Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[WarrenC12]

The problem is Translink has a mixed bag of extremely visible and unpopular tax options, like gas taxes and property taxes.

If instead they were just given a few hundred million of the province's general revenue every year to help with operating expenses, people would hardly notice a minuscule income tax increase and everybody would be happy.

It's all about perception.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

^ Out of curiosity, where is this quote from? That's right up there with Pamela Sauder's infamous "...creme de la creme of Vancouver..." quote when she spoke before Vancouver City Council about the proposed routing of the Canada Line (then RAV Line) through Kerrisdale along Arbutus.

Roads aren't free by any stretch of the imagination. Just as the police aren't free, hospitals aren't free, schools, etc. Besides the cost of designing, building, managing, maintaining, and policing roads, there is the societal cost of congestion due to their inefficient use. We can either continue to price road access through taxes and subsidies and congestion alone, or we can price road access through a fee-for-use on the direct beneficiaries (the road user), lower taxes and fewer subsidies from everyone else, and less congestion. I choose the latter.

It's not a direct quote, but it's the general impression I get when I talk to many drivers around here.

I know they're not free, hence the quotes. I know it's an appeal to tradition, but I just can't see it going over well. It's too drastic a change. Also, lots of road users do believe that they're not subsidized at all. They think their taxes cover more than the expenses required for construction and maintenance. And people do pay enough as it is. I like theKB's idea: Scrap the gas tax and make up the difference with property tax.

Honesty, the more I think about it, the more I just don't want to hear about it at the dinner table.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The problem is Translink has a mixed bag of extremely visible and unpopular tax options, like gas taxes and property taxes.

If instead they were just given a few hundred million of the province's general revenue every year to help with operating expenses, people would hardly notice a minuscule income tax increase and everybody would be happy.

It's all about perception.

This is kind of what I've been thinking but wasn't able to put into words. Road pricing would easily be the most visible tax. People hate Translink enough already, don't make it even easier.

[theKB]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

...while at the same time spending even more money on roads and bridges to accommodate that declining traffic.

The number of cars on the road is not declining. OF mode share yes absolutely but you can't expect the region to grow by population and not see more cars on the road at the same time? Also we are playing catch up as far road infrastructure goes.

The usage of gas or fuels will continue to decline with more and more efficient cars hitting the road along with alternative fuel and hybrid vehicles. At some point there will be a shift and gas usage will start to decline at a rapid pace and if we are looking 20-30 years out each year we are getting closer to that point. Also think for every 100 litres of fuel bought outside of the region, the transit authority loses 18 dollars so in essence it is an avoidable tax. All i am saying is to make it unavoidable whether it is through property taxes, sales tax, income tax, road pricing etc. Someway that is equitable and small enough that it won't make a difference in peoples day to day lives.

EV's are already gaining more range and getting cheaper and this will continue as more cars hit the road and technology improves.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by theKB

The number of cars on the road is not declining.

Yet More Evidence of Peak Car

Transportation and the New Generation

Washington's 20 Billion Mile Diet

‘Peak Car Use’: Understanding the Demise of Automobile Dependence

Yet more evidence for the decline of driving in the US

Many of these are US studies, but the same thing is happening up here. Port Mann bridge traffic peaked in 2006 and has been in decline since then. Massey tunnel traffic has been declining as well. Doesn't seem to stop us from building new roads, though.

Compare that to transit ridership, which has increased by 43% since 2006.

So sure, let's keep spending money on roads with no debate whatsoever, while subjecting transit to audits, "optimizations" (code for service cuts) and referendums.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Yet More Evidence of Peak Car

Transportation and the New Generation

Washington's 20 Billion Mile Diet

‘Peak Car Use’: Understanding the Demise of Automobile Dependence

Yet more evidence for the decline of driving in the US

Many of these are US studies, but the same thing is happening up here. Port Mann bridge traffic peaked in 2006 and has been in decline since then. Massey tunnel traffic has been declining as well. Doesn't seem to stop us from building new roads, though.

Compare that to transit ridership, which has increased by 43% since 2006.

So sure, let's keep spending money on roads with no debate whatsoever, while subjecting transit to audits, "optimizations" (code for service cuts) and referendums.

I hate to be nit picky but the links you provide all show PER CAPITA declines in auto usage, not total use decreases (although there is evidence that total use has decreased in downtown Vancouver) so with increases in population total use is likely still increasing. That said I firmly believe the overall trend in Vancouver will continue to be declining per Capita use (hopefully enough to result in a decline in total vehicle use over all of Metro Vancouver, not just downtown).

[Tetsuo]

Originally Posted by Pinion

Yeah Vancouver is way too humid to skip AC. I was fine in 41 degree heat in Palm Springs a few weeks ago but put me in a crowded bus here and I'll start gushing sweat from every pore. Public transit is so claustrophobic and obviously not meant for people over 6'.

As someone over 6', sitting in an MKI is horrible, but standing its rather fine. Especially since
1) Towering over everyone means your head is rather unobstructed, arms are allowed to move freely to the many railings
2) With the windows down you get railed by the incoming wind
3) Intimidation leads to people easily getting out of the way.

[memememe76]

It's not a direct quote, but it's the general impression I get when I talk to many drivers around here.

I have the opposite general impression of drivers. Most suburbanites do not view themselves as "the creme de la creme" and do not view people who actually live in Vancouver proper (DTES, excepted) as being "poor". Living in the City or near a Skytrain station is expensive--that's why they're living in the suburbs. So, when there is talk of making the lives of Vancouverites better while people SoF have to pay tolls or pay higher fares due to distance, resentment will inevitably arise.

I also don't think Vancouverites (transit takers or not) generally hold the view that only poor people take transit.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by memememe76

I also don't think Vancouverites (transit takers or not) generally hold the view that only poor people take transit.

Most people I talk to who grew up in middle class families look at me like I'm crazy when I suggest taking transit. People think it's a great solution for "somebody else".

I have a good income, but I can't "afford" to drive a nice car everywhere since I just don't see the value.

FWIW We are a family of 3 that has 1 modest small car that gets approx 10K kms put on every year.

[Metro-One]

I'm with memememe76, I also grew up in a middle class (maybe high middle class) family and as a teenager I was always told by my parents to ride my bike or take the bus to get somewhere instead of asking them for a ride.

In fact, in Maple Ridge, riding the 701 to Coquitlam Centre was somewhat of an unofficial "coming of age" when you were around 12 or 13 years old, hehe. I know, its lame, but at that age when you live in Maple Ridge Coquitlam is the place to go.

I wonder if the GEB and its connections have changed that at all.

I do know that we always wished for an all day WCE service.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Rico

I hate to be nit picky but the links you provide all show PER CAPITA declines in auto usage, not total use decreases

In fact the last link includes a graph showing the decline in total vehicle miles traveled, and the BC Department of Transportation site's traffic statistics are total vehicle counts. Yes, there really are fewer cars on the road over the last several years despite increasing population.

Also, I see I erred in the link to transit ridership stats, here is the correct link (PDF file).

But my main point is this: road traffic volumes have, even according to the most car-enthusiastic estimates by departments of transportation, stalled. At the same time transit use in Greater Vancouver continues to show strong growth. So why do roads and bridges get built with no public debate while transit struggles for funding?

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

II know, its lame, but at that age when you live in Maple Ridge Coquitlam is the place to go.

It's all relative. I remember driving through Hope once and the local radio station was having a contest - the prize was a weekend for two in Boston Bar...

[Whalleyboy]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

It's not a direct quote, but it's the general impression I get when I talk to many drivers around here.

I know they're not free, hence the quotes. I know it's an appeal to tradition, but I just can't see it going over well. It's too drastic a change. Also, lots of road users do believe that they're not subsidized at all. They think their taxes cover more than the expenses required for construction and maintenance. And people do pay enough as it is. I like theKB's idea: Scrap the gas tax and make up the difference with property tax.

Honesty, the more I think about it, the more I just don't want to hear about it at the dinner table.

I wouldn't say we should completely get rid of the gas tax. What should be done is lower it and increase property tax.

I find it so stupid how we keep taxing drivers. Not just because its over doing it and drivers are getting tired of it. But because the region has a hope to lower amount of people driving and getting more people taking transit. So by that logic alone that means they want to get money out of something they are trying to get rid of. They've already see a decrease in money coming in from the gas tax.

Mean while we are not growing short on new buildings and houses going up. Plus place with higher property value are usually close to good transit anyways.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Most people I talk to who grew up in middle class families look at me like I'm crazy when I suggest taking transit. People think it's a great solution for "somebody else".

I have a good income, but I can't "afford" to drive a nice car everywhere since I just don't see the value.

FWIW We are a family of 3 that has 1 modest small car that gets approx 10K kms put on every year.

Yeah, this is exactly what it is. It's not so much that it's for poor people, but whenever I bring up transit people look at me like I'm crazy too. Like it's not even an option. I remember somebody telling me their car broke down so they had to stay at home all weekend since they couldn't go anywhere. I asked why he didn't just take the bus and he just said he didn't even consider it. This is the typical view of transit that drivers I know seem to have.

*********************

And I didn't mean that suburbanites felt creme de la creme at all, not sure how that came out. What I meant is that suburbanites generally view other suburbanites taking transit as either people too young or too poor to drive. I choose to take transit even though I have access to a car, partially because I buy into the hype of SSP too much and partially because I genuinely enjoy it. But I still have to explain it to every single person when I say that I bus. Even my parents have started questioning why I don't just take one of their cars.

[queetz@home]

All this discussion about only poor people take transit is silly. Except for the very rich and snobby, most people would take transit...as long as transit is decent. For Metro Vancouver, that is WCE, Skytrain and a few express buses. Our normal transit buses...depends on crowdedness, but I think if they have A/C and are more comfortable, most people would love to take them too.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Yeah, this is exactly what it is. It's not so much that it's for poor people, but whenever I bring up transit people look at me like I'm crazy too. Like it's not even an option.

This is why the U-Pass program is so important. It's teaching a whole generation that transit is a perfectly reasonable option.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

This is why the U-Pass program is so important. It's teaching a whole generation that transit is a perfectly reasonable option.

But won't that risk having the opposite effect if transit is just so sucky? Students, and even their parents maybe pushing them to take transit due to the obligatory cost of the U-pass but if the users continue to experience crappy transit service, they would probably shun it for life. Plus I seriously doubt those UBC students driving Ferraris would give up those fancy cars for a bus pass...which they can easily afford to pay but not use anyway.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

But won't that risk having the opposite effect if transit is just so sucky?

Yes, and that's why we have to get past this funding debacle.

[Genauso]

Forget about "teaching people to use transit."

Transit use never declined because people forgot something they learned earlier.

Our whole transportation network needs to be about saving the most time and saving the most money of anyone that does, or could use it.

That's the secret, to make getting around easy, everything else will change.

[GlassCity]

Honestly I don't even think out transit is even that bad. I live in a low density neighbourhood fairly far from anything central and I still get a bus every half an hour. My only complaint is that it stops running at 7 PM...

And come on, the average UBC student doesn't own a Ferrari. Yeah more do than you'd think, but I'd guess that 80% at least of students take transit to the school. It seems that people don't mind it so much to commute to high volume (good transit) destinations like downtown or UBC. Yeah people would take it more if it was better, but from Translink's point of view I can see how it's hard to justify giving people in Brookswood 15 minute frequency, as a random example.