Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[GlassCity]

But the City seems to be pretty strict on Broadway heights. As far as I remember, Broadway is intended to be a primarily mid-rise corridor, with a few towers not much taller than the ones already there popping up. This would still be very dense. Of course, they can also just change their minds.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

But the City seems to be pretty strict on Broadway heights. As far as I remember, Broadway is intended to be a primarily mid-rise corridor, with a few towers not much taller than the ones already there popping up. This would still be very dense. Of course, they can also just change their minds.

You don't need a highrise for high density development. Look at Europe, urban cores are far denser than Vancouver yet highrises are a rare sight.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Jebby

You don't need a highrise for high density development. Look at Europe, urban cores are far denser than Vancouver yet highrises are a rare sight.

I know, hence "This would still be very dense."

[Kisai]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-co...routes-3-facts-you-didn-t-know-1.3153203

By Maryse Zeidler, CBC
Posted: Jul 15, 2015

TransLink's recently released 2014 Bus Service Performance Review reveals a few surprising details about some of Metro Vancouver's busiest bus routes.

Just how busy is the 99 B-Line?

We've all heard about how busy the 99 B-Line can be.

The bus serving the Broadway Corridor has been said to be one of the busiest routes in Canada and the U.S.

But TransLink's report shows just how busy the 99 is compared to the other top 10 busiest bus routes in the region.

http://infogr.am/top_10_busiest_bus_routes_in_greater_vancouver


http://infogr.am/49_bus_route_the_most_crowded_in_metro_vancouver


PDF source for the news article:
http://www.translink.ca/-/media/Document...2014%20BSPR/2014_bspr_summary_report.pdf

[Caliplanner1]

Enough talk and data show..........let's build the subway to UBC already!

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

Enough talk and data show..........let's build the subway to UBC already!

Got a few billion dollars lying around?

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by Jebby

Got a few billion dollars lying around?

There's always a few billion "lying around" Jebby.....the issue is generally relative priorities within the context of dysfunctional politics!

[Ridgerunner]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

There's always a few billion "lying around" Jebby.....the issue is generally relative priorities within the context of dysfunctional politics!

With a 1.8 billion surplus, BC could pay for the Translink program in four years.

Right up to the time that NDP get in and screw that up by debt spending.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Ridgerunner

With a 1.8 billion surplus, BC could pay for the Translink program in four years.

Right up to the time that NDP get in and screw that up by debt spending.

Actually, between 1980 and 2010, NDP governments across Canada have had balanced budgets 50% of the time, which is best for the five parties that have led a province or the country. Next is Conservative at about 37%, then PQ (29%), Liberal (27%) and Social Credit (25%).

And if you look at the average size of the deficits from each party, NDP actually has the lowest average deficit as a share of GDP at 0.75%. Combining federal and provincial governments, Conservatives are at 0.8% and Liberals at 1.9%, but if you look at just the federal governments, Liberals are at 2.3% and Conservatives are at 3.3%.

So this fearmongering that the NDP will just drive us into debt through deficit spending is unwarranted.

Imagine they inherit this $1.68b surplus, they could easily fund $500m/year for TransLink and still have nearly $1.2b left over. How exactly is that deficit spending?

[csbvan]

"Hepner said that during the talks she brought up Surrey’s priority for a $2.1-billion light rail system, and explained the city’s potential plan to seek private investment to accompany potential funding from the provincial and federal governments.

....

Hepner backtracked from suggestions Surrey might re-direct gas tax money, currently allocated to TransLink, back to a rail project in her city. Instead, she said Surrey simply wants to see some of the $110 million in its annual gas tax funds spent south of the Fraser River, where the population is growing.

Stone agreed that’s a priority.

“On behalf of government I’ve been consistent on saying Surrey is next,” he said. “Investments in Surrey are next up on the docket. We’re all going to continue to work hard together to deliver on the commitments and expectations that the region has for all of us in Surrey.”"

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Metro+V...mortem/11220673/story.html#ixzz3gAfFHrT3

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Ridgerunner

With a 1.8 billion surplus, BC could pay for the Translink program in four years.

I'd rather that money be returned to taxpayers via a refund. I wish BC implemented a similar mechanism as they have in Colorado.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Jebby

I'd rather that money be returned to taxpayers via a refund. I wish BC implemented a similar mechanism as they have in Colorado.

Would that be before or after the $64B debt is paid?

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by Jebby

I'd rather that money be returned to taxpayers via a refund. I wish BC implemented a similar mechanism as they have in Colorado.

No point in doing that when we have a debt to pay down.

[Ridgerunner]

[QUOTE=CanSpice;7098873

So this fearmongering that the NDP will just drive us into debt through deficit spending is unwarranted.

Imagine they inherit this $1.68b surplus, they could easily fund $500m/year for TransLink and still have nearly $1.2b left over. How exactly is that deficit spending?[/QUOTE]

Obviously you have not lived in BC for every long.

Our NDP are spenders of the first order. They are are shameless borrowers.

The first NDP government - the Barrett social worker government - took us from debt free with 500 million in cash to 3 billion in debt in three years.

The second round of that nonsense - the Harcourt Clark dock worker government - took us from 17 billion to 34 billion in ten years.

Don't worry about NDP governments in other places ... worry about the ones we have here.

My point is that the delay in the Evergreen line brings us too close to the 2017 election and that means a delay in the UBS/Surrey lines to after the next election. one day after the NDP gets in, the money won't be there ... they just can't help themselves.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Zassk

No point in doing that when we have a debt to pay down.

Debt servicing is taken into account when considering an operating surplus.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Ridgerunner

Obviously you have not lived in BC for every long.

I've lived in BC for 30 of my 39 years. Born in Surrey, university in Victoria, and now I live in New West. But it's okay, you can try to attack the messenger while ignoring the message (NDP governments are better at budgeting than any others). And never mind that the debt per capita in BC has gone up over 50% since the Liberals have been power, yeah, let's just ignore that.

[WarrenC12]

If you are dead set against the NDP forever, we might as well declare Christy Empress for Life.

[PaperTiger]

Originally Posted by Jebby

Debt servicing is taken into account when considering an operating surplus.

So are you suggesting you'd be willing to pay more tax in years of deficit?

[jsbertram]

I noticed earlier this week that the 7/11 at Oak & Broadway is closing at the end of the month.

I wonder if this means the new 988 West Broadway building is starting construction?

If so, the proposed UBC subway station entrance will be part of the new building.

Perhaps in our lifetime the actual UBC subway will be built and be connected to this entrance.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Actually, between 1980 and 2010, NDP governments across Canada have had balanced budgets 50% of the time, which is best for the five parties that have led a province or the country. Next is Conservative at about 37%, then PQ (29%), Liberal (27%) and Social Credit (25%).

And if you look at the average size of the deficits from each party, NDP actually has the lowest average deficit as a share of GDP at 0.75%. Combining federal and provincial governments, Conservatives are at 0.8% and Liberals at 1.9%, but if you look at just the federal governments, Liberals are at 2.3% and Conservatives are at 3.3%.

So this fearmongering that the NDP will just drive us into debt through deficit spending is unwarranted.

Imagine they inherit this $1.68b surplus, they could easily fund $500m/year for TransLink and still have nearly $1.2b left over. How exactly is that deficit spending?

I don't think anyone cares about the NDP in other provinces. Pull up the statistics for the NDP in this province then compare notes. But you're right that it's not just the NDP that cause debt. The other governments in power cause just as much if not more debt if you add everything up.

People just have to look at:

http://www.taxtips.ca/statistics/bcdebt.htm

1997 to 2001 we were NDP. Our debt grew by $4.464 billion or an average of $893 million per year.
2002 to 2013 we were Liberal. Out debt grew by $21.981 billion or an average of $1.8 billion per year.

So statistically speaking, debt has risen both steady and far quicker under the Liberals than under the NDP.

That said debt has grown regardless.

Our "Liberals" are actually supposed to be Conservatives when it comes to spending, yet they have upped the debt quite a bit. Even with this surplus they still upped BC's debt by $2.2 billion.

The other poster that said the NDP brought us from $17 billion to $34 billion in 10 years, well that's $17 billion total in 10 years vs the Liberals from 2003 to 2013 increased our debt by $18.9 billion... so more.

That's not the only picture though, the debt has risen, but if you also look at Debt vs GDP, we've been much better off under the Liberals in that sense as things improved from historic highs of around 29% to dropping as low as 18% and sitting around 25%. But the Debt per Capita has increased. So it's not as simple as people saying the NDP or horrible for debt and spending or the Liberals are awesome.

They both are actually quite bad imho.