Millennium Line - Evergreen Extension | Completed

[geoff's two cents]

Fair enough - I checked my bill and you're right about the groceries.

On the other hand, my larger point was that there is such a thing as incentive-based taxation and monetary policy. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not denying that.
Do you remember the controversy over the HST obliterating the incentive-based PST exemption on things like bicycles? In fact, to erase any confusion or any possibility of straw-man dismissals of my entire point of view on such dubious grounds, I edited my above post accordingly. Thanks for pointing out the error.

This in turn makes my suggestion credible as one possible alternative to the "let's just keep doing what we're doing and hope billions of dollars for Evergreen, UBC and Surrey Skytrain extensions will magically fall into our laps" line of argument.

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by geoff's two cents

Fair enough - I checked my bill and you're right about the groceries.

On the other hand, my larger point was that there is such a thing as incentive-based taxation and monetary policy. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not denying that.
Do you remember the controversy over the HST obliterating the incentive-based PST exemption on things like bicycles? In fact, to erase any confusion or any possibility of straw-man dismissals of my entire point of view on such dubious grounds, I edited my above post accordingly. Thanks for pointing out the error.

Why are bringing up the HST in this arguement? your proposal for tolling and incentive-based taxation aims for different public benefits than a VAT-style HST.

Your HST example cuts both ways. Don't forget the 'uproar' when people found out the HST applied to the new pay-parking tax from translink. The anti-tax neocons at the georgia straight railed against it...

But this is fairly trivial in comparison to a 35-percent parking tax across the region in 2010 as a result of the HST and a previous hike in taxes, which took effect on January 1.

This was the claim in a Metro Vancouver staff report that went to directors at the June 25 board meeting.

"In December 2009, the Province increased the social services tax from 7% to 21% as it applies to parking in the south coast region of the province, taking effect January 1, 2010," the report states. "This increase combined with implementation of the HST on July 1st, means that taxes on parking will be 35%."

http://www.straight.com/article-331237/v...e-35-percent-year-across-metro-vancouver

The HST has a negative effect on buying bicycles (that's bad!) and a negative effect on people aiming to use pay parking lots (that's good!).

But as public policy, it really wasn't designed to do that at all.

If you want more incentives for less driving and more non-driving alternatives, get specific legistlation, argue on its merits and mitigate any draw backs.

But you are really losing me with you trying to allude to the negative aspects to the HST. I even agree with most of your points, but you bringing up a totaly different issue dilutes what you are trying to say and again makes me question your analysis, again.

[geoff's two cents]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

Why are bringing up the HST in this arguement? your proposal for tolling and incentive-based taxation aims for different public benefits than a VAT-style HST.

Your HST example cuts both ways. Don't forget the 'uproar' when people found out the HST applied to the new pay-parking tax from translink. The anti-tax neocons at the georgia straight railed against it...



http://www.straight.com/article-331237/v...e-35-percent-year-across-metro-vancouver

The HST has a negative effect on buying bicycles (that's bad!) and a negative effect on people aiming to use pay parking lots (that's good!).

But as public policy, it really wasn't designed to do that at all.

If you want more incentives for less driving and more non-driving alternatives, get specific legistlation, argue on its merits and mitigate any draw backs.

But you are really losing me with you trying to allude to the negative aspects to the HST. I even agree with most of your points, but you bringing up a totaly different issue dilutes what you are trying to say and again makes me question your analysis, again.

If you agree with most of my points, that's great! I was merely arguing by analogy with other incentive-based taxation policies. PST exemption was a well-known one; there are (very) obviously others. The reason I brought up the whole issue of incentive-based monetary policy is to point out that it operates in other aspects of our economy, that the precedent has largely been set in principle for extending it more broadly to the way we choose to get from A to B, and that this could be used to help create additional revenue streams for capital-intensive infrastructure projects like the Evergreen Line.

I suggested this merely as one option among many, and am personally surprised it isn't getting more attention, given the precedents for tolling already in place worldwide, and given all of the press the Evergreen funding debacle has generated thus far. I speculated that this lack of official attention has everything to do with the sharp right-left divide in mainstream BC politics, and that the issue of tolling, which (like driving itself, as BCPhil points out) cuts across traditional political loyalties, is inconvenient for parties wanting to shore up their constituencies on opposite ends of the political spectrum.

If my analogy with taxation is too convoluted for you, the following links spell out most of the costs and benefits that would have to be addressed in any question of highway or bridge tolling. The first is a good read; the second lays out the issues at greater length, though more systematically:

http://www.worldchanging.com/local/seattle/archives/009019.html
http://www.worldbank.org/transport/roads/toll_rds.htm

But carrying this discussion much further runs the risk of trolling. Pity those poor SSPers who click on the Evergreen Line forum expecting construction or financing updates!

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by geoff's two cents

Agreed - there's a fine line between punishing people and creating incentives - tobacco taxes being an example of the former, the absence of PST on bicycles (until HST anyways) being an example of the latter.

You were responding to Metro-One's points about reasonableness and fairness of any planned user-pay incentives. The lack of PST on bikes IMO is a poor example of a government incentive. It may have marginally lowered the barrier to own a new bike (which raises a whole bunch of other questions, like if a $28 savings on a $400 bike will really be a decision changer for most people, the cost of adminstering the incentive, if you are extremely worried about regressiveness, then what about road-pricing's effects on low-income earners, etc), but made no incentive to actually use it for commutes.

The PST exemption on bikes has been in effect since ~ 1981, but there has been really little change in the walk/bike mode share in Trip Diary studies in the past 15 years. Perhaps other intiatives are more important to get more people on bikes, like upgrading bike infrastructure.

It makes for good PR, though, which will certainly be important for any incentive-pricing to be successful.

Anyhoo, i'll leave it at that. Sorry for beating a dead horse, but you got my dander up about "paying HST on groceries"....

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by geoff's two cents

Anyone who can afford to own and drive a car or truck, whether they drive a clunker or not, is wealthier than I am.

That said, I also agree that driving (to a large extent) transcends class; it also cuts across party loyalties. That's why I said it would be interesting to see who if anyone brings it up for the upcoming provincial election.

But is that just a function of high living expenses or poor financial planning? Most people making over say $12/hr can afford some form of vehicle as long as their living expenses are in check, at least as long as they don't have a lot of debt kicking them in the butt.

[Stingray2004]

The Environmental Assessment Office has now issued the final environment assessment cerificate for the Evergreen project.

http://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/epic/html/deploy/epic_project_doc_list_348_c_waa.html

Just need that last chunk of capital funding from Translink (or maybe the province can assist?)

[Mininari]

Related to the Evergreen-Translink funding mess...

Delta ponders leaving TransLink
Last Updated: Thursday, February 3, 2011 | 8:26 AM PT Comments43Recommend5
CBC News
TransLink operates the Vancouver area's public transit system. TransLink operates the Vancouver area's public transit system. (Mike Laanela/CBC)

Delta is considering parting ways with TransLink and forming its own transportation body so its taxpayers can get more service for their dollars.

TransLink and municipal mayors are at odds over a proposed property tax hike designed to pay for the Evergreen SkyTrain line that would link Coquitlam to Vancouver via Port Moody.

Delta Mayor Lois Jackson said taxpayers in her community aren't getting enough transit service in return for the money they pay into the TransLink system and she thinks a separate transportation body may be in order.

"To be asked for even additional amounts of money through TransLink when at least in Delta we don't seem to have a corresponding return for our twelve million dollars every year," said Jackson.

"We're going to be trying to get meetings together with our other partners South of the Fraser," Jackson added.

But, Langley Mayor Peter Fassbender is not about to jump on the Delta bus saying local governments need to find common ground, not work against each other.

"I don't believe the way to solve that is by threatening to leave or whatever else unless you think that is a ploy to get you more attention which it seems to." he said.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbi...lta-dumping-translink.html#ixzz1CwCcPAq0

[nname]

Originally Posted by Mininari

we don't seem to have a corresponding return for our twelve million dollars every year

One thing he doesn't seems to know that the cost of operating only the bus service each year costs 600 millions dollars. 12 million is just 2% of it...

[officedweller]

Great news on the EA.

***
WRT separate service - I'm sure that Delta->downtown commuters won't be happy to pay to transfer to TransLink's network if Delta has its own.

[squeezied]

Doesn't translink also provide road services as well as transit?

[bardak]

As some one that lives in Ladner and uses the bus as their main mode of transportation this is very worrying. The real sad part is that South Delta at least gets some of the best transit for how big it is. we have the 601 every 30min off peak and on peak the 601 and the like eg:608, 602, 603, 604 combined have at least 15min head ways. Then we have community shuttles C86, C87, and C88 also have 30min head ways. While the C84 and C89 have hourly departures. for an area with a population of only 50,000 I think that this is pretty decent and I haven't event mentioned the busses that just pick up people at the Ladner loop like the 404 and 620 or the fact that projects like the Canada line improved mobility options even if it is not within our borders. Now I'm willing to admin I no nothing really of the situation in North Delta so that could be a complete crapshoot.

As much as I love Ladner as a nice relatively compact it seams like the area has hit a brick wall when it comes to development. Outside of single family infill housing and one little townhouse project there has been nothing for pass few years. They aren't even attempting to create an area plan were as North Delta and Tsawwassen both have one.

Ugh enough of a rant let's remember that this is the evergreen thread.

[BCPhil]

Residents in Delta would benefit from improvements in Surrey their tax dollars would pay for. Skytrain in Surrey, even if noone from Delta rides it, would decrease traffic over AFB. And I'm sure residents in North Delta would appreciate a new PB payed for by Translink. So Delta just needs to wait their turn, even if the money is spent on Evergreen, people in Delta benefit by proxy.

[SpongeG]

February 14, 2011

Vancouver rapid transit Evergreen line approved

The Evergreen Line Rapid Transit Project has received an environmental assessment certificate after a review led by B.C.’s Environmental Assessment Office (EAO).

The EAO assessment report concluded the project is not likely to have significant adverse effects. The provincial certificate contains 157 commitments the proponent must implement throughout various stages of the project, which include: the installation of erosion and sediment control structures for creeks; re-planting of river habitats and, noise mitigation and providing municipalities with 72-hours notice of construction work scheduled beyond municipal noise bylaw hours.

The $1.4-billion project will link the cities of Burnaby, Port Moody and Coquitlam with an 11-kilometre advanced light rapid transit line between Lougheed Town Centre in Burnaby and Douglas College in Coquitlam.

...

http://www.journalofcommerce.com/article/id42849

[GeeCee]

Hoping that Christy Clark will drop a gift on us with regards to the Evergreen Line's funding gap..

[Gordon]

That would be nice, but what would be very nice if she would have her Transportation Minister would sit down with Translink & the Mayor's Coucil and finally solve Translink's funding problems once3 and for all.

[WarrenC12]

Public transportation was one of the things she mentioned, along with child poverty, minimum wage increases, and tax breaks for the "working poor", so there is some hope there.

A permanent solution would be best, but something to get Evergreen back on track now would be great in the short term.

[Metro-One]

I actually feel the opposite, I am afraid she might scrap it as is and will re propose it as at grade LRT to create some "New Liberal" bull crap campaign in order to try and please all the crazies across the province.

[BCPhil]

I think it is too late for that. After time is taken to redesign, and resubmit for environmental assessment, by the time shovels hit the ground, construction costs will be up that building it as LRT will probably only save a couple hundred million. LRT won't have as much ridership, so you are looking at saving money at a costs of deterring ridership. Clark will either get this built fast, or put it on the back burner for the next 10 years while they dump money into voter rich Vancouver and SoF where the NDP are gaining ground.

Changing horses midstream is usually a sure fire way to lose an election. Ujjal Dosanjh put the Fast Ferries up for sale after he took office, basically straight up telling the electorate "we are incompetent and incapable of doing anything". If Clark, even as an outsider, hinted that the liberals were wrong the last 5 years in building Skytrain, then why elect the party?

[Mininari]

Does anyone else find it hilarious that the Port Moody Skytrain Extension Project (under various names), has now been dealt with by TWO Premiers with the last name "Clark" ???

[Mac Write]

Even though I avoid all news, I was wanting to see video of the snow storm and saw "New Premier" had no clue about it, then I see the name "Clark" and think uh oh this isn't good. On the other hand it could be very good. We will have to see.