Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by s211

Surprise surprise, the easiest lever to pull that, during the transport referendum, the mayors said was not possible. What? There was a Plan B?

Begs the question, would you rather see a minor increase to the PST or higher property taxes which will impact everyone, even renters as the costs will be passed onto them?

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by s211

Surprise surprise, the easiest lever to pull that, during the transport referendum, the mayors said was not possible. What? There was a Plan B?

This is a different plan, but hardly something that was in their back pocket during the plebiscite. The property tax increase is one of about half a dozen pieces of funding being proposed to meet only 17% of the plan, instead of 33%.

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

This is a different plan, but hardly something that was in their back pocket during the plebiscite. The property tax increase is one of about half a dozen pieces of funding being proposed to meet only 17% of the plan, instead of 33%.

Translink's "plan B" is as much of a plan as the post "mission accomplished" Iraq plan of the US.

--------

What a crappy non-announcement. Victoria is ultimately responsible for translink but they provide zero support for it. At least Gordon Campbell provided political cover for TL expansion.

Transit is linked with a economic opportunity and housing affordability. If this keeps up, this is going to be on CC.

[s211]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

Begs the question, would you rather see a minor increase to the PST or higher property taxes which will impact everyone, even renters as the costs will be passed onto them?

I'm fine with either scenario. Are you suggesting that renters should for some reason be immune to the tax? What about those who can afford to rent high-rise penthouses?

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by s211

I'm fine with either scenario. Are you suggesting that renters should for some reason be immune to the tax? What about those who can afford to rent high-rise penthouses?

Nah, if you live near a transit station and aren't using transit you should still be paying for it.

If you live near a bus stop (eg on your block) you should also be paying for transit, even if you don't use it, but I'd understand people being upset by this if there isn't all-day bus service.

[s211]

Originally Posted by Kisai

Nah, if you live near a transit station and aren't using transit you should still be paying for it.

If you live near a bus stop (eg on your block) you should also be paying for transit, even if you don't use it, but I'd understand people being upset by this if there isn't all-day bus service.

What does that have anything to do with the renters you spoke of earlier?

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by s211

What does that have anything to do with the renters you spoke of earlier?

I last posted in this thread 6 days ago, so I assume you mean the previous poster logicbomb.

The costs will always be passed on to renters, there is trouble when the property tax increases are greater than the 4% increase allowed by the RTA.

Thats when you see renovictions happen, where the landlord has to force the tenant out with some BS excuse to raise the rent otherwise the landlord is in trouble with their bank or taxes.

[SOSS]

Landlords initially charge what the market can bare, not what their cost recovery formula is. Landlords can raise the rent by (I think) 4% year over year. The big hikes occur when someone moves. New renters are exposed to current market prices.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by SOSS

Landlords initially charge what the market can bare, not what their cost recovery formula is. Landlords can raise the rent by (I think) 4% year over year. The big hikes occur when someone moves. New renters are exposed to current market prices.

This is correct. Simply "passing on the costs" doesn't work in any business, unless you have a complete monopoly.

Rental increases are set by the RTO and are usually in the 2% range. Plus due to the rules and notice required, you can only realistically increase them every 15 months. Many landlords, myself included, don't even bother.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

This is correct. Simply "passing on the costs" doesn't work in any business, unless you have a complete monopoly.

Rental increases are set by the RTO and are usually in the 2% range. Plus due to the rules and notice required, you can only realistically increase them every 15 months. Many landlords, myself included, don't even bother.

Took 5 and a half years for the landlord here to raise the rent, and they did by 2.3%
http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/housin...enancies/during-a-tenancy/rent-increases

Maximum is 2.9% this year. It's been as high as 4.6% in 2004. If the landlord had been raising the rental rate like they were entitled to 104$ more per month over the 2010 rate. Instead it's been 15$. Current units are going for 300$ over what I'm paying.

[twoNeurons]

Not only that, but in general, it will be passed to a lesser extent to renters. Renters pay a LOT less than your typical mortgage.

If a landlord has a $5000 mortgage and two tenants paying $1000 each, chances are a $100 increase in property tax would result in each tenant only taking a $20 hit each ( if anything, to be honest ). In general, the landlord will just absorb the cost. Cost of doing business.

Property tax in Vancouver is half of what they pay in Toronto, if I'm not mistaken. Property tax puts the political blame on the cities, rather than the province. The province has been trying to get the cities to take this route for years.

The other alternative is to do what Toronto did and implement a Regional Property Transfer Tax. It would definitely NOT be popular, but it would essentially mean the city takes profit from each house sale. Rather than take more from those that are just living here in their home, you'd be taking from those that are profiting from selling their property.

[ClaytonA]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-co...tion/may-26-2016-1.3601431?autoplay=true

starts at ~ 2:31:30

Basically little to no dialogue with province, province is doing own thing.
Submitted proposal in April, now in May hours before Mayor's council meeting, get a non-announcement stating take our 33%, $250 million and go away.

This amount is for capital investment and doesn't address operating expenses. Will be able to buy buses, but not put drivers in them without having to increase property taxes too much.

Still doesn't address the $7.5 billion, 10 year plan.

Province doesn't want to invest anything until after the next election, this is filibustering.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The above is paraphrased. The Mayors council needs to outline what the impacts would be of the property tax increase. Explain why it would be too much. Do some mayors think it's worth it, but fiscal conservatives (not social) or those who want service commitments, not plans in outlying areas think it's not? If so the Mayors council vote results should be public, so the public knows. Call the province's bluff.

Maybe politically a solution is property taxes go up, but the money goes first to commitments in places like Maple Ridge and Langley now instead of just planned, then a commitment for Broadway and Surrey rapid transit. Yes financially this could be/is a poorly performing, but if it gets past the local municipal political impasse, gets everyone pulling together instead of voting down increases at the Mayors council, it's closer to funding the benefits most utilitarian.

The lack of trust in all this... Something is better than nothing even if it makes choke points like Broadway worse if we get closer to everything happening.

[ClaytonA]

http://www.surreyleader.com/news/379832261.html

... Mayors aren't spelling out exactly which source or sources they'd prefer to tap but they acknowledge the rejected sales tax isn't on the table, at least for now.

"We have put in a basket of options that are open to discussion," Surrey Mayor Linda Hepner said. "We'll have to see what is palatable and what is on the table and what is off the table."

...


Fassbender said he believes TransLink can generate that much money from its existing sources without implementing a new one, and thereby secure the roughly $370 million in federal contributions available for phase one projects.
...

Current funding sources that could be raised include higher TransLink property taxes, parking taxes or fares.

...

Phase two will take more work, Fassbender said, because while the province hopes Ottawa would continue its 50 per cent contribution in that round, it wants rock-solid assurances.

...

Delta Mayor Lois Jackson, meanwhile, said she's disappointed the talks with the province are taking place behind closed doors.

"All this in-camera stuff is not a good way to educate the public about the solution you think you have," she said.

Jackson said she doesn't believe there is any more support from voters than there was last year to impose higher TransLink taxes.

"We don't have any more buses, we don't have any more service yet they're asking us to pay more," she said. "Is it any different from how it was in the referendum? I'm not sure it is."

So one mayor says there's no talking, another says there is.

[ClaytonA]

http://www.surreyleader.com/news/381003411.html

... "We feel we're in striking distance of making this mayors' plan a reality but we need a partner with the provincial government and so far we haven't had that," New Westminster Mayor Jonathan Coté said. "We know there's going to be substantial federal money available for transit, the type of money we haven't seen in a generation. My big concern is if the mayors and the province can't get together to get an agreement in the very near term the reality is I think that's going to be a lost opportunity for our region."

...

But the mayors say that provincial commitment is paired only to an initial first phase of federal grants and doesn't yet extend to later years of the plan, creating uncertainty over how a new Broadway subway and light rail network from Surrey to Langley would actually be built.

And while the mayors have pledged to raise more money from their existing sources – mainly via TransLink property taxes, a fare increase, and the creation of a new regional development charge on new construction – they still want a new provincially approved source as well.

...

White Rock Mayor Wayne Baldwin suggested a lower DCC apply in areas without frequent transit.

Some mayors, including Lois Jackson of Delta and Nicole Read of Maple Ridge, said they're uncomfortable with the idea, the risk it could increase housing costs, and the general idea of raising more taxes for TransLink without the province handing back full control of the organization to the mayors.

...

Langley City Mayor Ted Schaffer said most mayors support the plan, except for a few holdouts, and he predicted it can pass and be implemented without them.

"Something has to be done," Schaffer said. "And there's only so many pockets to get the funding from."

West Vancouver Mayor Mike Smith said reform of TransLink so there is a clear line of authority of who is in charge is essential to ensure there's coordination of how regional growth and transportation is planned.

Right now, he said, that's "virtually impossible" with the province ultimately controlling TransLink.

North Vancouver District Mayor Richard Walton said concepts like road pricing and development cost charges will need much more work to flesh out, but said it's critical to begin the dialogue.

Everybody has different priorities and everyone seems to agree there is a problem. Show leadership, do something using the levers that the mayor's council controls. Don't count on the province. Forget those like the Delta mayor that are going to say no, no matter what. A press conference saying because the province refuses to fund this, the province is raising your property taxes and the result is A, B, and C would work.

[ClaytonA]

https://youtu.be/PaM6HU1cCVM

re federal monies and the province filibustering with the claim they cannot commit to changing anything without black and white federal phase 2 commitments:

All paraphrased. We have good discussion with the federal government. Major cities that get their funding agreements together for the first phase will be ahead of those that don't for phase two. Waiting until all the other cities are done, Montreal, Toronto, have everything lined up and in place to use the federal money is not a good strategy. We need to get our house in order.

Concern is if the province and mayors cannot agree how their going to work together, then the reality is lost opportunities for maybe once in a generation federal transit funding.

Frustrated with provincial government, cautiously optimistic.

Why leave yourself at the whim of the provincial government? Again? Is there a way to get the votes at Mayors council to raise the revenues you need from the sources you already have control over?

[ClaytonA]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-co...-funding-gardener-brian-minter-1.3602000

BC Almanac

[officedweller]

Don't think these pics have been posted:

Taken April 1, 2016 by Ian Fisher


https://www.flickr.com/photos/ian_yvr/26638809221/in/album-72157629835386280/


https://www.flickr.com/photos/ian_yvr/26638811081/in/album-72157629835386280/


https://www.flickr.com/photos/ian_yvr/26638811081/in/album-72157629835386280/


https://www.flickr.com/photos/ian_yvr/26638811081/in/album-72157629835386280/


https://www.flickr.com/photos/ian_yvr/26638811081/in/album-72157629835386280/

[SOSS]

Are those pallets of (???) to simulate passenger weight? or were perhaps used to help weigh down the units for transportation from the manufacturing facility?

[MIPS]

That's gotta be bags of sand to simulate a full load.

That or for some reason the new trains are filled with Potassium Nitrate.

[Waders]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Don't think these pics have been posted:

Taken April 1, 2016 by Ian Fisher


https://www.flickr.com/photos/ian_yvr/26638811081/in/album-72157629835386280/

The shape of the train seems to be slightly different from MarkII. Even the window and train door has a smooth curve shape.