u c t i o n of the demand/capa-c i t y a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e f a i l u r e to s a t i s f y the c r i t e r i o n . 86 The f o r e c a s t s and d e m a n d / c a p a c i t y a n a l y s i s were r e q u i r e d as b a s i c i n p u t s t o t h e work o f t h e APC i n g e n e r a l . A l s o i m p o r t a n t i n t h i s c r i t e r i o n a r e d a t a r e l e v a n t t o s p e c i f i c a l t e r n a t i v e s . S i n c e o n l y one p r o p o s a l was e x t e n s i v e l y s t u d i e d , t h i s i s a moot p o i n t . 8) D e c i s i o n s and r a t i o n a l e known. . O f f i c i a l l y t h e d e c i s i o n on t h e p a r a l l e l runway has n o t b e e n made. However d r e d g i n g and t e r m i n a l e x p a n s i o n p l a n n i n g , , w h i c h may o r may n o t be c o n n e c t e d w i t h runway c o n s t r u c t i o n , a r e underway. F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e EARP s t u d i e s on t h e s h o r t r u n -way p r o p o s a l a r e m a i n t a i n i n g a v e r y low p r o f i l e . T h e r e a r e , t h e r e f o r e , ~ l e g i t i m a t e s u s p i c i o n s t h a t t h e runway i s s u e has e f f e c t i v e l y ( i f n o t e x p l i c i t l y ) been d e c i d e d . However, a i r t r a f f i c demand i s n o t g r o w i n g as e x p e c t e d . I n Ma^ch 1977 CP A i r , one o f t h e m a j o r a i r l i n e s a t VIA, a n n o u nced p l a n s t o s e l l f i v e o f t h e i r a i r c r a f t . A l s o t h e f e d e r a l government i s a t t e m p t i n g t o r e s t r a i n i t s s p e n d i n g i n o r d e r t o r e d u c e i n f l a t i o n . I t i s p o s s i b l e , > t h e r e f o r e , t h a t t h e p r o p o s a l has been q u i e t l y d r o p p e d . A t t h i s s t a g e t h e s t a t u s o f t h e d e c i s i o n i s n o t known. T h i s may s o o n c h ange, b u t a t t h i s t i m e t h e c r i t e r i o n has n o t been met. 4.3 Time 1) S u f f i c i e n t t i m e w i l l be a v a i l a b l e I t i s n o t p o s s i b l e t o t e l l e x a c t l y how much t i m e o f t h e t h r e e y e a r s o f APC b u s i n e s s was l o s t t h r o u g h p r o c e d u r a l w r a n g l e s and how much was l e g i t i m a t e l y r e q u i r e d s i m p l y t o c o n d u c t 87 adequate s t u d i e s . For the most p a r t , once study terms of r e f e r e n c e had been e s t a b l i s h e d , the sub-committee proceeded w i t h the s t u d i e s while the wrangles o c c u r r e d i n the APC i t s e l f . The b u s i n e s s of the sub-committees was over by June 19 75, a f t e r which nine months of APC a c t i v i t y were s t i l l r e q u i r e d to pro-duce the F i n a l Report. C l e a r l y most of t h i s time was spent i n disagreements about procedure, e s p e c i a l l y i n the development of the s e c t i o n on areas of agreement and i s s u e s . MOT was genuinely s u r p r i s e d and shocked a t the assumptions ot h e r members i n s i s t e d on q u e s t i o n i n g , and the expansion of s t u d i e s t h a t t h i s made necessary. MOT's i n i t i a l r e s t r i c t e d view of the scope of the APC, and t h e i r u n f a m i l i a r i t y with the complexity of s t u d i e s to be made, probably e x p l a i n s the f i r s t d e a d l i n e s , which turned out to be inadequate. U n f o r t u n a t e l y f o r a l l these d e a d l i n e s c o n t r i b u t e d to the l o s s of t r u s t which made the whole process so d i f f i c u l t . T R e f i , t h r e e years which e v e n t u a l l y were a l l o t t e d t o the APC do seem t o be s u f f i c i e n t f o r the s t u d i e s required.' However the b a s i c disagrement on the scope of the APC l e d to a s e r i e s of sh o r t term d e a d l i n e s which aggravated d i f f i c u l t i e s i n the committee, and prevented i t to some exte n t from e f f e c t i v e l y u s i n g the time a v a i l a b l e . Time i s d i s c u s s e d f u r t h e r i n s e c t i o n 5.11. 4.4 B a r g a i n i n g Opportunity 1) Procedures f o r r e s o l u t i o n of d i f f e r e n c e s . E a r l y i n the APC process i t was decided t h a t d e c i s i o n s were not to be taken by vot e s , because i t was not p o s s i b l e t o 88 j u d g e t h e r e l a t i v e i m p o r t a n c e o f e a c h o f t h e i n t e r e s t s r e p r e -s e n t e d . T h e r e i s no a p p a r e n t a l t e r n a t i v e h e r e , f o r none o f t h e members o f t h e APC were e l e c t e d and t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e i r i n t e r e s t s c o u l d n o t be compared. However t h e l a c k o f a v o t i n g p r o c e d u r e was s e e n as a m a j o r f l a w i n t h e p r o c e s s by MOT, DPW, Richmond, and t h e B.C. A v i a t i o n C o u n c i l (APC, M a r c h , 1976, 7 0 ) . T h e s e a g e n c i e s f e l t t h a t t h e r e s u l t o f t h e c o n s e n s u s method was t o s t r e s s m i n o r i t y v i e w s d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y . W h i l e t h i s v i e w does e x p r e s s a l e g i t i m a t e c o n c e r n , i t a l s o begs t h e q u e s t i o n o f how t o d e t e r m i n e w h i c h v i e w s a r e , i n f a c t m i n o r i t y v i e w s . I t c o u l d n o t be done w i t h i n t h e APC i t s e l f . T h i s f o r m a l p r o c e d u r e f o r t a k i n g a d e c i s i o n i s n o t t h e o n l y a s p e c t o f t h e r e s o l u t i o n o f d i f f e r e n c e s . T h e r e i s a l s o t h e m o d i f y i n g o f p o s i t i o n t h r o u g h b a r g a i n i n g , compromise, o r -i n t h e words o f t h e CF - a c c o m o d a t i o n . When MOT w r o t e d e c i s i o n o p t i o n one i n J u n e 19 75 i t became a p p a r e n t t h a t t h e y had m o d i f i e d t h e i r p r o p o s a l f r o m an 11,000 f o o t runway t o a 10,600 f o o t runway. S h o r t l y a f t e r w a r d t h e y a t t e m p t e d t o i n t r o d u c e a 9,250 f o o t runway p r o p o s a l , b u t were r e b u f f e d . T h e s e a r e c l e a r l y a t t e m p t s t o compromise, e s p e c i a l l y w i t h DOE who were c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e e f f e c t o f f i l l on t h e e s t u a r y . The f i r s t compromise was a c c e p t e d ( f o r s t u d y p u r p o s e s ) as a m o d i f i c a t i o n o f t h e o r i g i n a l p r o p o s a l s . The s e c o n d was f e l t t o embody a new s e t o f v a l u e s w h i c h had n o t been c o n s i d e r e d , so was r e j e c t e d . The p r o b l e m was i n t h e t i m i n g o f t h e p r o p o s a l . MOT seemed w i l l i n g t o compromise o n l y a f t e r i t became c l e a r t h a t t h e y were f a c i n g v e r y s u b s t a n t i a l , o r g a n i z e d o p p o s i t i o n . L i t t l e compromise was a l l o w e d f o r i n t h e i r o r i g i n a l p o s i t i o n . 89 Had t h e s h o r t runway p r o p o s a l b een s t u d i e d f r o m t h e b e g i n n i n g i t w o u l d have a l l o w e d c o m p a r i s o n o f t h e v a l u e s i t r e p r e s e n t e d , and some i n f o r m a t i o n f o r t r a d i n g t h e s e o f f w i t h o t h e r a l t e r -n a t i v e s . T h e r e i s y e t a n o t h e r a s p e c t t o t h e q u e s t i o n o f b a r g a i n i n g . MOT c o n s i s t e n t l y r e f u s e d t o c o n s i d e r a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c y m e a s u r e s , d e s i r e d e s p e c i a l l y by GVRD, w h i c h w o u l d have "made b e t t e r use o f e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t i e s . " I n d o i n g so t h e y r e d u c e d t h e i r own o p p o r t u n i t y t o b a r g a i n , and e f f e c t i v e l y p r e c l u d e d t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f r e a c h i n g an agreement. V a n c o u v e r , GVRD, and Richmond a l l had g r e a t i n t e r e s t i n r e d u c i n g n o i s e , b u t MOT c o n t i n u a l l y r e f u s e d t o commit t h e m s e l v e s t o t h e n o i s e m i t i g a t i o n m e a sures w h i c h were p r o p o s e d . A m a j o r example o f t h i s was t h e d e s i r e o f t h e m u n i c i p a l i t i e s t o p h a s e o u t t h e c r o s s w i n d runway e x c e p t f o r emergency s i t u a t i o n s . MOT l e t i t be u n d e r s t o o d t h a t t h i s was p o s s i b l e , b u t r e f u s e d t o commit t h e m s e l v e s t o i t , o r t o commit t h e m s e l v e s t o s t u d y i n g i t . T h i s r i g i d i t y o f p o l i c y , t h e n a r r o w i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e sc o p e o f t h e APC, l e f t a l l members w i t h a n o n - n e g o t i a b l e p o s i -t i o n , b e c a u s e a l l t h e n e g o t i a b l e i t e m s were removed f r o m t h e t a b l e . However, MOT's p o s i t i o n was c o n s i s t e n t t h r o u g h o u t t h e p r o c e s s . They f e l t t h a t c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e s e w i d e r p o l i c i e s was o u t s i d e t h e terms o f r e f e r e n c e o f t h e APC. The d i f f e r e n c e between t h i s p o s i t i o n and t h o s e o f o t h e r a g e n c i e s , GVRD and CF i n p a r t i c u l a r , c o u l d a p p a r e n t l y o n l y be r e s o l v e d by r e f e r -e n c e t o a h i g h e r a u t h o r i t y . T h i s h i g h e r a u t h o r i t y e x i s t e d i n • 90 the form, of the T r i - L e v e l P o l i t i c a l Committee. However t o have u n e q u i v o c a l l y c l a r i f i e d the i n t e n t of the terms of r e f e r e n c e a t the beginning of the process would probably have prevented the formation of the APC i n the f i r s t p l a c e . Some ambiguity was necessary i n order to b r i n g the p a r t i e s to the t a b l e . The vagueness of the terms of r e f e r e n c e i s f u r t h e r d i s -cussed i n Chapter 5, as i s the r o l e of b a r g a i n i n g . The major p o i n t to be developed i s t h a t although t h e r e was no b a r g a i n i n g i n the APC, i t should not occur there i n any case, but should p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n f o r b a r g a i n i n g i n another sphere. 4.5 E f f i c a c y 1) P a r t i c i p a n t s ' e f f o r t s of value While the process was underway there was c o n s i d e r a b l e doubt among members as to the value o f the e x e r c i s e . CF threatened to withdraw twice, and c a r r i e d out the t h r e a t once. They were tempted t o withdraw a t many other p o i n t s , however, and d i d not do so because the i s s u e was not p o i n t e d enough t o r e p o r t t o the p u b l i c . GVRD i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c i p a n t s o f t e n f e l t l i k e withdraw-in g because no progress was apparent. MOT o f t e n showed t h a t i t wanted to wrap the process up as q u i c k l y as p o s s i b l e . These a t t i t u d e s were a l l p a r t of the g e n e r a l l o s s of f a i t h among the p a r t i c i p a n t s which was brought about by r i g i d i t y of p o s i t i o n and profound d i f f e r e n c e s i n v a l u e s . A l l members d i d p e r s e r v e r e , however, and now p o i n t t o sev-e r a l p o s i t i v e r e s u l t s of the e x e r c i s e . F i r s t , the most env i r o n m e n t a l l y damaging concepts have been dropped. T h e r e f o r e , whether the f i n a l d e c i s i o n i s to b u i l d or not to b u i l d , e n v i r o n -91 mental matters w i l l s t i l l have made a s i g n i f i c a n t impact. I t may be t h a t environmental v a l u e s g e n e r a l l y have r e c e i v e d added power i n decision-making. Second, the d e c i s i o n has been delayed. T h i s i s of advantage to those who are conducting f u r t h e r s t u d i e s ( p a r t i c u l a r l y DOE), and to MOT because demand has not grown as was p r e d i c t e d a t the time of the f i r s t s t e p s , the e x p r o p r i a t i o n s and esta b l i s h m e n t of the APC. The runway may s t i l l be b u i l t , but not so f a r i n advance and with as much s u r p l u s c a p a c i t y as would otherwise have o c c u r r e d . T h i r d , there has been a g r e a t e d u c a t i o n a l advantage f o r the members p e r s o n a l l y , f o r the p u b l i c g e n e r a l l y , and f o r the experts i n the f i e l d . Airport/community c o n f l i c t s have erupted across Canada ( e s p e c i a l l y P i c k e r i n g and Mir a b e l ) and i n other c o u n t r i e s . In few of these cases have there been s t u d i e s attempted which have a c t u a l l y broken new ground i n the i n f o r -mation and techniques of r e s o l v i n g them. P u b l i c e n q u i r i e s , such as oc c u r r e d a t P i c k e r i n g , do not b u i l d on the l e v e l of knowledge of those who p a r t i c i p a t e , do not p r o g r e s s i v e l y edu-cate c i t i z e n s or a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . The APC d i d t h i s , and i s t h e r e f o r e a u n i q u e l y v a l u a b l e experiment to some of i t s members. MOT has now e s t a b l i s h e d a s m a l l r e s e a r c h o f f i c e i n Ottawa which i s i n v e s t i g a t i n g some of the p o l i c y a l t e r n a t i v e s which GVRD emphasized so c o n s i s t e n t l y . I t i s d i r e c t e d by a former member of the APC. T h i s o f f i c e i n d i c a t e s the e d u c a t i o n a l accomplishments of the APC. The l a c k of assessment of a l t e r n a t i v e s was e a r l i e r i d e n t i -f i e d as a major f a i l u r e of the APC. The s t u d i e s produced i d e n t i f y many of the r e l e v a n t i s s u e s , but do not compare 92 s o l u t i o n s . The s t u d i e s i n themselves do not all o w p o l i t i c i a n s to make a d e c i s i o n . The n e c e s s i t y f o r f u r t h e r study of the s h o r t runway p r o p o s a l i s an i n d i c a t i o n of t h i s . T h e r e f o r e i t seems t h a t the APC was not as e f f e c t i v e as i t might have been. A g r e a t d e a l was achieved c o n s i d e r i n g the i n i t i a l momentum f o r a quick d e c i s i o n t o go ahead, but the process c o u l d have been more e f f e c t i v e than i t i n f a c t was. 4.6 E f f i c i e n c y 1) Normal f u n c t i o n i n g unhampered. Evidence e x i s t s to show t h a t the APC d i d i n f a c t , compete with other a c t i v i t i e s of some agencies. For example, on Aug. 1, 1974, Vancouver announced t h a t i t had not the resources to pro v i d e a chairman f o r the Noise Sub-Committee. Three weeks l a t e r , on Aug. 22, 19 74 GVRD announced t h a t i t had to r e s t r i c t i t s p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the APC (by r e l i n q u i s h i n g chairmanship of the PRMD Sub-Committee i n p a r t i c u l a r ) , because of the p r i o r i t y of i t s major p l a n n i n g program, the L i v a b l e Region. The c o n f l i c t i n these cases was r e s o l v e d by g i v i n g the APC a lower p r i o r i t y than normal f u n c t i o n s . In the case of DOE normal f u n c t i o n s were a l t e r e d , but perhaps not hampered. DOE began t o focus i t s a c t i v i t i e s on a p a r t i c u l a r problem area, the F r a s e r e s t u a r y / d e l t a , i n a new way. I t was t h i s f o c u s s i n g which l e d to the recommendation of a moratorium and e s t u a r y / d e l t a management p o l i c y t h a t so upset MOT. MOT's normal a i r p o r t o p e r a t i o n s were not hampered, but c e r t a i n l y plans f o r r o u t i n e expansion were, n e c e s s a r i l y of 93 c o u r s e . MOT a l s o assumed most o f t h e s e c r e t a r i a l a nd s u p p o r t d u t i e s f o r t h e APC, b u t t h e r e i s no i n d i c a t i o n e i t h e r way on w h e t h e r o r n o t t h i s o v e r l o a d e d t h e i r s y s t e m . I n g e n e r a l , t h e APC c a u s e d some m i n o r h i n d r a n c e s t o n o r m a l o p e r a t i o n s , b u t b e c a u s e s p e c i a l f u n d s were p r o v i d e d f o r APC b u s i n e s s , t h e s e e f f e c t s were n o t s e v e r e . 2) C o s t n o t o u t r a g e o u s . From J u n e 19 73 t o May 19 75 t h e d i r e c t f u n d i n g o f t h e APC was $1,355,000. Of t h i s MOT s p e n t $760,000, DOE s p e n t $470,000, and MSUA s p e n t $125,000 (APC, M a r c h 1976, 1 3 ) . The MSUA f u n d s were u s e d t o s u p p o r t GVRD and CF p a r t i c i p a t i o n . T h e s e f i g u r e s , however, do n o t i n c l u d e t h e v a l u e o f s t a f f t i m e f o r a t t e n d a n c e a t m e e t i n g s , so t h e a c t u a l c o s t o f t h e APC i s much h i g h e r . The APC met f o r t h r e e y e a r s , and f a i l e d t o r e a c h a d e c i -s i o n , o r t o p r e s e n t s t u d i e s t h a t i n t h e m s e l v e s a l l o w e d p o l i -t i c i a n s t o make a d e c i s i o n . T h e r e f o r e f r o m t h e p o i n t o f v i e w o f t h o s e who e x p e c t e d a d e c i s i o n , t h e c o s t w o u l d seem t o be o u t r a g e o u s . T h e r e i s , however, a n o t h e r l e v e l t o t h i s argument. I n t h e o p i n i o n o f most o f t h e a c t o r s s u b s t a n t i a l b e n e f i t s were a c h i e v e d . The most e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y damaging c o n c e p t s have been d r o p p e d ; s u b s t a n t i a l new r e s e a r c h has b e e n done; a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s t o e x p a n s i o n a r e now b e i n g s e r i o u s l y c o n s i d e r e d i n MOT p l a n n i n g , and so on. T h e s e b e n e f i t s a r e o f v e r y h i g h v a l u e t o t h e a g e n c i e s i n v o l v e d . The c o s t o f n o t p a r t i c i p a t i n g , a nd t h e r e f o r e n o t a c h i e v i n g t h e s e b e n e f i t s , w o u l d have been v e r y 94-g r e a t . I n a d d i t i o n t h e e s t i m a t e d c o s t o f t h e e x p a n s i o n i n 1971 p r i c e s was a p p r o x i m a t e l y $100 m i l l i o n ( S t e a d , Feb. 28, 1 9 77). T h i s c o s t has i n f l a t e d , p e r h a p s d o u b l e d . The e x p e n d i t u r e o f $2 m i l l i o n on s t u d i e s i s l e s s t h a n 2% o f t h e p r o j e c t e d t o t a l c o s t . From t h i s p o i n t o f v i e w t h e n , t h e c o s t o f t h e APC was n o t o u t r a g e o u s . P r o b a b l y no e v a l u a t i o n o f t h i s c r i t e r i o n c a n be d e f i n i -t i v e . However, i n summary t h e c o s t was n o t o u t r a g e o u s i n c o m p a r i s o n w i t h t h e a l t e r n a t i v e o f no p a r t i c i p a t i o n . I t was o u t r a g e o u s i n t e r m s o f what a w e l l - d e s i g n e d and i m p l e m e n t e d p r o c e s s c o u l d have p r o d u c e d . 4.7 Summary The APC p r o c e s s met t h e v a r i o u s c r i t e r i a i n d i f f e r e n t d e g r e e s . F o r t h e most p a r t a l l a f f e c t e d i n t e r e s t s c o u l d p a r t i c i p a t e and t h e i n t e r e s t e d c i t i z e n was made aware. A l -t h o u g h f r u s t r a t i o n s were common, t h e v a l u e o f t h e e f f o r t s o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n c a n a l s o be s e e n . V a l u e s were d i s c u s s e d and r e a l d e b a t e t o o k p l a c e a t t i m e s , b u t t h e y were hampered by d i f f e r i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f t h e r o l e o f t h e APC. V a l u a b l e t e c h n i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n was r e l e a s e d , b u t i t l a c k e d a s s e s s m e n t o f a l t e r -n a t i v e s and c o s t s . O v e r a l l enough t i m e was p r o v i d e d , b u t o n l y by a l l o w i n g d e a d l i n e s t o s l i p s e v e r a l t i m e s . The d i s r u p t i o n t o n o r m a l f u n c t i o n i n g a p p e a r e d t o be m i n o r . The c o s t o f t h e p r o c e s s was n o t o u t r a g e o u s c o n s i d e r i n g t h e b e n e f i t s g a i n e d , b u t g r e a t room f o r improvement e x i s t e d . The p r o c e s s was n o t e s t a b l i s h e d b e f o r e commitments were t a k e n , so t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o p a r t i c i p a t e came l a t e r t h a n w o u l d 95 be d e s i r e d . T h e r e were p r o b l e m s b o t h i n w i t t h o l d i n g i n f o r m a -t i o n and i n not. g e n e r a t i n g new i n f o r m a t i o n i n t i m e . T h e r e i s d o u b t now a b o u t t h e s t a t u s o f t h e d e c i s i o n on t h e runway i s s u e . The m a j o r d e f i c i e n c i e s o f t h e APC p r o c e s s r e l a t e d t o t h e l a c k o f a l t e r n a t i v e s e x p r e s s i n g t h e f u l l r a n g e o f v a l u e s w h i c h s h o u l d have been a s s e s s e d . The u n d e r l y i n g f a c t o r was a d i s -a g r e e m e n t on t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e APC's terms o f r e f e r e n c e . T h e s e p o i n t s a r e d i s c u s s e d i n d e t a i l i n C h a p t e r 5. CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION OF THE COMMITTEE PROCESS AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION T h i s c h a p t e r p i c k s up some o f t h e more i m p o r t a n t and more i n t e r e s t i n g t h r e a d s o f t h e d i s c u s s i o n t o t h i s p o i n t , and d e v e l o p s them f u r t h e r . The f i r s t s e c t i o n a d d r e s s e s two b a s i c q u e s t i o n s : 1) What f u n d a m e n t a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e p r o c e s s s h a p e d , o r p e r h a p s d e t e r m i n e d , t h e outcome? 2) Was t h e APC p r o c e s s a f a i l u r e ? M o s t o f t h e i d e a s e x p r e s s e d i n t h i s s e c t i o n a r o s e i n i n t e r v i e w s w i t h APC members. The d i s c u s s i o n s i s ^ m o r e i n t h e n a t u r e o f h y p o t h e s e s t h a n p r o o f v. , The s e c o n d s e c t i o n r e t u r n s s p e c i f i c a l l y t o t h e theme o f p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . S e v e r a l p r o b l e m s a r o s e i n t h e APC p r o -c e s s w h i c h prompt a r e - a p p r a i s a l o f t h e t h e o r y d i s c u s s e d i n C h a p t e r 2. An a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e p u b l i c t o t h e APC i s p r e s e n t e d , and some i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r f u t u r e pub-l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n p r o g r a m s a r e e x p l o r e d . 5.1 I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e APC P r o c e s s The p r o p e r t i t l e f o r t h i s s e c t i o n i s : What R e a l l y Happened? I n e x p l o r i n g t h i s theme i t i s w o r t h w h i l e t o keep i n mind a number o f b a c k g r o u n d c o n d i t i o n s . In t h e most g e n e r a l c o n t e x t MOT seems t o have been c a u g h t i n a change o f s o c i a l v a l u e s t h a t was u n p r e d i c t e d and a p p a r -e n t l y unmanageable. The p r o t e s t movements o f t h e s i x t i e s l e d b o t h t o t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l a w areness o f t h e s e v e n t i e s and t o t h e c r e a t i o n o f ad hoc p o l i t i c a l a c t i o n g r o u p s on a w ide s c a l e . I n e s s e n c e new v a l u e s demanded t h e i r p o l i t i c a l e n f r a n c h i s e m e n t . - I r o n i c a l l y MOT h a d p r o p o s e d a runway t o be b u i l t on f i l l e d l a n d i n the e s t u a r y , i n order to reduce the n o i s e impact, a t the same time as the new environmental concerns were a c h i e v i n g p o l -i t i c a l power. The a i r p o r t expansion i s s u e became a t e s t case f o r both the new environmental values and the new p o l i t i c a l p h i l o s o p h y . I t was i n these senses t h a t i t was experimental. S e v e r a l aspects of the committee s t r u c t u r e deserve r e -statement. [Many of these thoughts o r i g i n a t e w i t h Stead and R o b e r t s ] . F i r s t , membership was the widest p o s s i b l e i n c l u d i n g d i r e c t c i t i z e n involvement i n p l a n n i n g . T h i s c e r t a i n l y was experimental. Second, the committee i t s e l f determined i t s d i r e c t i o n ( s t u d i e s ) , and i t s l i m i t a t i o n s . These were not decreed by any h i g h e r a u t h o r i t y . T h i r d , the committee was not p r o v i d e d w i t h a separate s t a f f or with powers to f o r c e com-p l i a n c e . I t s o f f i c i a l p o s i t i o n was a d v i s o r y . F o u r t h , funding was e x p l i c i t l y p r o v i d e d f o r the p r e p a r a t i o n of opposing cases. T h i s again, was experimental and c o n t r o v e r s i a l . F i f t h , the committee operated by consensus and d i s s e n t r a t h e r than by v o t i n g . S i x t h , the committee i t s e l f , not the developer, made recommendations to the p o l i t i c a l decision-makers. Comments on the r o l e of MOT a l s o deserve emphasis. MOT i s c r i t i c i z e d i n t h i s paper f o r many f a i l u r e s . S e v e r a l reasons f o r t h i s are apparent. F i r s t , MOT had more resources than any other agency, and had almost a l l the t e c h n i c a l a v i a t i o n ex-p e r t i s e on the committee. Second, i t was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r l e t t i : c o n t r a c t s and f o r s e c r e t a r i a l support of the APC, i n c l u d i n g minutes. T h i r d , MOT had a s i n g l e o b j e c t i v e , whereas opponents of t h e i r views had d i v e r s e , even confused o b j e c t i v e s (Stead, 98 J a n . 23, 1 9 7 7 ) . T h u s , MOT h a d b o t h more p o t e n t i a l f o r m a n i -p u l a t i n g t h e p r o c e s s , and more o p p o r t u n i t y t o make e r r o r s . 5.11 B a s i c C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e P r o c e s s . T r u s t . The l a c k o f t r u s t among members o f t h e APC has been m e n t i o n e d numerous t i m e s a b o v e . I t i s p r o b a b l y t h e s i n g l e most d i s t i n c t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h e p r o c e s s . T h e r e were two m a j o r a s p e c t s t o t h i s d i s t r u s t ( R o b e r t s , Mar. 9, 1 9 7 7 ) . F i r s t , a l l i n f o r m a t i o n had t o be i n w r i t i n g and t a b l e d a t t h e APC b e f o r e i t l e g i t i m a t e l y became APC b u s i n e s s . CF i n p a r t i c u l a r i n s i s t e d on t h i s s t r a t e g y , t o t h e p o i n t o f r e f u s i n g t o g i v e o r r e c e i v e i n f o r m a t i o n o v e r t h e phone. T h i s p o l i c y , o f c o u r s e , d e l a y e d APC b u s i n e s s . S e c o n d , a l l o f f i c i a l and e x p e r t i n f o r -m a t i o n was d o u b t e d , and c a l l s were made f o r i n d e p e n d e n t v e r i f i c a t i o n o f a l l f i g u r e s . P a r t o f t h i s i s t h e a s k i n g o f n a i v e q u e s t i o n s , b u t , as d i s c u s s e d above, judgement and some measure o f t r u s t was r e q u i r e d t o k e e p t h e p r o c e s s m o v i n g . R e l a t e d t o t h i s p o i n t i s t h e o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t t h e c r i t i c a l c i t i z e n w i l l d i s t r u s t t e c h n i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n t r a n s l a t e d i n t o t h e common l a n g u a g e by e x p e r t s , P b u t w i l l be l i k e l y t o b e l i e v e t h e same i n f o r m a t i o n i f a p u b l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i v e i s i n v o l v e d i n t h e t r a n s l a t i o n ( S t e a d , F e b . 28, 1 9 7 7 ) . D i s t r u s t i n t h e APC d i d n o t f o r m f r o m t h e a i r i t s e l f . I t had s p e c i f i c , i d e n t i f i a b l e s o u r c e s . The most o b v i o u s was t h e c o n f r o n t a t i o n o v e r e x p r o p r i a t i o n w h i c h p r e c e d e d , w h i c h i n f a c t c a u s e d t h e APC. I t was h a n d l e d w i t h a s i n g u l a r l a c k o f f i n e s s e by MOT, a h e a v y - h a n d e d s t y l e t h a t l o c a l r e s i d e n t s see as com-p l e t e l y t y p i c a l o f t h e i n s e n s i t i v i t y o f f e d e r a l d e p a r t m e n t s 99 whose eyes, e a r s , and d e c i s i o n powers are a l l c o n c e n t r a t e d i n Ottawa, 2,500 m i l e s away. Both the p u b l i c and other agencies entered the process w i t h doubts about how t h e i r i n p u t s were to be used. Because of the other c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s to be d i s -cussed below t h i s i n i t i a l s u s p i c i o n was never overcome. Another aspect to the problem of t r u s t i s the d i f f e r e n c e i n v a lue systems. For those who- ate, s l e p t , l i v e d , and dreamed a v i a t i o n i t was. i n c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t t h e i r motives and t h e i r e x p e r t i s e would be s e r i o u s l y c h a l l e n g e d . I t tended t o be i n -t e r p r e t e d as an a t t a c k on t h e i r i n t e g r i t y , as arguing i n bad f a i t h . When such 'unreasonable' a t t a c k s continued, a l l s i d e s were pushed toward m a n i p u l a t i o n of the p r o c e s s , which r e -i n f o r c e d the o r i g i n a l problem. A l l problems i n the process tended to r e i n f o r c e d i s t r u s t , which i n t u r n r e i n f o r c e d the problems. T h i s i s t r u e f o r time c o n s t r a i n t s , a v a i l a b i l i t y of i n f o r m a t i o n , and w i l l i n g n e s s t o admit e r r o r s or to modify p o s i t i o n s . A f t e r a time no one c o u l d have the b e n e f i t of the doubt on any of these problems, par-t i c u l a r l y MOT. Personality-.- There i s no doubt t h a t p e r s o n a l i t i e s played a l a r g e r o l e i n the APC. P o s s i b l y the g r e a t e s t c o s t s of the whole process were p e r s o n a l ones, as i n d i v i d u a l s were worn down by the constant f i g h t i n g and t e n s i o n i n meetings. The g r e a t e s t problem p e r s o n a l i t i e s were the f i r s t chairman of the APC, and the most a c t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the CF. The per-s o n a l i t y c l a s h between them was t o t a l and monumental. The chairman was an o l d - s t y l e c i v i l s e r v a n t , e x p ert i n 100 ' h i s f i e l d , a b l e t o i m p l e m e n t p o l i c i e s and o p e r a t e p r o g r a m s . I t i s w i d e l y a c k n o w l e d g e d by members o f t h e c o m m i t t e e , how-e v e r , t h a t he was n o t e q u i p p e d by t r a i n i n g o r i n c l i n a t i o n t o c h a i r a c o m m i t t e e i n w h i c h t h e r e was c o n f l i c t a nd r a d i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n v a l u e s . The CF r e p r e s e n t a t i v e was e x c e e d i n g l y i n t e l l i g e n t , and v e r y c o m f o r t a b l e i n s i t u a t i o n s o f c o n f l i c t (he was a p s y c h i a -t r i s t by t r a i n i n g ) . He was a l s o e x t r e m e l y s u s p i c i o u s o f t h e power o f t h e b u r e a u c r a c y , and t h e i r t e n d e n c y t o acco m o d a t e w i t h one a n o t h e r . He b e l i e v e d s t r o n g l y i n t h e a d v e r s a r y r o l e i n t h e s e a r c h f o r t r u t h . D e s p i t e t h i s p r o n o u n c e d p e r s o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t , a nd o t h e r s , i t i s n o t t h e c a s e t h a t p e r s o n a l i t i e s d e t e r m i n e d t h e outcome o f t h e APC. P e r s o n a l i t i e s i n t e n s i f i e d t h e i s s u e s and t h e p o l a r i t y o f members, b u t d i d n o t c a u s e them. The i s s u e s were t h e r e b e f o r e t h e i n d i v i d u a l s ; i n some c a s e s t h e y were b u i l t i n t o t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e c o m m i t t e e . I f t h e p r o c e s s h a d b e e n s t r u c t u r e d d i f f e r e n t l y , t h e s e p e r s o n a l i t i e s w o u l d n o t have been s t i m u l a -t e d to c o n f l i c t , ..-.~\ '-'J..';: I v e d The c o n f l i c t s t h a t came t o be a t t r i b u t e d t o p e r s o n a l i t y o f t e n h a d t h e s e o t h e r r o o t s . F o r example, f u n d a m e n t a l d i f f e r -e n c e s i n v a l u e s , and b a s i c p r o b l e m s w i t h t h e o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e c o m m i t t e e f e d p e r s o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t s , and were s u s t a i n e d by them. The f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n o f s t r u c t u r a l f a c t o r s c l a r -i f i e s t h e s e p o i n t s . Time. T h e r e were two m a j o r p r o b l e m s r e l a t e d t o t i m e on t h e APC. An o b v i o u s . o n e i s t h e p r o b l e m o f d e a d l i n e s . U n r e a l -101 i s t i c d e a d l i n e s were o f t e n s e t (by MOT). They were u n r e a l -i s t i c i n s e v e r a l senses. F i r s t , they d i d not a l l o w the s t u d i e s to be p r o p e r l y sequenced and completed. For example, the e n g i n e e r i n g concepts which were submitted as p r o p o s a l s were not s u f f i c i e n t l y d e t a i l e d to al l o w environmental s t u d i e s on t h e i r impact (Roberts, Mar. 9, 1977). The time taken to generate t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n sparked d i s t r u s t among the e c o l o g i -c a l experts (Romaine, Jan. 20, 1977). Then, i n s u f f i c i e n t time was allowed f o r the completion and i n t e g r a t i o n of the e c o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s . Probably t h i s o r i g i n a t e s i n a l a c k of a p p r e c i a t i o n f o r the complexity and t i m e - s c a l e of e c o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s . Second, the d e a d l i n e s were u n r e a l i s t i c because they d i d not take i n t o account the d i s t r i b u t i o n of resources (man-days i n p a r t i c u l a r ) among agencies. MOT had s e v e r a l people f u l l -time on a i r p o r t expansion. Regional and m u n i c i p a l agencies, however, only had pa r t - t i m e o r s p e c i a l c o n s u l t a n t " s t a f f on the problem. They c o u l d not d i g e s t or produce i n f o r m a t i o n as q u i c k l y . P u b l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s were even more c o n s t r a i n e d . They had f u l l - t i m e jobs elsewhere which absorbed most of t h e i r time and energy. T h i r d , they were u n r e a l i s t i c because they took, no account of the time r e q u i r e d f o r any group process to work (Cooley, Mar. 11, 1977). Time to be spent i n d i s c u s s i o n , i n c i r c u l a -t i o n , i n r e v i s i o n , was c o n s i s t e n t l y underestimated. C i r -c u l a t i o n was a p a r t i c u l a r problem f o r DOE, which i s an agglomeration of the many government bodies d e a l i n g w i t h en-vironmental matters. I n t e g r a t i o n of these bodies i s s t i l l 102 l o o s e ( R o b e r t s , Mar. 9, 1977). In g e n e r a l t h e d e a d l i n e s were u n r e a l i s t i c b e c a u s e nobody, and p a r t i c u l a r l y MOT, had any r e a l i d e a o f t h e d i f f i c u l t y and s c o p e o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t u n d e r t a k e n ( R o b e r t s , Mar. 9, 1 9 7 7 ) . The s e c o n d m a j o r a s p e c t o f t i m e was n o t t h e d e a d l i n e s , b u t t h e t i m e a t w h i c h t h e APC g o t underway. By t h i s t i m e many a g e n c i e s h a d t a k e n p u b l i c p o s i t i o n s o f t h e a i r p o r t i s s u e , p o s i t i o n s w h i c h were f a i r l y r i g i d and f r o m w h i c h r e t r e a t was d i f f i c u l t ( S t e a d , F e b . 25, 1 9 7 7 ) . MOT i n p a r t i c u l a r , t h r o u g h c o n t i n u a t i o n o f e x p r o p r i a t i o n p r o c e e d i n g s , was c o m m i t t e d t o e x p a n s i o n . C h a i r m a n s h i p . The v e r y p a r t y t h a t was most d i s t r u s t e d , t h a t had t h e most t o w i n o r l o s e , MOT, s u p p l i e d t h e c h a i r m a n . T h i s f a c t a l o n e l e d t o an u n t e n a b l e c o n f l i c t w i t h i n t h e i n d i v i d u a l . On t h e one hand he was an MOT employee, u n d e r p r e s s u r e f r o m h i s s u p e r i o r s t o g e t t h e j o b done; on t h e o t h e r hand he was c h a i r i n g a d i v e r s e , c o n f l i c t i n g , and f o r c e f u l c o m m i t t e e , a r o l e w h i c h r e q u i r e d f l e x i b i l i t y and d i p l o m a c y . In t h e c o n f l i c t t h e f o r m e r r o l e t e n d e d t o d o m i n a t e . However, ev e n t h e most i m p a r t i a l c h a i r m a n w o u l d n o t have h a d t h e bene-f i t o f t h e d o u b t i f he had been s u p p l i e d by MOT ( C o o l e y , Mar. 11, 1 9 7 7 ) . He w o u l d b e , and was, i n an i n h e r e n t l y weak p o s i -t i o n where he c o u l d n o t i n t e r v e n e w i t h o u t a p p e a r i n g t o be p a r t i s a n ( R o b e r t s , Mar. 9, 1 9 7 7 ) . A t l e a s t one p a r t i c i p a n t b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e c h a i r m a n s h i p i s n o t q u i t e t o t h e p o i n t . 103 "MOT was able to i n s i s t on an MOT chairman. In t h i s , they were f o l l o w i n g c i v i l s e r v i c e t r a d i -t i o n , but t h i s t r a d i t i o n assumes t h a t i s s u e s w i l l be s e t t l e d on the m e r i t s and t h a t t h e r e f o r e the chairman w i l l be n e u t r a l but have enough i n t e r e s t to d r i v e t h i n g s to a c o n c l u s i o n . . . . With p o l i c y - o r i e n t e d o f f i c i a l s t h i s works, or a t l e a s t used t o . With t u n n e l - v i s i o n t e c h n o c r a t s , i t does not. They have no understanding or appre-c i a t i o n of p o i n t s of view other than t h e i r own" (Stead, Jan. 23, 1977). This argument i s examined i n d e t a i l below. V o t i n g and A d v e r s a r i e s . Without a means of measuring the r e l a t i v e importance of each view r e p r e s e n t e d i t was not pos-s i b l e to decide by vote i n the APC. Even had such v o t i n g been p o s s i b l e , many members would have opposed i t s use. The o b j e c t of the APC was to f l u s h out the f a c t s , and a non-voting procedure f o r c e s the a r t i c u l a t i o n o f opposing positions,, (Pickstone, Mar. 8, 1977). V o t i n g would have c l o s e d many i s s u e s with no recourse f o r the l o s i n g p o s i t i o n to have t h e i r views expressed (Romaine, Mar. 8, 1977). The n e c e s s i t y to proceed by consensus, however, d i d slow committee p r o g r e s s . I t was suggested t h a t p r o c e d u r a l matters c o u l d have been decided by vote, and s u b s t a n t i v e matters by consensus (Roberts, Mar. 9, 1977). However one can onl y agree to accept or change matters of procedure i f there i s mutual t r u s t i n the committee, which there was not (Cooley, Mar. 11, 1977). A l l matters were decided by consensus, with d i s s e n t i n g comments being appended t o r e p o r t s . T h i s method p l a c e d even g r e a t e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and s t r a i n on the chairman, who was i n a poor p o s i t i o n to handle i t . I t was e s p e c i a l l y d i f f i c u l t 104 because CF b e l i e v e d i n an adversary system such as i s used i n par l i a m e n t and the c o u r t s . They b e l i e v e d t h a t a fundamental adversary r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t e d between i n d u s t r y and the p u b l i c (Tyhurst, Mar. 3, 1977). The adversary r e l a t i o n s h i p works because i t i s governed by the r u l e s of order and good f a i t h (Tyhurst, Mar. 3, 1977). However, good f a i t h was ap p a r e n t l y l a c k i n g i n t h i s pro-cess, and r u l e s of order which were a p p l i e d ( l e g a l and parliamentary) are i n a p p r o p r i a t e to the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e func-t i o n . I t i s p o s s i b l e to reach a f a i r and j u s t d e c i s i o n without f o l l o w i n g such s t r i c t procedure, through b a r g a i n i n g . The s t r i c t r u l e s of order serve s i t u a t i o n s i n which grounds f o r agreement cannot be found among i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s . But t h i s i s c l e a r l y a value p o s i t i o n , and a p o s i t i o n which CF prof o u n d l y s u s p e c t s . B a r g a i n i n g , or "accomodation among burea u c r a t s " i s b a s i c a l l y r e j e c t e d by them. P o l i c y R i g i d i t y . The narrow scope o f p o l i c i e s and a l t e r -n a t i v e s which MOT co n s i d e r e d w i t h i n the terms of r e f e r e n c e of the APC has been d i s c u s s e d above. Throughout the process m i t i g a t i o n measures had to be dug out by other members; they were not suggested by MOT (Pickstone, Mar. 8, 1977). That r e l u c t a n c e c h a r a c t e r i z e s much of MOT's behaviour i n the APC. The r e f u s a l to c o n s i d e r p o l i c y a l t e r n a t i v e s was a fun-damental e r r o r of MOT. They c r e a t e d a s i t u a t i o n where compromise was i m p o s s i b l e because o f the i s s u e they chose (Tyhurst, Mar. 3, 1977). In e f f e c t by t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e i r terms of r e f e r e n c e , MOT d e f i n e d away the very bar-105 g a i n i n g items which c o u l d have l e d to an agreement. Because they were committed from the beginning to one p o l i c y - a runway i n one of three p o s i t i o n s - they c r e a t e d a s i t u a t i o n of c o n f r o n t a t i o n where they c o u l d o n l y win or l o s e . U n t i l l a t e i n the process they r e f u s e d to modify t h i s p o s i t i o n . By the time they d i d modify t h e i r p r o p o s a l , J u l y 1975, i t was too l a t e f o r the APC to c o n s i d e r , and the o p p o s i t i o n p o s i t i o n s were a l s o i n f l e x i b l e . B a r g a i n i n g r e q u i r e s t h a t a l l p a r t i e s have something to tra d e . For the most p a r t other agencies had o n l y t h e i r oppo-s i t i o n to t r a d e . T h i s meant t h a t a compromise was p o s s i b l e , but not a b a r g a i n . In a compromise each p a r t y w i l l g i v e up some-t h i n g they want; i n a b a r g a i n each p a r t y w i l l g ive up something i n exchange f o r something e l s e more important to them. GVRD i n s i s t e d throughout the process t h a t they were not n e c e s s a r i l y opposed to the runway, t h a t they would accept i t i f the need were properly~demonstrated, a n d . i f a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s to handle the demand f o r a v i a t i o n were i n v e s t i g a t e d . However, they had no other i s s u e with, which to trade w i t h MOT; they were i n a p o s i t i o n to compromise only. DOE was i n a complicated p o s i t i o n . The E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee, which, was dominated by DOE p e r s o n n e l , produced a r e -p o r t t h a t gave up no t h i n g s u b s t a n t i a l , t h a t made no concessions on environment matters. Furthermore, DOE was not w i l l i n g to bend i n terms of the time frame u n t i l t h e i r i n f o r m a t i o n was assembled (Romaine, Mar. 8, 1977). However the r e g i o n a l s t a f f of DOE, s u p e r i o r i n the DOE h i e r a r c h y to t h e i r own APC r e p r e -s e n t a t i v e s , were t a c i t l y , perhaps a c t i v e l y i n v o l v e d i n the 106 p r e p a r a t i o n of the sh o r t runway p r o p o s a l i n J u l y 1975. DOE and MOT were both c o n t r o l l e d by the same p o l i t i c a l body (the F e d e r a l C a b i n e t ) , and the compromising between them - whether attempted or r e a l - was seen as a l e g i t i m a t e procedure. Other members of the APC, however, were not i n v o l v e d , and p r e d i c a b l y r e a c t e d w i t h outrage. CF a l s o had t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n to compromise w i t h , but they chose i n the circumstances to t i r e l e s s l y i d e n t i f y and pursue i s s u e s r a t h e r than to accomodate..Given MOT's p o s i t i o n t h i s was not a s u r p r i s i n g r e a c t i o n , - but i t d i d r e i n f o r c e the p o l a r i t y i n the committee. I t i s necessary to emphasize here t h a t the purpose of bar-g a i n i n g i s not to obscure d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s o f view or t o a r r i v e a t a s i n g l e p r o p o s a l . Information should be generated on a num-ber of a l t e r n a t i v e s embodying d i f f e r e n t v a l u e s b e f o r e d e c i s i o n s are taken. B a r g a i n i n g . r e q u i r e s t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n i n p u t i n order to be e f f e c t i v e . In the APC case, few true a l t e r n a t i v e s were s t u d i e d , so there.was no comparative i n f o r m a t i o n which would allow b a r g a i n i n g to occur. Technocrats.vs. .Policy A d v i s o r s . Behind MOT's r e l u c t a n c e to b a r g a i n are a number of f a c t o r s r e l a t e d to the s t r u c t u r e of the agencies i n v o l v e d . i n the APC. A b a s i c flaw i n the committee was the ch o i c e of agency per-sonnel t o s i t on i t . MOT i n . p a r t i c u l a r chose t e c h n i c a l l y o r i e n t e d and t r a i n e d people, o p e r a t o r s and implementors o f p o l i c y , but not people who were able to q u e s t i o n p o l i c y . I t was not even i n t h e i r job d e s c r i p t i o n t o . q u e s t i o n p o l i c y ; p o l i c y was passed down from on high (Romaine, Mar. 8, 1977). In the f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n t h i s 107 type of person w i l l be r e f e r r e d to as a 'technocrat'. S i t t i n g on the same committee w i t h the t e c h n o c r a t s were p o l i c y a d v i s o r s , people s p e c i f i c a l l y t r a i n e d to c o n s i d e r p o l i c y and to t r a d e - o f f c o n f l i c t i n g v a l u e s . The m u n i c i p a l agencies, GVRD i n p a r t i c u l a r , had t h i s type of r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . T h i s fundamental d i f f e r e n c e made the outcome of the process s t r u c t u r a l l y i n e v i t a b l e from the beginning (Roberts, Mar. 9, 1977). Behind t h i s problem l i e s another, the c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of f e d e r a l policy-making power i n Ottawa. The l o c a l members of the APC were i n c l o s e c o n t a c t w i t h t h e i r p o l i t i c i a n s (and w i t h t h e i r p u b l i c , see below). They c o u l d get quick guidance on p o l i c y matters. The f e d e r a l members, however, were many steps removed from policy-making, and even more removed from t h e i r p o l i t i c i a n s . There was no f l e x i b i l i t y i n the h i e r a r c h y to a l l o w p o l i c y questions to be q u i c k l y c o n s i d e r e d even i f the MOT r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s had wished t o . In f a c t l a t e r i n the process one MOT r e p r e s e n t a t i v e d i d attempt to suggest some p o l i c y a l t e r n a t i v e s to h i s MOT s u p e r i o r s , but was r e b u f f e d (Stead, Jan. 23, 1977). On these matters, the MOT r e p r e s e n t a -t i v e s were on a s h o r t l e a s h . They needed a p o l i c y a d v i s o r e i t h e r on the APC or on c a l l to the APC, but MOT d i d not to supply one (Roberts, Mar. 9, 1977). There i s a f u r t h e r aspect to t h i s problem. While the MOT r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s were not f r e e to q u e s t i o n p o l i c y , i t i s an open q u e s t i o n as to whether they c o u l d t h i n k p o l i c y . Perhaps i t was not a matter of e x t e r n a l c o n s t r a i n t s on MOT r e p r e s e n t a -108 t i v e s , but of i n t e r n a l p a t t e r n of thought (Stead, Feb. 25, 1977) . MOT appears to have r e l a t i v e l y few g e n e r a l l y t r a i n e d p e r s o n n e l ; they are a l l t e c h n i c a l people. I f t h i s i s so there are two r e s u l t s (Stead, Feb. 25, 1977). F i r s t , t here i s g r e a t e r p r e s s u r e from the o u t s i d e f o r i n t e r - a g e n c y committees and p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n , because s i n g l e - p u r p o s e d e c i s i o n s are being made. Second, there i s l e s s g e n e r a l i s t manpower a v a i l -a ble w i t h i n the M i n i s t r y to handle t h i s demand. C o n f l i c t i s i n e v i t a b l e . M u n i c i p a l vs. Cabinet Governments. Another problem i n the process i s the c o n t r a s t between the p r i n c i p l e of c a b i n e t se-crecy and of open government. The p r a c t i c e of secrecy tends to reach throughout the f e d e r a l bureaucracy, i n s t e a d of being c o n f i n e d to the c a b i n e t . In l o c a l government "there i s nongovernment' and ' o p p o s i t i o n ' i n the P a r l i a m e n t a r y sense and no Cabinet . . . The p o l i -t i c i a n s are r i g h t on tope of the people who want to f e e l i n v o l v e d . Thus there i s no need f o r any k i n d of s o l i d a r i t y , nor f o r the s e c r e c y t h a t goes with i t , and every reason f o r openness. . . . There remains some c o n f l i c t of d o c t r i n e as between the two approaches which make p a r l i a m e n t a r y and m u n i c i p a l government somewhat uneasy p a r t n e r s " (Stead, Jan. 23, 1977). The MOT r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , o p e r a t i n g from a t r a d i t i o n of secrecy, were p a r t i c u l a r l y u n c e r t a i n about the APC experiment. Although they r e p e a t e d l y s t a t e d t h a t the APC was an 'open p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s ' , t h e i r narrow p o s i t i o n , t h e i r r e t i c e n c e with i n f o r m a t i o n , and t h e i r compromises with DOE o u t s i d e the APC c a s t doubt on t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h i s concept. Summary. A l l of these f a c t o r s were i n t e r a c t i n g i n a com-,109 p l i c a t e d manner to maintain problems i n the APC, and to p r e -vent a t r u l y c o n s t r u c t i v e interchange of views. T e c h n o c r a t i c vs. p o l i c y t r a i n i n g , and s e c r e t vs. open government t r a d i t i o n s , l e d to r i g i d p o l i c y p o s i t i o n s and a r e l u c t a n c e t o b a r g a i n , which accentuated the adversary stance of a c t o r s , which de-creased t r u s t , which accentuated p e r s o n a l i t y problems, which aggravated time problems, and so on. The c r i t i c a l f a c t o r seems to be the i n a b i l i t y of MOT to b r i n g p o l i c y a l t e r n a t i v e s i n t o t h e i r p o s i t i o n f o r d i s c u s s i o n or a n a l y s i s . By r e s t r i c t i n g themselves to the s i n g l e q u e s t i o n of the p a r a l l e l runway they shut out the c e n t r a l problem which others were p r e s s i n g r e c o g n i t i o n o f , t h a t of managing the demand f o r a i r t r a f f i c through p o l i c i e s made compatible to o t h e r i n t e r e s t s . The APC which MOT had i n mind was not address-i n g the r e l e v a n t need. However, i t was by no means c l e a r to a l l the a c t o r s a t the beginning of the process what t h i s r e l e v a n t need was. Only GVRD i n the f i r s t months had a c l e a r i d e a of the broader p o i n t s they wished to make. To make the p o i n t s GVRD had to accept an APC which, was not s t r u c t u r e d t o t h e i r l i k i n g , and to use the runway i s s u e as a demonstration case. Thus there was game p l a y i n g from the beginning, and the r u l e s of the game were u n c l e a r . As t r u s t f a i l e d the game p l a y i n g became more a c t i v e m a n i p u l a t i o n . o f the process on a l l . s i d e s . 5.12. F a i l u r e or Success. Because of the l a c k of t r u s t among p a r t i c i p a n t s , the h i g h p e r s o n a l c o s t s , and p a r t i c u l a r l y 110 because of the l a c k of agreement and the l a c k of a d e c i s i o n , there i s a s t r o n g tendency among p a r t i c i p a n t s to c h a r a c t e r i z e the APC process as a f a i l u r e . T h i s tendency, however, i s always q u a l i f i e d i n i n t e r v i e w s . Most p a r t i c i p a n t s , w h i l e s t a t i n g how t r y i n g the process was, s t i l l a f f i r m t h a t i t was s u c c e s s f u l . S e v e r a l o f the accomplishments have been d i s c u s s e d above. I t was an advance i n the s t a t e of the a r t i n s e v e r a l p l a n n i n g f i e l d s - p a r t i c u l a r l y environmental s t u d i e s , n o i s e , and f o r e -c a s t i n g . The most en v i r o n m e n t a l l y damaging a l t e r n a t i v e s have been e l i m i n a t e d . Indeed environmental values i n g e n e r a l have emerged s t r o n g e r from the proc e s s . A l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s have been suggested and are now under study i n MOT; they are no longer completely beyond the range o f the c o n c e i v a b l e . The-delay of the d e c i s i o n has allowed b e t t e r i n f o r m a t i o n to be gathered about demand growth r a t e s , environmental matters, and o t h e r s . I t has pr e c l u d e d the b u i l d i n g to o v e r c a p a c i t y which MOT's o r i g i n a l schedule i n v o l v e d . The most important accomplishment, however, r e l a t e s to i n f o r m a t i o n and o p t i o n s . S e v e r a l p a r t i c i p a n t s s t a t e d t h a t i t was not- necessary to produce a s i n g l e answer from the APC proce s s . Indeed the very success of the APC l i e s i n i t s ex-p o s i t i o n of d i v e r s e views, i t s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f i s s u e s and e f f e c t s . Every p a r t y i s now b e t t e r equipped t o s t a t e t h e i r case, and the p o l i t i c i a n s are b e t t e r able to decide. Without the APC much of t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n would not have been developed. There i s , however, another apparent f a i l u r e of the pr o c e s s . I t d i d not demonstrate the p o t e n t i a l advantages of s o l v i n g I l l p r o b l e m s t h r o u g h i n t e r - a g e n c y c o m m i t t e e s , n o r d i d i t demon-s t r a t e t h e p o t e n t i a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . T h e r e i s an u n d e r s t a n d a b l e r e l u c t a n c e on t h e p a r t o f t h e f e d e r a l a g e n c i e s i n v o l v e d t o r e - a c t i v a t e t h e APC o r any s i m i -l a r o r g a n i z a t i o n . P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s n o t i n and o f i t s e l f a c u r e f o r s t a l e m a t e o r c o n f r o n t a t i o n . I n f a c t , as t h e APC p r o c e s s shows, i t c a r r i e s w i t h i t c o n s i d e r a b l e d a n g e r when commitments have a l r e a d y b e e n made. The s o l u t i o n f o r s t a l e m a t e i s t o f i n d some common g r o u n d f o r agr e e m e n t . MOT was n o t a b l e t o d i s c o v e r t h i s g r o u n d , so f a i l e d t b o m e e t t h e i r o b j e c t i v e s . F u r t h e r d i s -c u s s i o n o f c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n f o l l o w s i n s e c t i o n 5.2. 5.2 On P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n 5.21 The R o l e o f P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n . One o f t h e more i m p o r t a n t q u e s t i o n s t o be a s k e d a b o u t t h e p r o c e s s i s w h e t h e r t h e p r e s e n c e o f d i r e c t p u b l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s added a n y t h i n g t o t h e p r o c e s s . I f t h e APC had been s t r i c t l y an i n t e r - a g e n c y c o m m i t t e e , w o u l d a n y t h i n g have been m i s s e d ? The answer i s t h a t t h e p u b l i c d e f i n i t e l y d i d make a c o n -t r i b u t i o n , t h o u g h a c o n t r o v e r s i a l one. They saw t h e i r r o l e as b e i n g t h a t o f a s k i n g n a i v e q u e s t i o n s , e i t h e r q u e s t i o n s t o w h i c h t h e answers were assumed, o r q u e s t i o n s w h i c h had n e v e r been a s k e d and t o w h i c h t h e r e was no answer p r e p a r e d . B e c a u s e t h e y were f r e e o f i n s t i t u t i o n a l r e s t r a i n t s t h e p u b l i c r e p r e -s e n t a t i v e s c o u l d ask q u e s t i o n s and p u r s u e p o i n t s w h i c h no ag e n c y c o u l d d i s c u s s . An i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t o f t h i s q u e s t i o n i n g was t h a t i t f o r c e d ri-2 agency representatives to broaden t h e i r scope of concern; i t forced a certain amount of integration of study areas. Some of these areas tend to be missed i n agency in t e r a c t i o n for two reasons. F i r s t , one agency w i l l be very reluctant to question i n the accepted f i e l d of expertise of any other. Therefore c r i t i c a l assumptions go unchallenged. Second, some questions f a l l between the perceived boundaries of the agen-cie s , and none, w i l l address them. There i s a case i n point here, for i n the beginning DOE did not consider that the effects of noise on humans f e l l within t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n . Their i n c l i n a t i o n was to concern themselves s o l e l y with the natural environment, and e x p l i c i t l y not with the human en-vironment. After a period of time DOE became involved i n the noise studies. In terms of s p e c i f i c substantial contributions to the f i n a l product, CF i s responsible for Decision Option 3. In more general terms, i t i s responsible for the expression of the 'conservation' viewpoint, the basic questioning of the growth philosophy (Roberts, Mar. 9, 1977). This i s a legitimate i n -terest which would not otherwise have been expressed. There i s , of course, another side to public p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s issue. The asking of naive questions can go on fo r -ever, i t can become a means of obstruction rather than a means i of forcing thought or of eliminating an a l t e r n a t i v e . The d i s t i n c t i o n i s one of judgement, based on a certain degree of tru s t . One must believe thatmembers are arguing i n good f a i t h , that they are arguing to learn and not arguing to win. 113 Such t r u s t was almost completely l a c k i n g i n the APC, and n a i v i t e . thus became a weapon to prolong the p r o c e s s . A second problem with p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s process was extreme doubt about the r e p r e s e n t a t i v e n e s s of the CF. Many members b e l i e v e t h a t i t was a l e g i t i m a t e p u b l i c group which was 'captured' by a p a r t i c u l a r a c t i v i s t i n t e r e s t , and which l o s t c o n t a c t w i t h the community at l a r g e . T h i s does not mean t h a t the views i t came to express were i n v a l i d -they were not - but t h a t these views r e c e i v e d ( i n the o p i n i o n of some) d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e emphasis, and d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e power i n shaping the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . T h i s was p a r t i c u l a r l y t rue because the most f o r c e f u l i n d i v i d u a l on the e n t i r e committee was a CF r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . T h i s problem i s i n h e r e n t i n p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n , of course. I t was one reason why the committee d i d not proceed by v o t i n g . But where i t becomes extreme i t tends to d i s c r e d i t the very i d e a of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n among those who are d o u b t f u l of i t s p o t e n t i a l v a l u e . R e l a t e d to r e p r e s e n t a t i v e n e s s i s the problem of accounta-b i l i t y . R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of the p u b l i c d i d not have t h e i r jobs or l i v e l i h o o d s a t stake, they had no o b l i g a t i o n to produce a s o l u t i o n to the o v e r r i d i n g problem of managing the demand f o r a i r t r a v e l , and they d i d not have to account f o r expenses of time and money. The l a s t p o i n t does not r e f e r to t h e i r i n -t e r n a l f i n a n c e s , but to t h e i r o p t i o n of c a l l i n g f o r more s t u d i e s and more complete i n f o r m a t i o n b e f o r e d e c i s i o n s were taken. The c o n s t r a i n t s on i n f o r m a t i o n g e n e r a t i o n and analy-s i s d i d not n e c e s s a r i l y b i n d the CF. In the atmosphere of c o n f r o n t a t i o n requests f o r s t u d i e s which may have been l e g i t i -114 mate were i n t e r p r e t e d as o b s t r u c t i o n i s t . I t i s never p o s s i b l e to generate p e r f e c t i n f o r m a t i o n , but CF would a p p a r e n t l y not be s a t i s f i e d w i t h l o s s . In summary, the APC experience r a i s e d three dilemmas of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n : d o u b t f u l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e n e s s , no t r u e a c c o u n t a b i l i t y , and c o n f l i c t i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n . 5.22 C o n c l u s i o n s from the APC E x p e r i e n c e . The three dilemmas of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n s t a t e d i n the p r e c e d i n g para-graph are p r e c i s e l y the c r i t i c i s m s which are o f t e n made of the agency-public j o i n t p l a n n i n g model i n t r o d u c e d i n Chapter 2. The APC was an example of the j o i n t p l a n n i n g approach i n ac-t i o n , and i t demonstrated e f f e c t i v e l y the i n h e r e n t flaw i n the model. In a c o n d i t i o n of a g r e a t d i v e r s i t y of v a l u e s , consensus on a s i n g l e i s s u e i s i m p o s s i b l e to achieve i n a s m a l l group. The most t h a t can be achieved i s t h a t the r e l e -vant a l t e r n a t i v e s w i l l be generated and analyzed, and t h a t p o s i t i o n s on them w i l l be expressed. T h i s i n i t s e l f i s a very important s e r v i c e to the decision-making process. Except f o r the l a c k o f true a l t e r n a t i v e s t h i s i s what a c t u a l l y happened i n the APC. "In some s i t u a t i o n s p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s urged as a way to reduce t e n s i o n and r e s o l v e c o n f l i c t s . U n d e r l y i n g t h i s emphasis are assumptions t h a t s h a r i n g p o i n t s of view i n c r e a s e s understanding and t o l e r a n c e and t h a t the very process of involvement weakens a tendency toward dogmatic a s s e r t i o n s and reduces p e r s o n a l b i a s e s and m i s t r u s t . I n s o f a r as c o n f l i c t s r e s t upon m i s i n f o r m a t i o n [ t h i s may be so] . . . . At the same time, the p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t par-t i c i p a t i o n leads to consensus would i n most s i t -u a t i o n s be of dubious v a l i d i t y . There i s reason to b e l i e v e t h a t i n a nonhomogeneous community i n c r e a s e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i l l h i g h l i g h t d i f f e r e n c e s 115 and i n c r e a s e c o n f l i c t . Probably the proper q u e s t i o n i s whether a c o n d i t i o n f o r consensus alr e a d y e x i s t s - i n which case p a r t i c i p a t i o n may f u r t h e r i t s r e a l i z a t i o n . But where a con-d i t i o n of d i v e r s i t y e x i s t s p a r t i c i p a t i o n can c o n t r i b u t e l i t t l e to c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n and may even i n c r e a s e c o n f l i c t by c r e a t i n g c o n f r o n t -a t i o n s and i n d u c i n g p o l a r i z a t i o n . Where a d i v e r s i t y of i n t e r e s t s i s ' c l e a r l y e s t a b l i s h e d , p a r t i c i p a t i o n can c o n t r i b u t e to c o n f l i c t r e s o -l u t i o n only i n h i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d s i t u a t i o n s w i t h i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d procedures and a w i l l i n g n e s s to accept unacceptable d e c i s i o n s (as i n l i t i -g ation) " (Wengert, 1976, 26-27). The a c t o r s i n the APC expected more of the p r o c e s s . They f e l t t h a t the problems c o u l d be r e s o l v e d w i t h i n the scope of the APC i t s e l f , whereas i t soon became e v i d e n t t h a t i t would be necessary to r e s o l v e them a t the p o l i t i c a l l e v e l . R e f e r -ence to the p o l i t i c a l l e v e l was necessary because the problems were c o n f i n e d to a s i n g l e major i s s u e i n v o l v i n g v a l u e d i f f e r -ences which accentuated c o n f l i c t . When there i s a sharp d i f f e r e n c e i n values there must be m u l t i p l e i s s u e s , and some-t h i n g to trade' away on a l l s i d e s , b e f o r e b a r g a i n i n g can occur and c o n f l i c t s can be r e s o l v e d . T h i s , and e x a c t l y t h i s , i s the r o l e o f the p o l i t i c i a n . In the APC t h e r e was a c o n f u s i o n of d u t i e s : the genera-t i o n of i n f o r m a t i o n and the achievement of consensus. The l a t t e r i s a p o l i t i c a l a c t which was not p o s s i b l e because of the opposing i n t e r e s t s i n v o l v e d . The c o n f r o n t a t i o n i n the APC c o u l d have been avoided i f the d i v e r s i t y of v a l u e s had been r e c o g n i z e d e a r l y , and i f the committee had committed i t s e l f to g e n e r a t i n g f a c t u a l i n f o r m a t i o n o n l y , on a l t e r n a t i v e s e x p r e s s i n g each value p o s i t i o n . Instead i n f o r m a t i o n was gen-e r a t e d on a r e s t r i c t e d range of a l t e r n a t i v e s , l a t e r reduced 116 to one only, and an attempt was made (or expected) to deter-mine what the best course of action would be. This meant that facts themselves could not be agreed on. Uncertainties became c r i t i c a l points of disagreement because alternative p o l i c i e s were not examined. Had alternatives been generated, each could have been assessed according to i t s impact on d i r e c t monetary cost, safety, noise, environmental damage, and, other values. In this s i t u a t i o n , where comparative knowledge i s available, i t i s easier for actors to agree on the facts because at least the r e l a t i v e impact of each alternative can be determined. The uncertainty about absolute figures i s not as important as when only one alternative i s considered. The role of public p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n such an analysis i s to ensure that t h e i r interests are expressed i n at least one alter n a t i v e , and that the impacts on them are discussed with respect to each alternative examined. They are not placed in the position of single-handedly stopping the implementation of some threatened actions. Instead they ensure that t h e i r case i s made before the p o l i t i c a l decision i s made. 5.23 On C o n f l i c t . Underlying the c o n f l i c t i n the APC was a basic disagreement on what the objectives of the process were. This disagreement was stated as two issues i n the F i n a l Report. "It i s an issue whether or not, when considering a development such as the proposed expansion of VIA, i t i s necessary to provide f o r : i) A statement of underlying p o l i c i e s that determine development objectives; i i ) An examination of these p o l i c i e s 117 i n terms of t h e i r contemporary r e l e v a n c e and t h e i r a p p l i c a t i o n to the s p e c i f i c development under study; i i i ) An examination of a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s p r e s e n t or f u t u r e " (APC, March 1976;.68). " I t i s an i s s u e whether or not the APC 1s terms of r e f e r e n c e p r o v i d e f o r the examination o f e x i s t i n g p o l i c i e s of governments and t h e i r departments and f o r the c o n s i d e r a t i o n of a l t e r n a t i v e , p o l i c i e s and the e x p l o r a t i o n of such a l t e r n a t i v e s " (APC, March 1976, 70). The two i s s u e s are whether or not a l t e r n a t i v e s should be exam-i n e d i n g e n e r a l , and whether or not they were w i t h i n the s p e c i f i c scope of the APC. MOT found they had a problem ( i n c r e a s i n g demand f o r a i r s e r v i c e s beyond the capacity' of the VIA) and a s o l u t i o n ( b u i l d a p a r a l l e l runway). They expected the APC to t e l l them how to m i t i g a t e the e f f e c t s of t h e i r s o l u t i o n . From GVRD 1s p o i n t of view there would be a problem i f MOT growth f o r e c a s t s were reasonable, and there were a number of p o s s i b l e s o l u t i o n s . The job of the APC was to assess the need, and compare the a l t e r n a t i v e s . The c o n f l i c t which arose seemed out of p r o p o r t i o n to the importance of the p r o p o s a l being s t u d i e d because more than the p r o p o s a l was a c t u a l l y i n v o l v e d . Opponents to MOT were t r y i n g to express new values and to demonstrate t h a t the e x i s t i n g p l a n n i n g process was not., adequate to these v a l u e s . They had to g i v e p u b l i c v i s i b i l i t y to. the p r o c ess, through c o n f l i c t , i n order to make t h e i r wider p o i n t . For many years p r i o r to the APC MOT operated w i t h a number of accepted procedures which appeared to s a t i s f y the v a l u e s of the day. Plans f o r the new runway e x i s t e d and a p p a r e n t l y caused no o b j e c t i o n . Suddenly (to MOT a t l e a s t ) , they were 1 1 8 caught i n a change of v a l u e s . New i n t e r e s t s demanded ex-p r e s s i o n , and they demanded such e x p r e s s i o n i n new p o l i t i c a l forms. The APC was s e t up to d e a l w i t h these i n t e r e s t s an-these p o l i t i c a l forms,.and i t became the scene of c o n f l i c t . Most of the c o n f l i c t c o u l d have been avoided had a l t e r n a -t i v e s which expressed the f u l l range of v a l u e s been examined. That i s the i d e a l . R e a l i s t i c a l l y however, the necessary a l t e r -n a t i v e s c o u l d not be generated, p r e c i s e l y because i t was not known what the f u l l range of values was. The new v a l u e s had to be demonstrated i n a t e s t case; they c o u l d not become p a r t of the p l a n n i n g process through a b s t r a c t argument only. To change a t t i t u d e s , to c h a l l e n g e b a s i c assumptions, to change e x i s t i n g procedures, c o n f l i c t was necessary. In f u t u r e cases when new values are" to. be expressed t h i s w i l l continue to be the case. The i s s u e w i l l a t f i r s t . n o t be c l e a r (except, perhaps, .to a few); c o n f l i c t w i l l c l a r i f y i t ; r e s o l u t i o n w i l l come w i t h the i n t e g r a t i o n of the new v a l u e s i n t o the process. The c o n f l i c t i s very l i k e l y to be out of p r o p o r t i o n to the^proposal i n d i s p u t e p r e c i s e l y because the p r o p o s a l does not take i n t o account a l l the r e l e v a n t v a l u e s . S i t u a t i o n s o f c o n f l i c t such as the APC are not common, but are bound to reoccur i n a changing s o c i e t y . C o n f l i c t i s a l e g i t i m a t e (though unpleasant) outcome of a p l a n n i n g process which c o n t a i n s i n i t s e l f very v a l u a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n . What i s important i s t h a t the i n f o r m a t i o n be r e c e i v e d and i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o the p l a n n i n g process. CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n Some way must be f o u n d i n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s t o i n c l u d e t h e v i e w s o f t h e p u b l i c t h a t i s a f f e c t e d by a p r o p o s a l i n o r d e r t o g e n e r a t e t h e n e c e s s a r y r e l e v a n t a l t e r n a t i v e s . The p u b l i c s e r v e d an i m p o r t a n t f u n c t i o n on the- APC by a s k i n g n a i v e q u e s -t i o n s , and by d e v e l o p i n g a t h i r d d e c i s i o n o p t i o n and a t h i r d p o i n t o f v i e w . The a g e n c y - p u b l i c j o i n t p l a n n i n g model has a b a s i c f l a w . Where p a r t i c i p a n t s i n a s m a l l p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g g r o u p have d i v e r s e i n t e r e s t s t h e y c a n n o t be e x p e c t e d t o r e a c h agreement. The n e c e s s a r y c o n d i t i o n s f o r e v a l u a t i o n , b a r g a i n i n g , and de-c i s i o n , f o r t h e r e s o l u t i o n o f c o n f l i c t , do n o t e x i s t . Such a g r o u p w o u l d have t o have e i t h e r a r e l a t i v e l y n a r r o w r a n g e o f v a l u e d i f f e r e n c e s , o r a w ide s c o p e f o r t r a d i n g , i n o r d e r t o s u c c e s s f u l l y a g r e e . Such a g r o u p c a n , however, s e r v e a v e r y i m p o r t a n t f u n c t i o n i n t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s . I t c a n and s h o u l d i d e n t i f y t h e r e l e v a n t a l t e r n a t i v e s and a s s e s s t h e i r i m p a c t . B a r g a i n i n g and d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g s h o u l d n o t be e x p e c t e d o f s u c h a g r o u p . The e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e APC s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e g e n e r a l p u r -p o s e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e and t h e p l u r a l i s t i c m o d e l s -may ibermore a p p r o p r i a t e f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . However t h e i r l i m i t a -t i o n s were n o t s p e c i f i c a l l y e x a mined i n t h i s t h e s i s . 6.2 The APC The APC was b o t h a s u c c e s s and a f a i l u r e . I t s u c c e e d e d i n 120 opening a f a i r l y c l o s e d , s i n g l e - p u r p o s e p l a n n i n g process, and i n s e r t i n g i n t o i t a number of other v a l u e s . I t improved s i g -n i f i c a n t l y the i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e on the e f f e c t s of a i r p o r t expansion, e s p e c i a l l y i n terms of f o r e c a s t s , n o i s e , and en-vironmental impacts. Agencies, p o l i t i c i a n s , and the p u b l i c a t l a r g e understand the e f f e c t s b e t t e r than i f the APC had not e x i s t e d . Most i m p o r t a n t l y , the APC succeeded i n e x p r e s s i n g the f u l l range of views on the i s s u e s which e x i s t . A l l of t h i s adds up to an important improvement i n the i n f o r m a t i o n system. The: APC f a i l e d t o assess the f u l l range of a l t e r n a t i v e s . Although the range was mentioned i t was not s t u d i e d , and ade-quate comparative i n f o r m a t i o n was not generated. I t a l s o f a i l e d , unavoidably perhaps -, t o operate without d i s t r u s t , so d i d not b u i l d confidence on the value of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The d i s t r u s t stemmed from the narrow p o l i c y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n which MOT p l a c e d on the APC, which r e s t e d on a fundamental d i f f e r e n c e of o p i n i o n as to the o b j e c t i v e s of the p r o c e s s . MOT has been much c r i t i c i z e d i n t h i s t h e s i s . The reader should remember, however, t h a t i t i s not an i n h e r e n t e v i l i n the agency which caused problems, but an u n f a m i l i a r i t y with t h i s k i n d of pr o c e s s , and a n e c e s s i t y to a d j u s t to u n f a m i l i a r values and p o l i t i c a l p h i l o s o p h i e s . 6.3 The Future I f an i n t e r - a g e n c y process such as the APC i s to be e s t a b -l i s h e d , i d e a l l y i t should be i n s t i t u t e d when an important problem i s f i r s t p e r c e i v e d . I t should be a c o - o p e r a t i v e e f f o r t to under-stand the. i m p l i c a t i o n s of. the problem and the f : u l l range of a l t e r n a t i v e s a v a i l -121 able to manage i t . The process, then, should begin b e f o r e p o s i t i o n s become r i g i d , and should proceed t o examine a l t e r -n a t i v e s . I t should be e x p l i c i t l y understood from the beginning t h a t the group i s not expected to agree or decide. I d e a l l y the problem which i s addressed should be a p p r o p r i a t e to the need f e l t by the p a r t i c i p a n t s . . R e s t r i c t i o n o f the i s s u e to a s u b s i d i a r y one c r e a t e s f r u s t r a t i o n and c o n f r o n t a t i o n . The agencies on the committee should p r o v i d e members of appro-x i m a t e l y equal p o l i c y scope, so t h a t one agency i s not c o n s t a n t l y t a l k i n g i n a wider sphere than another. Without these agreements on the scope and o b j e c t i v e s of the process i t w i l l not run smoothly, c o n f l i c t i s bound to a r i s e . Yet r e a l i s t i c a l l y such agreement cannot always be expected at the beginning of a pr o c e s s . Often the problem i s not p e r c e i v e d u n t i l a f t e r i n f l e x i b l e p o s i t i o n s are adopted. The scope of the a l t e r n a t i v e s may not be p e r c e i v e d u n t i l h a l f way through a pr o b l e m - s o l v i n g process. In these cases c o n f l i c t i s i n e v i t a b l e and necessary i n order to express the r u l l range of val u e s . I f a r e p e t i t i o n of the c o n f l i c t i n f u t u r e i s t o be avoided, i t i s c r u c i a l t h a t the new valu e s expressed be i n c o r -porated v i s i b l y i n t o the decision-making process. I t w i l l be e a s i e r t o e s t a b l i s h a s m a l l group which can operate w i t h t r u s t because i t w i l l be b e t t e r known from the begin n i n g what the r e l e v a n t range of a l t e r n a t i v e s i s . 1.22 BIBLIOGRAPHY A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee, 1973 to 1976, Minutes. , Feb. 1974, Vancouver Area A i r p o r t s - S t u d y Design f o r the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee. , Jan. 1975. A i r T r a f f i c A c t i v i t y F o r e c a s t s and Pro-j e c t i o n s , R e p o r t No. P 169-1. _ _ , Feb. 1975a, E n g i n e e r i n g F e a s i b i l i t y Study, Report No. P 169-2. , Feb. 1975b, Grand T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Study, Report No. P 169-3. , Feb. 1975a, An Economic Study of the S i g n i f i c a n c e of Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l . A i r p o r t , Report No. P 169-4. , A p r i l 1975, A l t e r n a t i v e A i r p o r t S i t e S t u d i e s , Report No. P 169-5. , May 1975, A Statement o f S o c i a l Concerns Regarding A i r p o r t Development, Report No. P 169-7. , June 19 75a, Urban Issues - Governmental O b j e c t i v e s , P o l i c i e s , Programs and Plans i n R e l a t i o n to A i r p o r t  Expansion, Report No. P 169-6. , June 1975b, A e r o n a u t i c a l Noise Study, V o l s . 1 and 2, Report No. P 169-9. , J u l y 1975a, The Demand/Capacity A n a l y s i s o f the E x i s t - i n g Runway System a t Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t , Report No. P 169-8. , J u l y 1975b, An .Environmental Impact Assessment of the Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t Expansion P r o p o s a l s, Report No. P 169-10, r e p r i n t e d : E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee, (Jan. 1976). , March 1976, F i n a l Report, Report No. P 169-11. Boyce, Helen, Nov. 18, 1975, l e t t e r to J . Sauve. Buchanan, James M., and Gordon T u l l o c k , 1962, The- C a l c u l u s of  Consent, L o g i c a l Foundations of C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Demo-crac y , U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan P r e s s , Ann Arbor. Canada - B.C. Okanagan B a s i c Agreement, March 19 74, P u b l i c  Involvement, T e c h n i c a l Supplement XI. Carney, Pat, 1977. P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n as a S o c i a l Communica- t i o n s Mode, M.A. T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia. 123 Chang, Ian, March 15, 1977, Interview. Community Forum on A i r p o r t Development, n.d., News l e t t e r . , Dec. 9, 1974, Re: Approval i n P r i n c i p l e : GVRD S t a f f P r o f o s a l f o r F i n a l Report. , J u l y 15, 1975, F i n a l Report of the APC: Review and Approval Process and Timetable. , n.d., CF Response to Press Release by M i n i s t e r o f Tran s p o r t of March 12, 1976. Cooley, Nancy, J u l y 5, 1973, l e t t e r to the A i r p o r t P lanning Committee. • _, A p r i l 16, 1974, l e t t e r to I. Jones. , Sept. 16, 19 74, memorandum to GVRD Chairman. , Nov. 19, 1975, l e t t e r to J . Roberts. , March 11, 1977, Interview. Coser, Lewis A.,' 1956, The Fun c t i o n s of S o c i a l C o n f l i c t , The Free P r e s s . Darendorf, R a l f , 1958, Toward a Theory of S o c i a l C o n f l i c t , J o u r n a l o f C o n f l i c t R e s o l u t i o n 11 (2): 170-183, r e p r i n t e d i n A. E t z i o n i and E. E t z i o n i (eds.), 1964, S o c i a l Change: Sources, P a t t e r n s , and Consequences, B a s i c Books, N.Y. Demerath, N.J. and R.A. Peterson (eds.), 196 7, System, Change, and C o n f l i c t , The Free P r e s s . Department of the Environment and Community Forum, n.d. (May 23?, 1975), A Reply to the M i n i s t r y of Tr a n s p o r t Com-ments on the E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee Summary Report, 5pp. E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee f o r the Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r -p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee, January 19 76, An Environmental  Impact Assessment o f the Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r -p o r t Expansion P r o p o s a l s : A Summary Report, Environment Canada,CVancouver, B.C. F a r r e l l , G.M., J . P. M e l i n , and S.R. Stacey, n.d., Involvement: A Saskatchewan P e r s p e c t i v e , prepared f o r Department of the Environment> Government of Saskatchewan. F a r r y G., Sept. 3, 1975, l e t t e r to J . Roberts. Fawcett, B r i a n , Jan. 23, 1976, l e t t e r to D. Hosgood. 124 F i s h e r , A.W., Jan. 20, 1973, The E x p r o p r i a t i o n A c t ; RSC 1976, Chap. 16, 1 s t Supp., Report of the Hearing O f f i c e r . Fox, I r v i n g , 1975, A Framework f o r Developing and E v a l u a t i n g Regional Resource P o l i c y - P l a n s , i n : I. Fox and W. Morton (eds.), Regional N a t u r a l Resources P l a n n i n g : A  Framework and i t s A p p l i c a t i o n to the C h i l l i w a c k R i v e r  Basin i n B r i t i s h Columbia, P r e l i m i n a r y D r a f t J u l y 1975. , 19 76, I n s t i t u t i o n s f o r Water Management i n a Changing World, N a t u r a l Resources J o u r n a l , V o l . 16, October 1976, U n i v e r s i t y of New Mexico School of Law, pp. 743-758. Graham, John, 1976, R e f l e c t i o n s on a P l a n n i n g F a i l u r e , i n Swainson (1976), pp. 96-114. Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t , n.d. (1973), Chronology of the Sea I s l a n d A i r p o r t Issue, 3 pp. , Oct. 26, 1973, Why Should There Be a Community Forum on A i r p o r t Development? 2 pp. , October 1974, P o s i t i o n Paper on A i r p o r t Expansion. , 1975, The L i v a b l e Region,,1976/1986 : P r o p o s a l s t o Manage th e Growth of Greater Vancouver. Ha e f e l e , Edwin T., 1976, R e p r e s e n t a t i v e Government and E n v i r o n -mental Management, i n Swainson (1976), pp. 115-142. Hosgood, D.G., J u l y 5, 1975, Proposals f o r the P r o c e s s i n g ( i . e . Review and Approval) of the APC F i n a l Report. , Oct®. 29, 1976 , l e t t e r t o E. Watchorn. Lane, W i l l i a m T. (ed.), 1975, S e l e c t e d Readings i n Law f o r L o c a l P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t o r s , Second E d i t i o n , Vancouver. LeBlanc, Romeo, Nov. 1, 1976, l e t t e r t o E. Watchorn. Lenahan, J.A., Sept. 30, 1974, l e t t e r to I. Jones 1 p. Lucas, A l a s t a i r R., 1976, L e g a l Foundations f o r P u b l i c P a r t i -c i p a t i o n i n Environmental Decisionmaking, i n U t t o n e t a l (1976), pp. 73-102. M i n i s t r y o f T r a n s p o r t , November 1971, Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a 1 A i r p o r t - Capacity/Demand A n a l y s i s f o r S e l e c t e d Runway  C o n f i g u r a t i o n s . , Oct. 27, 1972, An A n a l y s i s of the Vancouver I n t e r n a - t i o n a l A i r p o r t Runway System, w i t h Reference to the  Requirement f o r a P a r a l l e l Runway 0 8L 26R. 125 M i n i s t r y of Tr a n s p o r t , Feb. 21, 1973, Press Release No. 14/73. , A p r i l 13, 1973, Press Release. ________ Feb. 21, 1974, Press Release No. 14/74. , March 27, 1974, Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t Master P l a n n i n g P r o j e c t . , Dec. 11, 1974, Press Release. • , January, 1975, Sorry About the Noise, 8 pp. , March 12, 1976, Press Release No. 32/76. , Aug. 12, 1976, Press Release No. 115/76. Neales W., March 6, 1975, l e t t e r to J . Tyhurst. , J u l y 18, 19 75, memorandum to the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee, 1 p. O'Brien, J . J . , 1973, V i l l a g e Lake L o u i s e - A Study of P u b l i c  P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Pl a n n i n g , M. A. T h e s i s , U.B.C, Vancouver, B. C. Perryman, Gavin, 19 75, The Functions of E v a l u a t i o n Research i n  C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n Programs, M.A. T h e s i s , U.B.C., Vancouver, B. C. Pickstone> H., March 8, 1977, Interview. R e i d e l , James A., 1972, C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n : Myths and Rea-l i t i e s , P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Review, May/June 1972, 211-220. Roberts, J.E., Sept. 8, 1975, Notes on Two E d i t o r i a l Questions A r i s i n g from the Working Paper on Areas of Agreement and Issues.• , March 9, 1977, Interview. • , March 11, 1977, Interview. Romaine, Mike, Jan. 22, 1976, l e t t e r to D. Hosgood. - , Jan. 20, 1977, Interview. , March 8, 1977, Interview. Smith, D a r r e l , Nov. 21, 1974, memorandum to the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee. , March 31, 1977, Interview. 126 S p e c i a l A d v i s o r y Panel to the M i n i s t e r of the Environment, Mar. 22, 1976, Report, 9 pp. S t a r l i n g , R., Nov. 14, 1975, l e t t e r to D. Hosgood. Stead, Gordon, Sept. 10, 1973, l e t t e r t o I. Jones. , Jan. 26, 1974, l e t t e r to E. Winsor. , March 23, 1975, The I m p l i c a t i o n s of the Report of the P i c k e r i n g Enquiry f o r the Work of the Vancouver A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee, 14 pp. Jan. 23, 1977, A t t i t u d e s and P r o c e d u r a l Manoeuvring i n Vancouver A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee Process, 28 pp. Stead, Gordon, Feb. 25, 1977, Interview. , Feb. 28, 1977, Interview. , March 2, 1977, Interview. Swainson, N e i l A. (ed.),1976, Managing the Water Environment, U n i v e r s i t y of B.C. Press, Vancouver. Tackaberry, Chuck, Jan. 20, 1975, l e t t e r t o I. Jones. T r i - L e v e l S t a f f Committee, Nov. 14, 1974, Minutes. Tyhurst, J . S., Jan. 18, 1977, Interview. , March 3, 1977, Interview. Utton, A l b e r t , E., W. R. D e r r i c k Sewell, and Timothy O'Riordan (eds.), 1976, N a t u r a l Resources f o r a Democratic So- c i e t y : P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Decision-Making, West-view P r e s s , Boulder, Colorado. Vancouver P r o v i n c e , Nov. 5, 1976, MOT c a l l f o r tender, p. 17a. Wengert, Norman, 1976, C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n : P r a c t i c e i n Search of a Theory, i n Utton e t a l (1976), pp. 23-40. Wolpert, J u l i a n , 1976, Regressive S i t i n g of P u b l i c F a c i l i t i e s , i n Utton e t a l (1976), pp. 103-116. 127 APPENDIX 1 Chronology o f Events T h i s i s a s e l e c t i o n o f events which emphasizes the p r o c e d u r a l aspect of a i r p o r t p l a n n i n g . In t h i s s e c t i o n the events are s e t out, r a t h e r l y d r y l y , without any attempt to l i n k them t h e m a t i c a l l y , which i s the o b j e c t of s e c t i o n 3.3. Those f o r whom t h i s data i s not c r i t i c a l should omit t h i s s e c t i o n . 3.31 U n t i l March 1976 In most cases below the comments are those of the author. In a few cases they are those of the GVRD, i n a document t i t l e d "Chronology of the Sea I s l a n d A i r p o r t Issue" (n.d.). Where t h i s source i s used the agency i s i d e n t i f i e d . Pre-1972. Plans f o r the expansion of VIA. have e x i s t e d i n rough f o r more than 20 y e a r s . MOT has been a c q u i r i n g land on Sea I s l a n d on the market throughout t h i s p e r i o d . Nov. 19 71. An MOT r e p o r t (Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l  A i r p o r t - Capacity/Demand A n a l y s i s f o r S e l e c t e d Runway Con- f i g u r a t i o n s ) recommended a g a i n s t expansion. New c o n t r o l d e v i c e s , a lengthened main runway, and removal of g e n e r a l a v i a t i o n would meet demand u n t i l i990. August and September 1972. MOT f i l e d n o t i c e of i n t e n t to e x p r o p r i a t e i n the B u r k e v i l l e and Cora-Brown-McDonald s u b d i v i s i o n s on Sea I s l a n d . 128 Sept. 25, 1972. GVRD h e l d a l i v a b i l i t y meeting w i t h the Sea I s l a n d Community and Ratepayers A s s o c i a t i o n . The Ratepayers asked t h a t the GVRD send an expert witness to upcoming hearings i n connection w i t h the e x p r o p r i a t i o n , (from GVRD) Oct. 27, 19 72. A second MOT r e p o r t (An A n a l y s i s of the Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t Runway System, with Reference t o the Requirement f o r a P a r a l l e l Runway 08L 26R) concluded as f o l l o w s : "2. An adequate standby runway i s r e q u i r e d to meet the o p e r a t i o n a l needs o f the a i r c a r r i e r s * . 3. The c o n s i d e r a t i o n of o p e r a t i n g problems, the runway maintenance requirements, and c o s t b e n e f i t a n a l y s i s s t r o n g l y support the case f o r a new runway wi t h f u l l a i r c a r r i e r c a p a b i l i t y - to be o p e r a t i o n a l by 1976." •Runway maintenance requirements' here r e f e r s t o the need f o r major maintenance t o the main runway at VIA, which would r e q u i r e the c l o s i n g the runway f o r s e v e r a l months. Such a c l o s u r e would r e s t r i c t normal o p e r a t i o n s o f some long d i s t a n c e f l i g h t s , and reduce income to both a i r c a r r i e r s and MOT. Note t h a t the e x p r o p r i a t i o n proceedings began before t h i s r e p o r t was completed. At some p o i n t i n 1972 MOT e v i -d e n t l y reached a judgement t h a t the second runway would be r e q u i r e d . Dec. 4, 19 72. The' f i r s t e x p r o p r i a t i o n h e a r i n g opened,-and was immediately adjourned to a l l o w the Ratepayers to study data s u p p l i e d by MOT three days p r e v i o u s l y . 129 Jan. 4, 1973. A meeting wa's h e l d a t the GVRD o f f i c e s between s e n i o r p l a n n i n g s t a f f members and MOT p l a n n i n g o f f i c i a l s r e g a r d i n g p l a n s f o r the A r t h u r Laing B r i d g e , the proposed new runway and the proposed P r o v i n c i a l f e r r y t e r -m i n a l . MOT claimed n o i s e from the expanded a i r p o r t would not be a problem. (from GvRD) Jan. 8-15, 1973. The e x p r o p r i a t i o n h e a r i n g reconvened. The GVRD P u b l i c Program assig n e d a worker t o f o l l o w the i s s u e . The Ratepayers asked him to have the GVRD send an expert witness t o the hearings to comment on the r e g i o n a l i m p l i c a t i o n s of the a i r p o r t expansion. The Board r e f u s e d t o send a person t o speak. (from GVRD) One of the major c o n t r o v e r s i e s of the process i s a l -ready apparent i n t h i s e a r l i e s t stage. "(The) complaint about n o n - d i s c l o s u r e of p e r t i n e n t data as to the reasons f o r the e x p r o p r i a t i o n was r e l a t e d and documented so o f t e n d u r i n g the h e a r i n g t h a t I was o b l i g e d i n the i n t e r e s t s o f time t o cut sh o r t the r e p e t i t i o n of what I then c o n s i d e r e d a w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d complaint . . . I conceded t h a t the A s s o c i a t i o n had e s t a b l i s h e d beyond doubt i t s v a l i a n t attempts to get data and t h a t i t had been i g n o r e d . ( F i s h e r , Jan. 20, 1973) January 1973. The M i n i s t e r o f the Environment requested an environmental impact assessment, and formed a s t e e r i n g committee w i t h i n DOE. Feb. 7, 19 73. The second e x p r o p r i a t i o n h e a r i n g p r o -ceeded without GVRD appearance, but s t a f f d i s c u s s i o n continued. The s t a f f became convinced t h a t the Ratepayers' grievances were w e l l founded. The s t a f f prepared i n f o r m a t i o n 130 f o r the Pla n n i n g Committee seeking t h e i r approval f o r the p r e p a r a t i o n o f a case t o be presented a t the h e a r i n g , (from GVRD) Feb. 14, 1973. The E x e c u t i v e Committee a u t h o r i z e d the request t h a t the d i s t r i c t f o r m a l l y p r e s s f o r a new p l a n n i n g process and presen t i t s concerns at the e x p r o p r i a t i o n h e a r i n g s . (from Gv'RD) Feb. 16, 19 73. The GVRD s o l i c i t o r began h i s p r e s e n t a -t i o n a t the h e a r i n g . The b a s i s o f the p r e s e n t a t i o n was t h a t the expansion as planned c o u l d r e s u l t i n damage t o the regi o n ' s l i v a b i l i t y . He pr e s s e d f o r a new involvement of l o c a l governments and communities i n d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g p r o j e c t s l i k e the a i r p o r t . A t the same time Richmond and Vancouver sent p o l i t i c i a n s and c i v i l s e r vants to p r o t e s t the u n i l a t e r a l development o f the a i r p o r t area. (from GVRD) Feb. 16-19, 19 73. When MOT f a i l e d t o f u r n i s h the GVRD w i t h m a t e r i a l s as r e q u i r e d under the E x p r o p r i a t i o n A c t , l e g a l a c t i o n i n F e d e r a l Court was undertaken. The case was even-t u a l l y d i s m i s s e d but i t was e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t the MOT d i d not have a comprehensive p l a n based on thorough r e s e a r c h , espec-i a l l y i n r e g a r d t o environmental e f f e c t s . (from GVRD) Feb. 21, 19 73. In a pre s s r e l e a s e (Nov. 14/73) the M i n i s t e r s of DOE, MSUA, and. MOT s t a t e d : " I f , a f t e r reviewing the Hearing O f f i c e r ' s r e p o r t , the F e d e r a l Government decided t o proceed w i t h a second new p a r a l l e l runway f o r Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l t 1 3 1 A i r p o r t , no c o n s t r u c t i o n would take p l a c e u n t i l a f u l l twelve-month environmental study had been completed and made p u b l i c . . . I f p u b l i c d i s -c u s s i o n s of the s t u d i e s r e v e a l e d t h a t d e t r i m e n t a l e f f e c t s would r e s u l t from the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f the new proposed runway, a l t e r n a t i v e a c t i o n s would have t o be implemented to o f f s e t the a n t i c i p a t e d i n -crease i n t r a f f i c . Feb. - March, 1 9 7 3 . The a i r p o r t i s s u e was p l a c e d on the agenda of the T r i - L e v e l meeting at the i n i t i a t i v e o f GVJRD. The s t a f f . developed a Terms of Reference f o r a study of a i r p o r t requirements t o be presented at the meeting. The Ratepayers were granted $40,000 by the M i n i s t e r of Tra n s p o r t to study t h e i r community. However, the expro-p r i a t i o n s were confirmed. An ombudsman was appointed to mediate between f e d e r a l p r o p e r t y owners and those people being e x p r o p r i a t e d . (from GV/RD) March 3 1 , 1 9 7 3 . The T r i - L e v e l P o l i t i c a l Committee met f o r the f i r s t time. The a i r p o r t i s s u e was the major item on the agenda. The es t a b l i s h m e n t o f the APC was approved i n p r i n c i p l e . A p r i l 1 3 , 1 9 7 3 . An MOT press r e l e a s e s t a t e d t h a t a p a r a l l e l runway would be b u i l t i f environmental and urban s t u d i e s r e v e a l e d t h a t no major d e t r i m e n t a l e f f e c t s would r e s u l t , and t h a t the land would be used f o r oth e r a v i a t i o n purposes i f the runway were not c o n s t r u c t e d . A p r i l 1 6 , 1 9 7 3 . The T r i - L e v e l S t a f f Committee met i n V i c t o r i a . A m o d i f i e d v e r s i o n o f GyRD's proposed p r o c e s s -was agreed t o , and terms o f r e f e r e n c e f o r the c r e a t i o n of 132 the APC were e s t a b l i s h e d . A p r i l 2'5',' 19 73. A meeting of r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f concerned c i t i z e n groups endorsed the agreement worked out on A p r i l 16. (from GVRD) May 14, 19 73. At the second T r i - L e v e l s t a f f meeting i n Ottawa i t was r e p o r t e d t h a t a l l three governments i n v o l v e d accepted the A p r i l 16th agreement. (from GVRD) May 1973. Four concepts (A-D) f o r the p a r a l l e l runway were proposed by MOT to pr o v i d e DOE w i t h a b a s i s f o r e c o l o -g i c a l assessment. June 6, 1973. The f i r s t meeting o f the APC was h e l d . R e p r e s e n t a t i o n was r e p o r t e d as f o l l o w s : MOT, f o u r members i n c l u d i n g the chairman; DOE, one member; GVRD, one-member; Vancouver, one member; Richmond, one member; MSUA, one member; DPW, one member; B.C., one member. In f a c t o t h e r r e p r e s e n t a -t i v e s were pr e s e n t , but MOT recorded them as ' s p e c i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s ' , as i t wished t o all o w each agency o n l y one o f f i c i a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . J u l y 5, 1973. GVRD t a b l e d a p r o p o s a l on p u b l i c i n -volvement i n the APC, at an APC meeting. The p r o p o s a l recommended "ways t h a t c i t i z e n s c o u l d speak' f o r themselves, not a mechanism f o r GVRD to a c t as an i n t e r m e d i a r y between c i t i z e n s ' groups and the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee. ( l e t t e r , Cooley t o APC, J u l y 5, 1973)." The p r o p o s a l a l s o emphasized the c r e a t i o n of a c o o p e r a t i v e r a t h e r than c o n f r o n t a t i v e 133 process, and the importance of d i r e c t l y i n v o l v i n g c i t i z e n s i n order to g r a d u a l l y d i s p e l the c o n f l i c t s and s u s p i c i o n which a l r e a d y surrounded the i s s u e and the APC. See Appendix 3 f o r the f u l l t e x t . J u l y 19, 1973. The p r o p o s a l was g e n e r a l l y accepted a t an APC meeting, w i t h the p r o v i s o t h a t members o f the to-be-c r e a t e d Community Forum were to be observers o n l y a t the sub-committee l e v e l , although they would be a c t i v e members of the APC i t s e l f . Aug. 2, 19 73. The f i r s t p r o v i s i o n a l members of the p u b l i c were seated on the APC. Sept. 10, 1973. In a l e t t e r t o an MOT r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , a GVRD r e p r e s e n t a t i v e makes the f o l l o w i n g comments on p o l i c y , f o r e c a s t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n , and d e l a y s : " I f t h i s process e s t a b l i s h e s t h a t the p r e s s u r e of a i r t r a f f i c i s l i k e l y to exceed the c a p a c i t y of p r e s e n t f a c i l i t i e s w i t h p r e s e n t o p e r a t i n g p r o c e -dures, we must then examine a wide v a r i e t y o f a l t e r n a t i v e s , i n c l u d i n g o p e r a t i n g procedures and s c h e d u l i n g , use of a l t e r n a t i v e s i t e s and p o l i c y o p t i o n s such as changes i n r o u t i n g and o t h e r as-pects of c a r r i e r r e g u l a t i o n . But proper t r a f f i c f o r e c a s t s must come f i r s t ; s i m p l i s t i c mathematical p r o j e c t i o n s from the r e c e n t p a s t . . . w i l l not c a r r y c o n v i c t i o n . . . . T h i s has been i n d i c a t e d r e p e a t e d l y i n my l e t t e r of March 29, 19 73, o t h e r w r i t t e n m a t e r i a l and d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h B i l l Neales, Tony Beak and others i n June and J u l y . . . " "The d e a d l i n e we are working to has been l a i d down by the M i n i s t e r . . . I f anything, GViRD i s more i n t e r e s t e d i n a balanced a n a l y s i s of the whole q u e s t i o n than i n the exact t i m i n g (Stead t o J o n e s ) . " Sept. 13, 19 73. R e p r e s e n t a t i o n from the A i r C a r r i e r s and the B.C. A v i a t i o n C o u n c i l was added t o the APC. 134 Nov. 1, 1973. C o n s u l t a n t s from B.C. Research C o u n c i l became i n v o l v e d i n d r a f t i n g a study design a c c e p t a b l e to a l l members of the APC. Less formal designs were a l r e a d y being acted upon. Nov. 9,.1973. Approximately 120 people from 30 o r g a n i -z a t i o n s attended the f i r s t meeting o f the Community Forum. Nov. 27, 19 73. MOT r e p l a c e d concepts A to D f o r a i r p o r t expansion w i t h concepts 1 to 5. " E s s e n t i a l l y , t h i s l a t t e r s e r i e s represent(ed) a refinement of the former one . . . however, the lower l i m i t o f the range o f areas t o be f i l l e d (was) reduced ( E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee, Jan. 1976, 20)." Nov. 29-30, 1973. A workshop on sub-committees and the study design was h e l d . I t was agreed t h a t sub-committee chairmen would be appointed by the APC (r a t h e r than any one agency), and t h a t the chairman i n each case would have some knowledge i n the f i e l d . Dec. 13, 1973. i t was suggested i n an APC meeting t h a t CF r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s be accepted as a c t i v e members o f sub-committees. The minutes are not c l e a r on whether t h i s was adopted as APC p o l i c y , but CF members d i d take an a c t i v e r o l e i n sub-committees throughout the p r o c e s s . Dec. 20, 1973. The F e d e r a l Cabinet e s t a b l i s h e d the Environmental Assessment and Review Process (EARP). Jan. 3, 19 74. At an APC meeting MOT announced the s i g n i n g of a c o n t r a c t with a c o n s u l t a n t f o r a n o i s e study. 135 Contentious d i s c u s s i o n f o l l o w e d , as recorded i n the Minutes: "There i s g e n e r a l agreement t h a t i f the APC approves a l l study terms o f r e f e r e n c e then there i s no need to r e t u r n to the APC f o r c o n t r a c t approval u n l e s s changes have been made to the o r i g i n a l l y agreed t o terms of r e f e r e n c e . In the case o f the APS study, while the terms o f r e f e r e n c e were processed through the sub-committee, no formal approval was g i v e n by the APC as a whole. The f a c t t h a t there were some con t e n t i o u s i s s u e s i n the terms of r e f e r e n c e , and MOT's unbending stand concerning t h e i r p o s i t i o n would i n d i c a t e t h a t the terms o f r e f e r e n c e should have gone back to the APC bef o r e any c o n t r a c t was l e t , r e g a r d l e s s o f the time c o n s t r a i n t . " Jan. 14, 1974. MOT p r o v i d e d a g r e a t d e a l o f f o r e -c a s t i n g data to GIVRD (but not a l l t h a t had been requested) . Feb. 21, 1974. The study d e s i g n e s t a b l i s h i n g s i x o f f i c i a l sub-committees was adopted by the APC. Feb. 1974. The S p e c i a l A d v i s o r y Panel to the M i n i s t e r of the Environment was e s t a b l i s h e d . A p r i l 1974. MOT opened a 24 hour phone l i n e t o r e c e i v e no i s e complaints at the a i r p o r t . A p r i l 18, 1974. MOT s t a t e d t h a t they c o u l d now begin to document the case f o r the new runway (APC Mi n u t e s ) . June 18, 1974. MOT e l i m i n a t e d concepts 4 and 5 from c o n s i d e r a t i o n , a f t e r a request f o r review o f the concepts by DOE. E v a l u a t i o n proceeded o n l y on concepts 1-3. J u l y 2,. 19 74. In responding to a l e t t e r from a c i t i z e n r e q u e s t i n g t h a t the a l t e r n a t i v e of no expansion be s t u d i e d / I.Jones r e s t a t e d MOT p o l i c y : 136 "From the M i n i s t r y of Tra n s p o r t ' s p o s i t i o n , I must advise t h a t the a l t e r n a t i v e o f no expansion of the e x i s t i n g a i r p o r t runway f a c i l i t i e s w i l l o n l y a r i s e i f i t i s determined t h a t major e n v i r -onmental or urban p e n a l t i e s would r e s u l t from such a i r p o r t development. T h i s has been a con-s i s t e n t p o s i t i o n o f the M i n i s t r y " ( l e t t e r , Jones to Spencer). J u l y 13, 1974. The e x i s t i n g main runway a t VIA was c l o s e d f o r a three month p e r i o d to allow e x t e n s i v e mainten-ance work. A i r c r a f t o p e r a t i o n s were s l i g h t l y reduced d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d . Aug. 22, 19 74. GVRD announced t h a t i t would have t o r e s t r i c t i t s r o l e i n the APC because o f the p r i o r i t y of the Regional P l a n . Sept. 16, 1974. GVRD was deve l o p i n g a p o s i t i o n paper on the a i r p o r t i s s u e . In an i n t e r n a l GVRD memo to the Chairman o f the GVRD, a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e on the APC s t a t e d : "The i m p l i e d t h r e a t o f a c o n f r o n t a t i o n from GVRD has prompted l o c a l MOT o f f i c i a l s t o t a l k s e r i o u s l y about d e a l i n g w i t h l o c a l problems. D i s c u s s i o n s w i t h them are now becoming u s e f u l and h o l d the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t we may be able t o hammer out a p o s i t i o n the Vancouver M i n i s t r y p e r s o n n e l can s u b s t a n t i a l l y agree t o . I f t h i s i s p o s s i b l e , we may be abl e t o head o f f another f u l l - s c a l e c o n f r o n t a t i o n " ( C o o l e y t o Chairman, GVRD). Oct. 23, 1974. The Chairman o f the APC c a n c e l l e d an APC meeting scheduled f o r the f o l l o w i n g day, pending a meet-i n g of the T r i - L e v e l S t a f f Committee. The more seems t o have been prompted by continued delays i n APC d e a d l i n e s , and a t h r e a t e n i n g exhaustion o f f i n d s . S e v e r a l agencies seem to have been i n v o l v e d i n i n f o r m a l d i s c u s s i o n s which l e d 137 to t h i s more, but CF was not i n v o l v e d , nor were they per-m i t t e d to a t t e n d the subsequent T r i - L e v e l meeting. A l s o on Oct. 23, i n the a f t e r n o o n , GVRD h e l d a press conference a t which they r e l e a s e d a s t a f f p o s i t i o n paper which was h i g h l y c r i t i c a l o f MOT's p o s i t i o n . The GVRD Board took no p o s i t i o n on the s t a f f views, r a t h e r the Board r e l e a s e d them f o r p u b l i c d i s c u s s i o n . Although these events o c c u r r e d on the same day, i t seems t h a t n e i t h e r caused the o t h e r , but t h a t both were a r e s u l t o f the background events of the p r e c e d i n g months. Nov. 14, 1974. The T r i - L e v e l S t a f f Committee met on t h i s date. At t h i s meeting a new t i m e t a b l e f o r completion of the work of the APC was s e t out. C e r t a i n aspects of the o r i g i n a l study design, n o t a b l y the e v a l u a t i o n a n a l y s i s , were abandoned. P o l i c y i s s u e s r a i s e d by APC d i s c u s s i o n s , but beyond the terms of r e f e r e n c e of the APC, were i d e n t i f i e d , but no commitments were made. F i n a l l y , " I t was agreed, a f t e r c o n s i d e r a b l e d i s c u s s i o n , t h a t  i t would be d e s t r u c t i v e of the APC process i f  i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i e s o r agencies were t o take p u b l i c  p o s i t i o n s on the a i r p o r t i s s u e p r i o r to the r e l e a s e  of the f i n a l r e p o r t . There should be no need f o r t h i s s i n c e the approach suggested f o r the APC's f i n a l r e p o r t has p r o v i d e d f o r agreements and d i s -agreements w i t h i n the APC to be c l e a r l y s e t out" ( T r i - L e v e l S t a f f Committee Minutes, Nov. 14, 1974). Both o f the statements i n t h i s q u o t a t i o n subsequently became c o n t r o v e r s i e s i n the p r o c e s s . The CF, not a member of the T r i - L e v e l Committee, made numerous comments on the T r i - L e v e l meeting i n a Memorandum dated Dec. 9, 1974. 138 "In a l e t t e r dated October 23rd, the Chairman of the APC c a n c e l l e d the APC meeting f o r the f o l l o w i n g day and n o t i f i e d members t h a t t h i s was' because there was 1. . . agreement among the l o c a l and F e d e r a l Government p a r t i c i p a n t s on the APC t h a t , f o r our-s e l v e s , i t was necessary t o c o n s u l t w i t h the G r e a t e r Vancouver T r i - L e v e l committee ( s t a f f ) i n r e s p e c t t o the immediate p a s t and p r o s p e c t i v e f u t u r e d i f f i c u l -t i e s i n our committee . . . 1 The d i f f i c u l t i e s were not d e s c r i b e d and t h i s , a c t i o n was taken without any p r i o r d i s c u s s i o n with o r agreement by the APC. . . . I t - has been f r e q u e n t l y suggested t h a t the d i f f i c u l -t i e s are the problem o f "reaching consensus' i n the APC. But, the p o s s i b i l i t y o f disagreement was s p e c i f i c a l l y a n t i c i p a t e d i n the o r i g i n a l study design, and there i s no r e f e r e n c e there t o any a b s o l u t e nec-e s s i t y f o r r e a c h i n g consensus. In f a c t , not only i s the p o s s i b i l i t y o f r e a c h i n g disagreement recog-n i z e d , but procedures are s e t out f o r d e a l i n g w i t h i t . . . In a l l of t h i s , the Chairman has f u n c t i o n e d as a s t a f f member of MOT r a t h e r than as Chairman of the APC and c u s t o d i a n of i t s procedures." ". . . In our view, a l s o , a major reason f o r the s l i p p a g e being experienced i n the p l a n n i n g process to date has not been simply l a c k o f consensus but i s the r e s u l t o f f a i l u r e t o ensure a c l e a r under-s t a n d i n g before the f a c t , on tasks and f u n c t i o n s , terms of r e f e r e n c e and procedures - and e s p e c i a l l y , a f a i l u r e then to adhere to and monitor s y s t e m a t i -c a l l y what has been agreed t o . . . . This has been exacerbated by the Chairman's repeated tendency to a c t as a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s t a f f member of MOT r a t h e r than as Chairman of the APC." (CF, Dec. 9, 1974) The c o n t r o v e r s y over r e f e r r a l t o the T r i - L e v e l Committee had r e p e r c u s s i o n s throughout the r e s t o f the APC pr o c e s s . Nov. 19 74. R e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a s o c i a l impact study was s h i f t e d t o the PRMD Sub-Committee, but t h i s sub-committee had c o n s i d e r a b l e d i f f i c u l t y d e f i n i n g what an adequate s o c i a l impact sJt'u'dy e n t a i l e d . Nov. 21, 1974. The A i r p o r t s System Report was t a b l e d at the APC. I t e l i m i n a t e d a l l a l t e r n a t i v e s to VIA on the b a s i s 139 of some combination of a i r s p a c e c o n s t r a i n t s , b i r d hazard, and environmental concerns. A memorandum from the Chairman of the AS Sub-Committee to the APC, Nov. 21, 1974, makes these comments: "Considerable d i s c u s s i o n has taken p l a c e between myself and the Community forum r e p r e s e n t a t i v e and a t t h i s p o i n t I am not aware of any r e s o l u t i o n reached t h a t rendered the r e p o r t a c c e p t a b l e to them - I can o n l y r e i t e r a t e t h a t they have been i n v o l v e d i n the process from the beginning, have had r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . . . I do f e e l t h a t two r e - w r i t e s of a r a t h e r t e c h -n i c a l r e p o r t should be c o n s i d e r e d as evidence o f an attempt at cooperation"(Smith to J o n e s ) . Dec. 11, 1974. An MOT press r e l e a s e s t a t e d t h a t the APC was expected to r e p o r t by m i d - A p r i l 1975: The M i n i s t e r ex-pected to announce h i s d e c i s i o n by the end of A p r i l 19 75. The APC would be r e p l a c e d by a permanent a i r p o r t c o n s u l t a t i v e committee. Dec. 12, 1974. In a c t i o n a r i s i n g from the T r i - L e v e l meeting, i t was agreed a t an APC meeting t h a t three a l t e r n a -t i v e s would be presented i n the f i n a l r e p o r t : 1) proceed now, 2) do not proceed, 3) postpone a d e c i s i o n Dec. 13, 19 74. The f i r s t meeting of sub-committee c h a i r -man w a s ; h e l d . These meetings were designed to monitor the progress of the v a r i o u s s t u d i e s , and to d i s c u s s the form of r e p o r t s . Dec. 30, 1974. The Chairman o f the APC, i n a l e t t e r t o the S e n i o r P l a n n i n g A s s o c i a t e o f the GVRD, made these sug-g e s t i o n s : 140 "I b e l i e v e we agreed t h a t i t would be d e s i r a b l e t o attempt a minor r e - s t r u c t u r i n g of the d r a f t October 2 2 r e p o r t . . . In p a r t we have attempted to achieve t h i s by r e - w r i t i n g the l a s t page . . . I b e l i e v e t h a t w i t h the suggested modest adjustments, the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee as a whole can r e a d i l y accept t h i s r e p o r t without f u r t h e r time-consuming debate and p o t e n t i a l e x t e n s i o n o f both the Sub-Committee and the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee's i n -volvement" (Jones t o F a r r y ) . Jan. 6, 1975. In a l e t t e r from MOT to DOE, concept I was i d e n t i f i e d as the major p r o p o s a l . Jan. 9, 1975. The F o r e c a s t Report (APC, Jan. 1975) was t a b l e d a t the APC. Jan. 1975. MOT p u b l i s h e d an i n f o r m a t i o n pamphlet t i t l e d S o r r y About the Noise. A l s o , the Economic Study (APC, Feb. 1975c) was t a b l e d a t the APC. Feb 6, 1975. Both the E n g i n e e r i n g F e a s i b i l i t y Study (APC, Feb. 19 75 a) and the Ground T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Study (APC, Feb. 19 7.5 b) were t a b l e d a t the APC. Feb. 27, 1975. Controvery over the MOT i n f o r m a t i o n pam-p h l e t erupted. A motion was made a t the APC meeting s t a t i n g t h a t "the APC was not i n v o l v e d i n the p r e p a r a t i o n o f the MOT pamphlet Sorry About the Noise of January 19 75, and cannot take a p o s i t i o n on the statements i t c o n t a i n e d . " The Chairman s t a t e d t h a t he d i d not c o n s i d e r t h a t the pamphlet breached the T r i - L e v e l agreement of Nov. 14, 19 74. The pamphlet d i d not p r e j u d i c e the work o f the APC. MOT was not prepared t o stop d i s t r i b u t i o n . 141 A p r i l 17, 19 75. GvRD presented, the L i v a b l e Region P l a n (GyRD, .1975) t o the APC. May/ 1975. A S o c i a l Concerns Study (APC, May, 1975) ( i n s t e a d of a f u l l S o c i a l Impact Study) was t a b l e d a t the APC. The E c o l o g i c a l Report was a l s o d i s c u s s e d . I t s main recommenda-t i o n was f o r a moratorium on a l l major development on the F r a s e r E s t u a r y / D e l t a , s p e c i f i c a l l y i n c l u d i n g a i r p o r t expansion, pending the es t a b l i s h m e n t of a comprehensive E s t u a r y / D e l t a management and p r o t e c t i o n p o l i c y . May 6, 1975. I. Jones, i n a l e t t e r t o the Chairman of the E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee, made some h i g h l y c r i t i c a l s t a t e -ments about the E c o l o g i c a l Report, from the MOT p o i n t of view: "We cannot agree t h a t the a i r p o r t development i s s u e , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n context of Concept One of the"  M i n i s t r y ' s p r o p o s a l s , should become a secondary  Issue to t h a t of a F r a s e r E s t u a r y / D e l t a management  p o l i c y and a Moratorium on a l l p r o s p e c t i v e e s t u a r y  developments. We b e l i e v e t h a t the use o f the a i r -p o r t development i s s u e (Concept One) through d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e i n f l a t i o n and t r a n l a t i o n o f con- cerns as a means of a c h i e v i n g such a p o l i c y d i s c r e d i t s the Report which was to assess the impact o f a i r p o r t development . . . Those.. . I must express our i n t e n s e disappointment w i t h the Report. I do not b e l i e v e i t a p p r o p r i a t e l y conveys  the r e s p e c t e d i n p u t o f many of the Environment  Canada's t e c h n i c a l s t a f f who c o n t r i b u t e d much to the Report's intended purpose of a s s e s s i n g the impact o f a i r p o r t development and which i n my  view has been subverted. I b e l i e v e t h i s Report c o n t a i n s imputations which do not s u b s c r i b e to a f a i r assessment o f Concept One which i s the s t a t e d M i n i s t r y o f T r a n s p o r t development p r o p o s a l . " (emphasis i n o r i g i n a l ) A storm' erupted over t h i s l e t t e r , which l e d to the f o l l o w i n g s e r i e s o f events. 142 May 23, 19 75. A second l e t t e r was, t a b l e d , and the f i r s t one withdrawn at a meeting o f the E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee. For the most p a r t the second l e t t e r was the same. DOE and CF immediately prepared a r e b u t t a l of the p o i n t s made i n the MOT l e t t e r . May 24, 19 75. A t h i r d l e t t e r was sent superceding the f i r s t two, along w i t h a c o v e r i n g l e t t e r s t a t i n g " i t i s q u i t e c l e a r t h a t our l e t t e r of May 2 3 was i l l a d v i s e d , should not be c i r c u l a t e d , and I r e s p e c t f u l l y request t h a t i t be r e t u r n e d to me" (Jones to Romaine, May 24, 1975). May 27, 1975. At a s p e c i a l meeting of the E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee the request t o withdraw the l e t t e r of May 23, 1975 was r e j e c t e d . May 30, 19 75. The Chairman o f the APC, I. Jones, r e -signed and was r e p l a c e d by D. Hosgood, a l s o of MOT. June 1975. The Urban Issues Study (APC, June 1975 a) and the Noise Study (APC, June 19 75 b) were p u b l i s h e d . June 5, 1975. The Runway Demand/Capacity A n a l y s i s (APC, J u l y 1975 a) was reviewed by the APC. There was c r i -t i c i s m t h a t so c r u c i a l a r e p o r t should become a v a i l a b l e so l a t e i n the p r o c e s s . June 12, 1975., The E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee Report (APC, J u l y 19 75 b) was reviewed at the APC. 143 June, 2 7, 19 75. The A i r C a r r i e r s , commented, i n an APC meeting: 11 (We) b e l i e v e t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t o marry the two o p t i o n statements, so ab l y s e t f o r t h by the MOT and GVRD i n t o a s i n g l e document. We do not a n t i -c i p a t e t h a t anyone w i l l come forward to prepare a statement on the t h i r d o p t i o n - Do Not Proceed w i t h the second runway - s i n c e the work of the APC has proven t h a t o p t i o n to be i n v a l i d " ( M i n u t e s ) . J u l y 4, 1975. The Chairman sent a memorandum to the APC: "Proposals f o r the P r o c e s s i n g ( i e . review and approval) o f the APC F i n a l Report". "The s o l e o b j e c t i v e of the Review i s to ensure the r e p o r t i s complete, a c c u r a t e , f a i r and e q u i t a b l e and t h a t i t meets the g e n e r a l d i r e c t i o n s r e c e i v e d from the T r i - L e v e l S t a f f Committee. T h e r e f o r e , as no ' p o s i t i o n s ' are i n v o l v e d , acceptance s h a l l be by simple m a j o r i t y vote, each member agency having one vote. Amendments to the d r a f t s h a l l be made by motion, r e g u l a r l y moved and seconded by v o t i n g r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f the member agencies. Amendments s h a l l c a r r y by simple majority.' 1 J u l y 15, 1975. In a CF memorandum, " F i n a l Report of APC: Review and Approval Process and Timetable", the p o s i t i o n was s t a t e d t h a t d e c i s i o n s on procedure and/or content w i l l not be made by v o t i n g , but by d i s c u s s i o n and consensus, i n -c l u d i n g disagreement. A l s o , "A s i g n i f i c a n t p o r t i o n of the development of the s e c t i o n on Areas of Agreement and Issues . . . w i l l depend upon the completion of the s e c t i o n on D e c i s i o n Options. As t h i s i s a t o t a l l y new  s e c t i o n or area of i n f o r m a t i o n and commentary f o r the APC and i t s member agencies, and as t h i s s e c t i o n comprises both an attempt at problem i d -e n t i f i c a t i o n and p u b l i c i n f o r m a t i o n , i t i s not on l y new m a t e r i a l but a l s o p i v o t a l . " J u l y 17, 1975. A meeting o f the APC d e a l t w i t h c o n f u s i o n as to the development concepts under study. The w r i t t e n 144 concepts d e a l t w i t h an 11,000 f o o t runway, but i n the d e c i s i o n o p t i o n w r i t t e n by MOT was an amended concept d e a l i n g w i t h a 10,600 f o o t runway. The Chairman s t a t e d t h a t he had asked the Chairman of the E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee about the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the acreage change, and found t h a t i t was not s i g n i f i c a n t . An MOT r e p r e s e n t a t i v e gave an o r a l b r i e f i n g on the 10,600 f o o t runway, and was asked t o pr o v i d e w r i t t e n doc-umentation. The CF announced t h a t i t was d r a f t i n g the t h i r d d e c i s i o n o p t i o n - Do Not Proceed. GVRD supported CF' s c r i t i q u e (July 15) o f MOT's proposed review procedure (July 4). J u l y 18, 1975. An MOT memorandum t o the Chairman of the APC announced a r e v i s e d runway concept wholly w i t h i n the Sea I s l a n d dyke. "I have i n s t r u c t e d the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g P r o j e c t Team to r e v i s e i t s plans a c c o r d i n g l y and to proceed w i t h a p r e - d e s i g n and e n g i n e e r i n g p r o p o s a l f o r a runway w i t h i n the dyke. T h i s d e c i s i o n i n no way p r e j u d i c e s the f u t u r e e x t e n s i o n o f t h i s runway to f u l l redundancy capa-c i t y , should DOE s t u d i e s determine there w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t e c o l o g i c a l impact and should the demand f o r such a runway p e r s i s t " ( N e a l e s t o APC). J u l y 21 and 23, 1975. GVRD and CF r e a c t e d w i t h s u r p r i s e to the i n t r o d u c t i o n of what was, to them, y e t another develop-ment p r o p o s a l d i f f e r e n t from the one v e r b a l l y o u t l i n e d i n the meeting of J u l y 17. They c a l l e d f o r c l a r i f i c a t i o n o f how t h i s p r o p o s a l a f f e c t e d the APC process, and how the APC should respond. 145 J u l y 31, 1975. A f t e r lengthy d i s c u s s i o n a t an APC meeting, i t was decided t h a t the APC would not c o n s i d e r the 9250 f o o t runway p r o p o s a l i n t h e i r r e p o r t , but would c o n f i n e themselves to the p r e v i o u s 10,600 f o o t p r o p o s a l . The s h o r t e r runway p r o p o s a l was to be d e f e r r e d t o a second stage p r o c e s s , where i t would have t o be s p e c i f i c a l l y s t u d i e d . There was a l s o c o n s i d e r a b l e d i s c u s s i o n on what process might f o l l o w the APC F i n a l Report. T h i s "ongoing c o n s u l t a -t i v e p r o c e s s " had been mentioned i n numerous pre c e d i n g meet-i n g s , and confirmed i n the T r i - L e v e l meeting of Nov. 14, 1974. "The Chairman f e l t i t was l o n g agreed t h a t an on-going c o n s u l t a t i v e process was an e s s e n t i a l development and t h a t there i s going t o be a recommendation t o t h a t e f f e c t i n the f i n a l APC r e p o r t , but, t h a t the 'how and d e t a i l s ' were beyond the terms of r e f e r e n c e of the APC"(Minutes). Sept. 8, 1975. The e d i t o r of the r e p o r t , an o u t s i d e c o n s u l t a n t , r e q u e s t e d d i r e c t i o n from the APC i n a memorandum -"Notes on Two E d i t o r i a l Questions A r i s i n g from the Working Paper on Areas of Agreement and Issues". The second q u e s t i o n was "How can broader i s s u e s before the APC and APC member agencies' p o s i t i o n s on these i s s u e s be i d e n t i f i e d f o r i n c l u -s i o n i n the f i n a l r e p o r t ? " Nov. 13, 1975. Stormy d i s c u s s i o n took p l a c e a t an APC meeting over the Issues s e c t i o n o f the d r a f t r e p o r t . MOT and others were r e l u c t a n t to have i t as a separate s e c t i o n , and suggested e i t h e r combining i t w i t h the d e c i s i o n o p t i o n s o r w i t h agency comments. CF, DOE, and GVJRD f e l t t h a t i t was a major s h i f t i n proc e s s . CF l e f t the meeting h a l f way 146 through, suggesting t h a t they may have to 'go p u b l i c ' w i t h t h e i r concerns. Nov. 18, 1975. The S p e c i a l A d v i s o r y Panel to the Min-i s t e r of the Environment, advised t h a t the Issues s e c t i o n be r e i n t r o d u c e d , o r t h a t DOE withdraw from the APC. ( l e t t e r , Boyce to Sauve) Nov. 19, 1975. The GVRD asked the e d i t o r o f the r e p o r t to s i g n and r e t u r n a l e t t e r guaranteeing t h a t no changes w i l l be made to any m a t e r i a l without p r i o r GVRD ap p r o v a l , ( l e t t e r , Cooley t o Roberts) The l e t t e r was signed by the e d i t o r , and ret u r n e d to GVRD. Nov. 27, 1975. Serious antagonism erupted between the Chairman and CF a t an APC meeting over the CF l e t t e r of Nov. 14, 1975, which d i s c u s s e d the meeting of Nov. 13. The Chairman threatened l e g a l a c t i o n . T h i s t h r e a t was never acted upon. Jan. and Feb. 19 76. APC member agencies reviewed the f i n a l r e p o r t , and commented on the d e c i s i o n o p t i o n s . The Issues s e c t i o n remained i n the r e p o r t . Jan. 22, 1976. A DOE r e p r e s e n t a t i v e made these comments about an attempt by the Chairman t o speed up the review p r o c e s s : "Your request f o r agencies t o submit t h e i r f i n a l comments on the f i n a l APC r e p o r t , p r i o r to the r e c e i p t of or knowledge of when the second and f i n a l d r a f t of t h i s document w i l l be a v a i l a b l e f o r review, i s unacceptable . . . I t i s con-s i d e r e d extremely unwise f o r any agency t o 147 prepare, submit, and commit i t s e l f t o a p a r t i -c u l a r s e t of comments, i n the absence of the p r i o r o p p o r t u n i t y to adequately review the f i n a l document".-... (Romaine to Hosgood)-. The GVRD sent a s i m i l a r l e t t e r on the f o l l o w i n g day. Feb. 19, 1976. The f i n a l meeting of the APC took p l a c e . March 19 76. The E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee Report was p u b l i s h e d by DOE. A l s o , the F i n a l Report of the APC was p u b l i s h e d . March 12, 1976. The M i n i s t e r of T r a n s p o r t i n v i t e d comment on the APC F i n a l Report. " r e l a t i n g to the p r o p o s a l to c o n s t r u c t a runway t h a t extends onto the Sea I s l a n d f o r e s h o r e , but more p a r t i c u l a r l y because he views i t as a b e t t e r s o l u -t i o n , he would l i k e comments to c o n c e n t r a t e on a r e l a t i v e l y r e c e n t p r o p o s a l . . . f o r a s h o r t e r runway w i t h i n the Sea I s l a n d dyke" (Press Re-l e a s e No. 32/76). The CF responded i n d e t a i l to t h i s press r e l e a s e , . p a r t i -c u l a r l y t o the s e c t i o n qquoted above. "This i s a t r u l y e x t r a o r d i n a r y request. F i r s t of a l l , how does the M i n i s t e r come to the view t h a t i t i s a b e t t e r s o l u t i o n ? He c o u l d not have based t h i s on the APC s t u d i e s because those s t u d i e s do not c o n s i d e r i t " (CF n.d. March 12, 1976). The CF was a l s o very concerned t h a t p u b l i c h e a r i n g s were not to be h e l d , and a l l i n f o r m a t i o n and d i s c u s s i o n was to flow through MOT. March 24, 1976. MOT announced p l a n s to b u i l d a second a i r p o r t t e r m i n a l by 19 80. I t was not immediately c l e a r how t h i s announcement r e l a t e d t o the p o s s i b l e new runway as 148 discussed, by the APC. A p r i l 6, 1976. At a p u b l i c meeting sponsored by Vancouver C i t y , MOT announced t h a t they favoured the runway w i t h i n the dyke ( i . e . , approximately 9200 f e e t l o n g ) , and t h a t t h i s was being s t u d i e d through EARP. May 15, 19 76. CF met w i t h the M i n i s t e r of T r a n s p o r t i n Vancouver. He mentioned t h a t he might decide to go ahead w i t h p r e - l o a d i n g of the runway (meaning dredging and spreading f i l l ) b e fore a d e c i s i o n on the runway i t s e l f was made. Th i s would, at l i t t l e c o s t , save c o n s i d e r a b l e time i f a d e c i s i o n were e v e n t u a l l y made to go ahead. Aug. 12, 1976. In a p r e s s r e l e a s e the M i n i s t e r of T r a n s p o r t announced t h a t "a proposed new runway a t Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t w i l l be g i v e n f u r t h e r and d e l i b e r a t e con- 1 s i d e r a t i o n and w i l l not be s t a r t e d b e f o r e 1978 i n any case. . . . C o n s i d e r a t i o n ( w i l l be) of a s h o r t e r runway l o c a t e d w i t h i n the dyke" (Press Release No. 115/76). Nov. 1,,1976. The M i n i s t e r o f Environment, i n a l e t t e r t o the Chairman o f the CF, s t a t e d , "I b e l i e v e t h a t a comprehensive p o l i c y c o v e r i n g a l l development i n t h i s area makes sense i n terms of environmental p l a n n i n g but it.may be necessary to assess c u r r e n t i n d i v i d u a l d e v e l -opment p r o p o s a l s on t h e i r own m e r i t s u n t i l t h i s p o l i c y has been e s t a b l i s h e d " (LeBlanc to Watchorn). Nov. 2, 1976. An a l l - c a n d i c a t e s meeting i n Vancouver-C i t y was unanimously opposed to expansion at VIA. Nov. 5, 1976. An advertisement f o r tender c a l l i n g f o r the dredging of borrow s i t e no. 3 ( i n the North Arm of the F r a s e r ) was p u b l i s h e d i n the Vancouver P r o v i n c e . The even-t u a l use of the dredge s p o i l was not immediately c l e a r . Nov. 17, 1976. A new Noise Committee was e s t a b l i s h e d , w i t h r e p r e s e n t a t i o n from MOT, Vancouver, GVRD, and Richmond. A broader c o n s u l t a t i v e committee was being planned. Dec. 2, 1976. CF was i n c o r p o r a t e d under the S o c i e t i e s A c t of B.C. as a n o n - p r o f i t s o c i e t y . 150 APPENDIX 2 L i s t of Areas of Agreement and Issues i n APC F i n a l Report  A r i s i n g from APC S t u d i e s I t i s an i s s u e whether o r not the MOT A i r T r a f f i c A c t i v i t y F o r e c a s t s should be accepted f o r making d e c i s i o n s i n the immediate f u t u r e on the c o n s t r u c t i o n of the proposed p a r a l l e l runway at Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not an adequate i n v e s t i g a t i o n has been made of a l t e r n a t i v e s i t e s to VIA f o r a major a i r c a r r i e r a i r p o r t and, more s p e c i f i c a l l y , whether or not VIA i s the o n l y reasonable s i t e f o r such an a i r p o r t . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not an adequate i n v e s t i g a t i o n has been made of p o s s i b l e T r a f f i c A l l o c a t i o n Scenarios f o r the Vancouver A i r p o r t s System and, more s p e c i f i c a l l y , whether the c o n c l u s i o n s of the i n v e s t i g a t i o n on.the need f o r , and t i m i n g o f , a p a r a l l e l runway a t VIA are a c c e p t a b l e . I t i s an i s s u e whether o r not s u f f i c i e n t evidence has been presented to show t h a t the runway requirements of a i r t r a f -f i c a t VIA w i l l exceed p r e s e n t runway c a p a c i t y i n the p e r i o d 19 80-19 82 and t h a t t h e r e f o r e a d d i t i o n a l runway c a p a c i t y must be brought i n t o s e r v i c e d u r i n g t h i s same p e r i o d . I t i s agreed t h a t i n view o f the t e c h n i c a l nature of the en-g i n e e r i n g f e a s i b i l i t y study and i t s c l e a r l y s t a t e d l i m i t a t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o e c o l o g i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , the r e p o r t on the study i s a c c e p t a b l e to a l l APC members. I t i s agreed t h a t an a n a l y s i s of the e x i s t i n g ground t r a n s -p o r t a t i o n system on Sea I s l a n d has i d e n t i f i e d under v a r i o u s assumptions, some of which were adopted f o r study purposes, the p r a c t i c a l c a p a c i t y of VIA ground t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f a c i l i -t i e s and the years i n which those f a c i l i t i e s w i l l reach t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e c a p a c i t i e s . . . . I t i s a l s o agreed t h a t a l t e r -n a t i v e s t r a t e g i e s f o r p r o v i d i n g p o s s i b l e i n c r e a s e s i n ground t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c a p a c i t y to and on Sea I s l a n d are s u b j e c t s f o r f u r t h e r study. I t i s agreed t h a t the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the economic impact of VIA on the r e g i o n , w h i l e producing some i n f o r m a t i o n on the c o n t r i b u t i o n of the a i r p o r t to the l o c a l economy, i s i n -complete; and t h a t more study w i t h more comprehensive terms of r e f e r e n c e would be r e q u i r e d to o b t a i n an adequate view o f the a i r p o r t ' s e f f e c t s on the r e g i o n i n economic terms. I t i s agreed t h a t f u r t h e r steps to m i t i g a t e the n o i s e impact of a i r o p e r a t i o n s both at VIA and i n the r e g i o n g e n e r a l l y should be undertaken now. 151 I t i s a g r e e d t h a t an i n t e r - a g e n c y p r o c e s s s h o u l d be e s t a b -l i s h e d now t o t a k e a c t i o n on t h e m i t i g a t i o n o f a e r o n a u t i c a l n o i s e a t V I A and i n t h e r e g i o n g e n e r a l l y . I t i s a g r e e d t h a t m o n i t o r i n g a c t i o n on n o i s e m i t i g a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s must i n c l u d e means o f e f f e c t i v e r e g u l a t i o n and e n f o r c e m e n t . They s h o u l d a p p l y t o t h e p r o c e d u r e s u n d e r t h e c o n t r o l o f b o t h a e r o n a u t i c a l and community a u t h o r i t i e s . I t i s a g r e e d t h a t r e s p e c t i n g t h e p r o b l e m o f n o i s e a t n a t i o n -a l , p r o v i n c i a l , r e g i o n a l , and l o c a l l e v e l s , t h e r e i s a need t o i d e n t i f y and c l a r i f y j u r i s d i c t i o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and, i n t h e p r o c e s s o f d e v e l o p i n g p o l i c y and a c t i o n , p r o v i d e f o r t h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f a l l a f f e c t e d j u r i s d i c t i o n s . I t i s an i s s u e w h e t h e r o r n o t a e r o n a u t i c a l n o i s e i s a p r o b -lem now i n t h e G r e a t e r V a n c o u v e r R e g i o n . I t i s an i s s u e w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e n o i s e s t u d i e s c o n d u c t e d on b e h a l f o f t h e APC p r o v i d e an a d e q u a t e p i c t u r e o f t h e p r e s e n t and f u t u r e a e r o n a u t i c a l n o i s e e n v i r o n m e n t o f t h e G r e a t e r V a n c o u v e r r e g i o n . I t i s an i s s u e w h e t h e r o r n o t some o r a l l t h e p r o p o s e d a e r o n a u t i c a l n o i s e m i t i g a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s w i l l i m p r o v e t h e p r e s e n t and f u t u r e n o i s e e n v i r o n m e n t i n t h e G r e a t e r Van-c o u v e r r e g i o n and m a i n t a i n i t w i t h i n s o c i a l l y t o l e r a b l e u n i t s . I t i s an i s s u e w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e p r o p o s e d a e r o n a u t i c a l n o i s e m i t i g a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s h a ve been e x a m i n e d as t o f e a s i -b i l i t y , a c c e p t a b i l i t y a n d e n f o r c e a b i l i t y and w h e t h e r o r n o t upon e x a m i n a t i o n t h e y w i l l be f o u n d t o be s o . I t i s an i s s u e w h e t h e r o r n o t MOT has e i t h e r t h e l e g i s l a t e d a n d / o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c a p a c i t y t o i m p l e m e n t and e n f o r c e t h e p r o p o s e d a e r o n a u t i c a l n o i s e m i t i g a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s . I t i s an i s s u e w h e t h e r o r n o t s u c c e s s f u l s t e p s h a v e been t a k e n t o w a r d s m i t i g a t i o n o f a e r o n a u t i c a l n o i s e i n t h e G r e a t e r V a n c o u v e r r e g i o n . I t i s an i s s u e w h e t h e r o r n o t c o n s t r u c t i o n a n d use o f t h e p r o p o s e d p a r a l l e l now, t h e p h a s i n g o u t o f t h e c r o s s w i n d runway f o r j e t a i r c r a f t u s e and i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f some o f t h e recommended m i t i g a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s w i l l t o g e t h e r r e s u l t i n a r e d u c t i o n i n t h e number o f p e r s o n s l i k e l y t o be h i g h l y a nnoyed by a i r c r a f t n o i s e i n Richmond. I t i s an i s s u e w h e t h e r o r n o t n o t c o n s t r u c t i n g t h e p r o p o s e d p a r a l l e l runway w i l l w i t h i n c r e a s i n g a i r t r a f f i c , r e s u l t i n an i n c r e a s e d number o f p e r s o n s l i k e l y t o be h i g h l y annoyed by a i r c r a f t n o i s e i n Richmond. 152 I t i s an i s s u e whether o r not the crosswind runway w i l l be e l i m i n a t e d i f a p a r a l l e l runway i s c o n s t r u c t e d . I t i s an i s s u e whether o r not the i n t e r - a g e n c y p r o c e s s should p r o v i d e f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n by a l l i n t e r e s t s from the aeronau-t i c a l s e c t o r , the three l e v e l s of government and i n t e r e s t e d s e c t o r s of the p u b l i c . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not the establishment of an i n t e r -agency p r o c e s s , and formal agreement on n o i s e m i t i g a t i o n procedures must precede a d e c i s i o n on the c o n s t r u c t i o n of the proposed p a r a l l e l runway. I t i s agreed t h a t the F r a s e r E s t u a r y / D e l t a i s a n a t i o n a l l y unique e c o l o g i c a l l y s e n s i t i v e a r e a which supports v a l u a b l e commercial and r e c r e a t i o n a l f i s h e r i e s r e s o u r c e s , the l a r g e s t w i n t e r i n g p o p u l a t i o n of waterfowl i n Canada and a host of resource o r i e n t e d and marine uses. I t i s f u r t h e r agreed t h a t there i s a t p r e s e n t no comprehensive p o l i c y f o r the r a t i o n a l p r o t e c t i o n and use of the F r a s e r R i v e r E s t u a r y / D e l t a and t h a t such a p o l i c y i s needed. I t i s agreed t h a t no one appears a t p r e s e n t to be completely c e r t a i n as to the a c t u a l degree o f danger t o the v i a b i l i t y of the F r a s e r E s t u a r y / D e l t a i n h e r e n t I n any f u r t h e r develop-ment p r o p o s a l s . I t i s an i s s u e whether o r not t o proceed w i t h the expansion of the a i r p o r t as p r e s e n t l y proposed i n view of the f i n d i n g s and recommendations of the Summary Report of the E c o l o g i c a l Sub-Committee of the APC. I t i s an i s s u e whether or not there should be a moratorium on f u r t h e r major developments i n the F r a s e r E s t u a r y / D e l t a f o r a d e f i n e d p e r i o d d u r i n g which an o v e r a l l p o l i c y f o r management and p r o t e c t i o n of the area w i l l be prepared. I t i s an i s s u e whether or not any moratorium on f u r t h e r major developments i n the F r a s e r E s t u a r y / D e l t a should apply to the proposed expansion at VIA. I t i s an i s s u e whether or not a c o n f l i c t e x i s t s between the MOT p r o p o s a l s to p r o v i d e f a c i l i t i e s f o r our s e r v i c e s i n a n t i c i p a t i o n of p r o j e c t e d growth i n demand, and the GVRD o b j e c t i v e of managing a l l aspects of growth i n the r e g i o n . I t i s agreed t h a t i n c r e a s e d a i r t r a f f i c a t VIA w i l l r e s u l t i n i n c r e a s e d ground t r a f f i c and without a s i g n i f i c a n t swing to p u b l i c t r a n s i t t h i s e x t r a volume w i l l r e s u l t i n i n c r e a s e d v e h i c u l a r c o n g e s t i o n i n the r e g i o n a l ground t r a n s p o r t a t i o n network. I t i s an i s s u e whether or not a e r o n a u t i c a l n o i s e i n the . Greater Vancouver Region has a major impact on l a n d use p l a n n i n g . 1 5 3 I t i s an i s s u e whether or not the d e f i n i t i o n of Noise Impact Zones w i l l have a p o s i t i v e impact on land use p l a n n i n g around VIA and whether the p o s i t i v e impacts of such zones w i l l out-weigh the d i f f i c u l t i e s t h a t may a r i s e w i t h r e s p e c t to both land use and other aspects of urban l i v i n g . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not expansion of VIA w i l l c o n f l i c t w i t h p o l i c i e s r e l a t i n g t o land use on or adjacent to Sea I s l a n d . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not p u b l i c access to the dykes and shores of Sea I s l a n d has high p r i o r i t y and should be preserved and i f p o s s i b l e extended. I t i s an i s s u e whether or not p u b l i c access to the dykes and shores o f Sea I s l a n d should have equal c l a i m with a i r p o r t use o r should take precedence over a i r p o r t use. I t i s an i s s u e whether or not a p o r t i o n of the n o r t h s i d e of Sea I s l a n d should be preserved as a park f o r p u b l i c use to i n s u r e t h a t i t i s compatible with the l a n d being s e t aside f o r park use on the o p p o s i t e shore of the F r a s e r River i n Vancouver. I t i s agreed t h a t although a S o c i a l Impact Study of the proposed expansion o f VIA on the Greater Vancouver Region was p r o v i d e d f o r i n the APC Study Design, i t was i n f a c t not c a r r i e d out. I t i s an i s s u e whether or not a S o c i a l Impact Study c o u l d have been c a r r i e d out. Broader Areas of Agreement and Issues I t i s an i s s u e whether o r not expansion of the a i r t r a v e l i n d u s t r y r e p r e s e n t s an a p p r o p r i a t e a l l o c a t i o n of energy and f u e l p r i o r i t i e s i n c l u d i n g r e l a t e d economic c o s t s . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not expansion of VIA r e p r e s e n t s t h a t waste of resources and f a c i l i t i e s now being r e c o g n i z e d as c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a 'consumer' s o c i e t y as c o n t r a s t e d to a 'conserver' s o c i e t y . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not, when c o n s i d e r i n g a development such as the proposed expansion of VIA, i t i s necessary to p r o v i d e f o r : i ) A statement of u n d e r l y i n g p o l i c i e s t h a t de-termine development o b j e c t i v e s ; i i ) An examination of these p o l i c i e s i n terms of t h e i r contemporary relevance and t h e i r a p p l i c a t i o n to the s p e c i f i c development under study; i i i ) An examination of a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s p r e s e n t or f u t u r e . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p o l i c i e s and p r a c t i c e s f o l l o w growth p a t t e r n s o r whether they c r e a t e and promote growth. 154 I t i s an i s s u e whether or not the development of a i r s e r v i c e s and t h e i r s u p p o r t i n g f a c i l i t i e s i s to take precedence over the competing requirements of other F e d e r a l departments, ot h e r l e v e l s o f government and community i n t e r e s t s . I t i s an i s s u e whether o r not the demand f o r a i r s e r v i c e s s hould be s a t i s f i e d no matter how generated, o r whether some reasonable l e v e l of s e r v i c e should be s e t to balance the needs of the users o f a i r s e r v i c e s w i t h those of non-users. I t i s an i s s u e whether or not the proposed investment i n the expansion o f VIA and other a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n the Lower Main-l a n d i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h p u b l i c p r i o r i t i e s both r e g i o n a l l y and n a t i o n a l l y . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not there are l i m i t s to the volume of a i r t r a f f i c t h a t the Greater Vancouver Region can advan-tageously absorb gi v e n the c o n s t r a i n t s imposed by l o c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not the c a p a c i t y o f e x i s t i n g a i r -p o r t f a c i l i t i e s can be i n c r e a s e d by the adoption of d i f f e r e n t t e c h n o l o g i e s , procedures, and p o l i c i e s , as an a l t e r n a t i v e t o immediate expansion o f , or a d d i t i o n t o , the f a c i l i t i e s a t VIA. I t i s an i s s u e whether or not g e n e r a l a v i a t i o n should be phased out of Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t In the next few y e a r s . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not c o n s t r u c t i o n of a p a r a l l e l runway a t VIA should begin i n advance of demonstrated need i n face of p r e s e n t u n c e r t a i n t i e s as to whether the f o r e c a s t demand f o r our s e r v i c e s w i l l m a t e r i a l i z e i n the p r o j e c t e d time frame and the l i k e l i h o o d t h a t such expansion once i n i t i a t e d , may be i r r e v e r s i b l e . I t i s an i s s u e whether o r not the proposed p a r a l l e l runway would have major adverse urban and environmental consequences. I t i s an i s s u e whether or not the d e c i s i o n on the proposed p a r a l l e l runway should await development of p o l i c i e s concern-i n g the environment, t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , urban growth management, and o t h e r matters i d e n t i f i e d d u r i n g the work o f the APC. I t i s an i s s u e whether o r not there i s a need to make an e a r l y d e c i s i o n on the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a p a r a l l e l runway at VIA to remove u n c e r t a i n t i e s i n p l a n n i n g f o r MOT, the Township of Richmond and the a i r i n d u s t r y . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not a case has been made and can be made at t h i s time f o r the expansion of VIA. I t i s an i s s u e whether o r not the APC's terms of r e f e r e n c e p r ovide f o r the examination of e x i s t i n g p o l i c i e s of govern-155 merits and t h e i r departments, and f o r the c o n s i d e r a t i o n of a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s and the e x p l o r a t i o n o f such a l t e r n a -t i v e s . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not there were s e r i o u s d e f i c i e n c i e s and abrogations of agreed-upon procedures i n the APC process which pose q u e s t i o n s as to the v a l i d i t y and u s e f u l n e s s of the work of the APC, i t s sub-committees and study r e p o r t s . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not the abandonment of both the development and a p p l i c a t i o n of an e v a l u a t i o n methodology, which was p r o v i d e d f o r i n the APC study design, c o n s t i t u t e s a s e r i o u s d e f i c i e n c y i n the work of the APC and i t s sub-committees . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not there was adequate p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f , and c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h , a l l j u r i s d i c t i o n s a f f e c t e d by the proposed expansion of VIA d u r i n g the APC study p r o c e s s . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not the p r o p o s a l s f o r a i r p o r t expan-s i o n were s p e c i f i e d i n s u f f i c i e n t d e t a i l and made a v a i l a b l e i n a c o n s i s t e n t and t i m e l y manner to the APC study p r o c e s s . I t i s an i s s u e whether or not a r e a l i s t i c estimate o f up-to-date development c o s t s of a i r p o r t expansion and the c o s t s of noi s e m i t i g a t i o n are r e q u i r e d f o r p l a n n i n g , d e c i s i o n making and p u b l i c understanding. I t i s an i s s u e whether or not there has been any e v a l u a t i o n of s o c i a l c o s t s occasioned by the proposed expansion of VIA and i t s d i r e c t and i n d i r e c t consequences. I t i s an i s s u e whether or not the i n f o r m a t i o n gathered i n the course of the work of the APC i s s u f f i c i e n t l y complete i n c r i t i c a l areas as a b a s i s f o r a d e c i s i o n on the proposed expansion of VIA. I t i s agreed t h a t when the APC's work i s completed and the committee i s disbanded there s h a l l be some form of ongoing c o n s u l t a t i v e process on a i r p o r t o p e r a t i o n s and development i n v o l v i n g both a i r p o r t and community i n t e r e s t s . I t i s agreed t h a t the APC has examined a number of a i r p o r t expansion concepts put forward by the MOT and t h a t the only concept to be addressed i n the d e c i s i o n o p t i o n statements i n the f i n a l APC r e p o r t s h a l l be M o d i f i e d Concept I with a runway l e n g t h o f 10,600 f e e t . I t i s agreed t h a t the APC has not c o n s i d e r e d and agreed not to c o n s i d e r the p r o p o s a l f o r a p a r a l l e l runway of l e n g t h 9,250 f e e t put forward by MOT on J u l y 18th, 1975 and the APC recommends t h a t t h i s and any o t h e r runway concept pro-posed . . . should be s u b j e c t to study by the ongoing c o n s u l t a t i v e process and to the requirements of the E n v i r o n -mental Assessment and Review Process. 156 APPENDIX 3 A Proposal f o r P u b l i c Involvement i n the Work of the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee J u l y 5, 1973. DRAFT PROPOSAL - A PROGRAM FOR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN THE WORK OF THE AIRPORT PLANNING COMMITTEE BACKGROUND At the f i r s t T r i - L e v e l Committee meeting held f o r the Greater Vancouver Region (which took p l a c e on March 31, 1973), i t was suggested by the Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t and agreed by. the F e d e r a l M i n i s t e r s i n v o l v e d t h a t a c o n s u l t a t i v e process should be e s t a b l i s h e d to review the planning f o r the proposed expansion o f the Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t . P r i o r to that time, the p l a n n i n g f o r the a i r p o r t had been c a r r i e d on with l i t t l e r e l a t i o n to the pl a n n i n g f o r the Region as a whole or to the concerns, of the a f f e c t e d p u b l i c . As a consequence, when the F e d e r a l government began e x p r o p r i a t i o n proceedings on Sea I s l a n d , t h e r e was a gre a t d e a l of misunderstanding, anger and c o n f l i c t . Thus, the c o n s u l t a t i v e process was suggested and agreed to as a way to all o w the v a r i o u s i n v o l v e d agencies of the th r e e l e v e l s o f government and the concerned p u b l i c to t r y to s o r t out on a c o - o p e r a t i v e , r a t h e r than a c o n f r o n t a t i o n , b a s i s the many competing i n t e r e s t s and consequences of a l t e r n a t i v e p r o p o s a l s f o r the f u t u r e o p e r a t i o n s of the Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t . A f u r t h e r meeting was hel d on A p r i l 16, 1973 by s t a f f r e p -r e s e n t a t i v e s o f the t h r e e l e v e l s of government to work out the d e t a i l s o f a c o n s u l t a t i v e process and r e p o r t back to t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e governments f o r a p p r o v a l . It was agreed at th a t meeting, and subsequently accepted by a l l p a r t i e s , t h a t an A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee would be e s t a b l i s h e d with r e p r e s e n t a t i o n from a l l a f f e c t e d p a r t i e s , and th a t the GVRD would undertake to recommend methods f o r de v e l o p i n g d i r e c t involvement of c i t i z e n s i n the p l a n n i n g process o f th a t Committee. I t i s as a r e s u l t of t h a t commitment t h a t the p r o p o s a l s contained below are presented f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n . OBJECTIVES - The p r e s e n t and f u t u r e o p e r a t i o n s of the Vancouver I n t e r n a t i o n a l A i r p o r t touch on the l i v e s of many people, i n t h e i r d a i l y l i v i n g p a t t e r n s , t h e i r means of l i v e l i h o o d , and t h e i r r e c r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s . Thus r e s i d e n t s of the Greater Vancouver Region have many d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of i n t e r e s t and concern over the p r o p o s a l s f o r the a i r p o r t . It i s the i n t e n t here to t r y to develop a program which can accomodate as many of these l e v e l s of i n t e r e s t and concern as p o s s i b l e . Thus the proposals below are an attempt t o s a t i s f y f o u r major o b j e c t i v e s . 158 1 . To allow any in teres ted res ident of the Region to fo l low the work of the A i rpor t Planning Committee from beginning to end and stay abreast o f the general progress o f the studies being undertaken. 2. To permit i nd i v i dua l s and groups who have strong views on p a r t i c u l a r aspects o f the a i rpor t development or i t s consequences to present t h e i r views to the Committee while the planning process i s underway. 3. To allow d i r ec t p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the work of the Committee and i t s sub-committees for representat ives of those groups which have both a strong continuing i n te re s t in the future of the a i rpo r t and the time ava i l ab le to devote to the process 4. To permit as broad-based and f u l l pa r t i c i pa t i on as poss ib le without s i g n i f i c a n t l y extending the time required to complete the planning for the future of the Vancouver Internat ional A i rpo r t . It i s important to see these object ives and the recommendations which fo l low in the context of the h i s tory of the development of the A i rpor t Planning Committee. The Committee was created as a r e s u l t of confrontat ion and c o n f l i c t which have l e f t a good deal of re s idua l susp ic ion. There are many res idents of the Region who are not e n t i r e l y convinced of the accep tab i l i t y of the motivations and methodologies being followed in the a i rpor t planning exerc i se . And in a cl imate o f - susp ic ion quite innocent act ions or overs ights can be quick ly misconstrued 9 as attempts to hide information or make decis ions in secret . Thus, i t i s extremely important that the Committee allow the publ ic to fo l low i t s de l ibera t ions c l o se l y i f these ex i s t ing suspic ions are to be d i spe l l ed and future ones avoided. RECOMMENDED PROGRAM The f i v e - p o i n t program out l ined below i s recommended with the expectat ion that i t w i l l allow the gradual d i s s i pa t i on of the suspic ions about the a i rpor t planning program and the growth of a t r u l y co-operat ive planning process. 1 . C i t i z e n representat ion should be added to the A i rport Planning Committee in the form of Region res idents who w i l l s i t as working members of the Committee. It i s recommended that c i t i z e n s s i t , not as observers, but as working members who w i l l accept the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to f u l l y fo l low the complicated planning process and to accept the working conventions of the Committee, which may inc lude the need for c o n f i d e n t i a l treatment of mater i a l . 2. C i t i z e n representat ion should also be added to the sub-committees on the same basis - that i s as f u l l working members with the same commitments of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and time. 159 3. The A i r p o r t Planning Committee schedule time i n r e g u l a r meetings or hold s p e c i a l meetings to hear from s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t groups, i f the s i t t i n g c i t i z e n s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s do not f e e l t h a t they can adequately speak f o r the s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t i n q u e s t i o n . 4. The A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee arrange f o r p e r i o d i c b r i e f i n g s by i t s members to r e p o r t progress to p u b l i c meetings c a l l e d i n the Region. . 5. The A i r p o r t Planning Committee produce a r e g u l a r n e w s l e t t e r r e p o r t i n g on i t s a c t i v i t i e s . The n e w s l e t t e r should be a t e c h n i c a l , e d u c a t i o n a l document which can keep people abreast of the progress o f the Committee and which can begin to l a y the ground work f o r people's understanding of the d i f f i c u l t c h o i c e s which may have to be made between competing i n t e r e s t s i n the f i n a l d e c i s i o n s as to the d i s p o s i t i o n o f the a i r i n d u s t r y i n the Vancouver Region. I t i s suggested t h a t only a n e w s l e t t e r be produced and t h a t the Committee not undertake to make press r e l e a s e s o f any k i n d . The n e w s l e t t e r c o u l d o f course be picked up by the pre s s i f they c o n s i d e r e d i t newsworthy. However, the n e w s l e t t e r should s t r i v e t o be e d u c a t i o n a l i n a s u b s t a n t i v e sense, r a t h e r than seek to be "newsworthy" i n a r e p o r t e r ' s terms. METHODOLOGY To Obt a i n C i t i z e n R e p r e s e n t a t i o n I t i s suggested t h a t a C i t i z e n s ' Forum on Vancouver A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g be formed t o a c t as the c e n t r a l c l e a r i n g house and organiza-t i o n a l f o c u s f o r the i n t e r e s t e d c i t i z e n s groups. An i n i t i a l round o f i n v i t a t i o n s would be i s s u e d to groups to send r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s to s i t on t h a t Committee. I n v i t a t i o n s would be i s s u e d to — (a) R e s i d e n t Groups. For example, r a t e p a y e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s , ad hoc a s s o c i a t i o n s which have a l r e a d y grown up around the a i r p o r t plans i n Richmond and Vancouver, and groups i n oth e r p a r t s o f the Region as they become i n -t e r e s t e d or f e e l themselves d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d by the a i r p o r t p l a n s . (b) (c) B u s i n e s s and Commercial Groups. For example, Chambers of Commerce, Boards of Trade, Commercial f i s h e r y a s s o c i a t i o n s , e t c . S p e c i a l Purpose Groups. For example, r e c r e a t i o n a s s o c i a t i o n s , c o n s e r v a t i o n groups, c i v i l a v i a t i o n groups, e t c . 160 The C i t i z e n s * Forum, once formed, would then t a k e t h e r e s p o n s i -b i l i t y o f s e l e c t i n g a s m a l l number of i n d i v i d u a l s t o r e p r e s e n t i t on t h e A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee. I t would be c l e a r l y u n d e r s t o o d t h a t t h o s e i n d i v i d u a l s r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e C i t i z e n s ' Forum must be w i l l i n g t o d e v o t e the time t o a t t e n d Committee m e e t i n g s , t o f o l l o w f u l l y t h e work o f t h e Committee and t o a c t as r e s p o n s i b l e members o f t h e Committee, a c c e p t i n g t h e p o s s i b l e need f o r c o n f i d e n t i a l t r e a t m e n t o f some m a t e r i a l . I t i s suggested t h a t a minimum of t h r e e c i t i z e n members be s e l e c t e d by t h e C i t i z e n s ' Forum. The C i t i z e n s ' Forum would a l s o u n d e r t a k e to f i n d i n d i v i d u a l s t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n the work of the subcommittees i f i t was t h o u g h t d e s i r a b l e or n e c e s s a r y . A subcommittee of o b v i o u s i n t e r e s t i s the one d e a l i n g w i t h n o i s e , t h e p r e s e n t members o f which have a l r e a d y recommended t h a t a c i t i z e n member be added. However, n e i t h e r the C i t i z e n s ' Forum nor t h e A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee may f e e l t h a t c i t i z e n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s are r e q u i r e d on a l l subcommittees. I t i s recommended t h a t a l l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e C i t i z e n s ' Forum who a t t e n d A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee and subcommittee meetings be p a i d an honorarium i n o r d e r t h a t p a r t i c i p a t i o n not be l i m i t e d o n l y t o t h o s e who can a f f o r d t o a t t e n d what a r e l i k e l y t o be p r e -d o m i n a n t l y daytime m e e t i n g s . GVRD would t a k e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r s uch payment. The C i t i z e n s ' Forum i s e n v i s i o n e d as a group w i t h an e l a s t i c membership. No i n i t i a l canvass w i l l , p i c k up a l l groups who a r e i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e a i r p o r t and i t s development. T h e r e f o r e , i t i s e x p e c t e d t h a t as the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee b e g i n s i t s work, as n e w s l e t t e r s are d i s t r i b u t e d , and as word g e n e r a l l y g e t s around as t o t h e o p e r a t i o n s o f t h e Committee, more groups w i l l become i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The C i t i z e n s ' Forum would then a b s o r b new members and b r i n g them up t o date on the p r o c e s s . I t would thus a l l o w an expanding base of i n f o r m e d c i t i z e n r y w h i l e s t i l l m a i n t a i n i n g a s m a l l , s t a b l e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n on the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee and i t s subcommittees. GVRD s t a f f a r e w i l l i n g t o u n d e r t a k e the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f i n i t i a t i n g t h e C i t i z e n s ' Forum i n c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h o t h e r members o f t h e A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee, and t o work c l o s e l y w i t h i t t h r o u g h o u t t h e A i r p o r t p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . I n f o r m a l d i s c u s s i o n s have been h e l d w i t h s e v e r a l i n t e r e s t e d groups t o d a t e , and t h e i d e a s c o n t a i n e d i n t h i s p r o p o s a l are g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t a b l e t o them. To 5chedule S p e c i a l H e a r i n g s or P u b l i c Meetings I f t h e C i t i z e n s ' Forum a c t s as t h e c e n t r a l c l e a r i n g hoese and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l f o c u s f o r c i t i z e n s , b u s i n e s s and s p e c i a l purpose o r g a n i z a t i o n s , then i t can a d v i s e the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee as t o t h e need f o r and t i m i n g o f s p e c i a l h e a r i n g s and p u b l i c m e e t ings. The A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee through i t s c i t i z e n members, and o t h e r members as needed, would keep the C i t i z e n s ' Forum f u l l y b r i e f e d on 161 i t s a c t i v i t i e s . T h e n , i f s p e c i a l purpose i n t e r e s t s wanted to be h e a r d , t h e y and t h e C i t i z e n s ' Forum r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s would work out whether t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s c o u l d speak f o r them or submit a b r i e f on t h e i r b e h a l f , o r whether the group s h o u l d be heard d i r e c t l y . I f t h e l a t t e r c o u r s e of a c t i o n were chosen, then the C i t i z e n s ' Forum r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s and t h e A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee Chairman c o u l d s e l e c t a date f o r t h e group o r g r o u p ( s ) t o be heard. S i m i l a r l y , t h e C i t i z e n s ' Forum r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s would a d v i s e the r e s t o f t h e A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee when they thought a b r i e f i n g was n e c e s s a r y f o r a p a r t i c u l a r group i n the Regio n , o r whether g e n e r a l p u b l i c meetings s h o u l d be c a l l e d t o r e p o r t p r o g r e s s . To Produce a R e g u l a r N e w s l e t t e r I t i s s u g g e s t e d t h a t the A i r p o r t P l a n n i n g Committee c o n s t i t u t e a subcommittee which would s u p e r v i s e the p r o d u c t i o n o f the n e w s l e t t e r and approve the' copy f o r each b e f o r e i t was p r i n t e d add r e l e a s e d . The GVRD w i l l v o l u n t e e r i t s r e s o u r c e s t o produce d r a f t copy f o r a p p r o v a l by t h e subcommittee f o r t h e f i r s t few i s s u e s , on t h e under-s t a n d i n g t h a t t h e arrangement w i l l be r e v i e w e d i n the F a l l ( o r e a r l i e r i f any member o f t h e Committee so w i s h e s ) . The i n i t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e n e w s l e t t e r can be t o a l l o r g a n i z a -t i o n s r e p r e s e n t e d on t h e C i t i z e n s ' ^orum and t o any o t h e r p a r t i e s members o f t h e Committee t h i n k are a p p r o p r i a t e . The GVRD would l i k e t o d i s t r i b u t e i t t o the i n d i v i d u a l s and i n s t i t u t i o n s ( i n c l u d i n g t h e media) on i t s m a i l i n g l i s t , which number a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3,000. Other members may have s i m i l a r l i s t s they would l i k e t o m a i l t o . NC/pm 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094051/manifest

Comment

Related Items