Serving Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody, Anmore and Belcarra since 1984
FRESH
WEDNESDAY
December 1, 2010
It ’s easy to give
25
Add a Coupon to your cart
and help support your local food bank the whole year through.
It ’s 0 2 $ 0 1 5 $ $
The Terry Fox Ravens are one win away from their second B.C. football title in three years.
easy
FRESH
FRE SH
FRES H
bank in
your area
for
pon Add a Cou cart! to your
.
Food For Give this coup on Fami lies er and to the cashi sure $20 we’ll make the food gets to area. bank in your
Your source for local news, sports, weather and entertainment. www.thenownews.com
Traffic concerns in Port Moody Jennifer McFee jmcfee@thenownews.com
Traffic could soon crawl at an even slower pace for commuters inching through the streets of Port Moody. At a town hall meeting Monday night, residents and councillors discussed what to do now that the long-awaited Murray-Clarke Connector has disappeared from TransLink’s priority list. One option is to close the gates to regional traffic and favour local drivers instead. City manager Gaetan Royer said the municipality could restore priority to local traffic by reducing inbound capacity on roads like Guildford Way. Another method would be to stop synchronizing traffic lights along St. Johns Street. “Many of our businesses would benefit from traffic moving more slowly and from people having the ability to turn left and enter their business. We could allow more driveways and more parking on St. Johns and Clarke, which we currently restrict,” Royer said. “Obviously there would be downsides to this option as well. Commuters who live east of us would certainly complain about this. Measures that slow traffic that’s travelling through would also impact Port Moody residents who are travelling … so we would impact ourselves.” However, Moody Centre resident Judith Roche said shutting down Port Moody “has a nice ring to it.” “Maybe we’d get everyone’s attention, including the province,” she said. “I’d say if you want to commute through Port Moody, it’s going to be CONT. ON PAGE 4, see ‘THIS.’
Gabrielle Beer/NOW
Dennis Lei shows his opposition with a sign as he speaks to Coquitlam council at a public hearing Monday about a proposed homeless shelter.
Coquitlam OKs homeless shelter
height of the building and the prospect of diminished property values. jkurucz@thenownews.com Many wanted the facility to be located on the Riverview Hospital grounds, though that idea was quashed due to the site’s location, age and many Six hours of presentations, more than 60 speakers building code problems. and an evening’s worth of heated exchanges precedHomelessness advocates and service providers ed Coquitlam council voting in favour of rezoning spoke in favour of the planned facility, as land for a controversial homeless shelter did former homeless people, high school in the eastern part of the city. students and area residents. Monday’s vote came after what In the end, Coun. Lou Sekora was was the longest public hearing in the lone councillor to vote against the city since 2007, as 63 people the proposal, which began discusfrom all walks of life weighed sion at 7 p.m. with a public hearing in on whether or not to allow a Visit www.thenownews.com for a gallery portion and ended just shy of 1 a.m. permanent shelter at 3030 Gordon of photos from Monday’s public hearing. with the final vote. About 300 people Ave. that would have the capacity to were in attendance. house up to 90 people per night. “I don’t know that I heard from a single The vast majority of those opposing the person who was against the construction of homeproposal live or work within the immediate vicinity of the site, and their concerns ranged from increased less shelters — it was all about location and there’s no question that people living near it would have crime and drug use to the proposed four-storey
John Kurucz
Photos
NOW
Your child’s report card is telling you it’s time to call Sylvan. Coquitlam 604.941.9166
www.sylvanbc.ca
a stronger opinion about location,” Mayor Richard Stewart said Tuesday. “We can attach, perhaps, more significance to the concerns of a resident nearby, but we can’t give anyone a veto. So we’re still left with having to balance the needs of the community with the concerns of local residents.” Though emotions were raw Monday, the atmosphere of the public hearing was nowhere near as hostile as when the issue first surfaced at the Nov. 1 council meeting. At that time, residents living near the affected site hurled obscenities and uttered threats at council. That wasn’t the case Monday, and Stewart began the meeting with a preamble warning those in attendance not to resort to that kind of behaviour, while reminding residents that members of the RCMP would enforce the rules of conduct surrounding the meeting.
CONTINUED ON PAGE 3, see ‘WHAT ABOUT ME?’