Hwy 99 Fraser River Tunnel (George Massey Replacement) | Proposed

[GeeCee]

Originally Posted by libtard

You are so far off in outer space with your left wing ideas its frightening. How can you justify slapping a toll on an old decrepit tunnel that offers no new benefits for drivers. Furthermore all this talk about regional tolling needs to stop. People pay tolls to gain access to pieces of NEW infrastructure that offer advantages over non-tolled routes.

That might be the BC Liberal party's idea of road tolling, but it's certainly not the case elsewhere in the world and is certainly not the definition of road tolling.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

SFUVancouver's post was entirely reasonable, with zero inflammatory language.

Totally agree. I've always found his posts to be very useful contributions to the discussion.

[Infrequent Poster]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

How is it wrong to save up the money to build the bridge ahead of time instead of going into debt to build it?

I'm not suggesting that we don't build the bridge until we can completely pay for it. I'm suggesting that the inevitable toll be imposed ahead of time so that we can (a) finance at least a bit of the construction cost from savings instead of debt and (b) more importantly, find out what the real impact of tolls is going to be on traffic volumes, which could avoid overbuilding if we don't really need it.

So then using your logic. How about we quadruple the fare on all buses on broadway. No change in service, just more money. Try that out for 5 or 10 years. Maybe if passenger numbers go flat after ten years we wont even build the line (cuz it would be proven its not needed). Its a way to save up money to build the line instead of going into debt to build it. Right?

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Yep, that's the same business park. We should get a beer some day after work at Fuggles and Warlock.

Yeah definitely, that would be awesome. I've been wanting to check it out for a while now

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Infrequent Poster

So then using your logic. How about we quadruple the fare on all buses on broadway. No change in service, just more money.

Well, the difference is that in the case of the new tunnel we know that it will be financed through tolls. But financing new transit has never been via fare increases.

But yeah, I support the idea of providing Translink with an annual budget, both through fares and other sources, that includes both money for operations and also funds to be put aside toward new infrastructure. Essentially, Alberta's idea of a "Heritage Fund". IMHO Alberta would be in a far better place today if they hadn't raided that fund for all sorts of pet political projects.

[s211]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Fuck off, ya ignorant troll! I have been here on SSP for 12 years and have never even seen ya post in any of the threads that I have ever posted in during that time frame. And then, in this thread, awhile back, ya decided to troll as follows concerning me personally:

Can I suggest you just add the person in question to your ignore list? I use that option frequently now, and I have to say it's done wonders for my blood pressure.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by s211

Can I suggest you just add the person in question to your ignore list? I use that option frequently now, and I have to say it's done wonders for my blood pressure.

I second that. Certainly better than expectorating your personal grievances out in public.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

I second that. Certainly better than expectorating your personal grievances out in public.

I third that...even if I don't have anyone on my ignore list because I am a overly tolerant person.

Both have valuable unique contributions and it would be unfortunate to see any one banned.

As for the bridge/tolling all I have to say is that what un democratic social engineers with personal ideologies that they try to push on to others like a religion fail to realize is that they push negative sentiment under ground and let it fester. What we are going to get is a major swing right because at the end of the day most people drive, most people value their time, most people value their democracy, and most people hate being manipulated and taken advantage of. And anytime you get swings someone or something suffers, like say transit. And right now there is plenty of stuff festering in Vancouver.

The metro board is so out of touch with the actual residents of this region that its only a matter of time before everyone points their fingers at them for all their problems.

[libtard]

Originally Posted by GeeCee

That might be the BC Liberal party's idea of road tolling, but it's certainly not the case elsewhere in the world and is certainly not the definition of road tolling.

Where in north America is this not the case???

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

It's not yet $100M in annual losses, though the Province forecasts that it will lose that much this year. It is a fact, however, that the Port Mann Bridge is running at a loss and in 2015 those losses were $86M (per the quoted Vancouver Sun article, below)...

How much money does the Hornby Bike Lane make? Or Point Grey Road?

Since there is zero effort given to charging the figurative handful of users of that infrastructure why does it suddenly become so important for the PMB or Massey Bridge. Nobody ever concerned themselves about how much the Oak Street or Arthur Laing Bridge "made" because they didn't use the BC Lib's whacked way of financing infrastructure.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by whatnext

How much money does the Hornby Bike Lane make? Or Point Grey Road?

Since there is zero effort given to charging the figurative handful of users of that infrastructure why does it suddenly become so important for the PMB or Massey Bridge. Nobody ever concerned themselves about how much the Oak Street or Arthur Laing Bridge "made" because they didn't use the BC Lib's whacked way of financing infrastructure.

As much as I disapprove of closing off road space for the sake of a few dozen bikers, those "upgrades" didn't take $4-5 billion. I'd bet that more than half the forum would want to see a return on their investment for that kind of money.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

As much as I disapprove of closing off road space for the sake of a few dozen bikers, those "upgrades" didn't take $4-5 billion. I'd bet that more than half the forum would want to see a return on their investment for that kind of money.

Exactly. Spending several Billion on this project limits our ability to spend on other infrastructure.

Spending a few million on a bike lane (which is a 100% municipal decision), is not comparable at all.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Exactly. Spending several Billion on this project limits our ability to spend on other infrastructure.

...and shows a hypocritical attitude by a Provincial Government that demands a referendum before spending a dime on transit.

[Genauso]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

...and shows a hypocritical attitude by a Provincial Government that demands a referendum before spending a dime on transit.

To be fair, Translink tanked the referendum by proposing to do essentially nothing until maybe 2040.

I think at this point in time every voter is united in wanting more transparency. Step-by-step, with simple explanations of the process used in decision making without have to second-guess true intentions.

Like the GMT replacement is totally about developing the ALR/Tsawassen lands in Delta, and later in Richmond should the bridges into Vancouver be widened. I actually support developing a lot of that land, but there's a lot to be questioned about how it is done. There's no good reason for secrecy. All this Metro board vs. Provincial cabinet arguing is a waste of time because no one is saying what they truly want.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Genauso

To be fair, Translink tanked the referendum by proposing to do essentially nothing until maybe 2040.

WTF are you talking about? What part of "Mayors' Council Ten Year Plan" wasn't going to start until 2040?

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

WTF are you talking about? What part of "Mayors' Council Ten Year Plan" wasn't going to start until 2040?

Seconded.

[s211]

Originally Posted by cornholio

I third that...even if I don't have anyone on my ignore list because I am a overly tolerant person.

Both have valuable unique contributions and it would be unfortunate to see any one banned.

As for the bridge/tolling all I have to say is that what un democratic social engineers with personal ideologies that they try to push on to others like a religion fail to realize is that they push negative sentiment under ground and let it fester. What we are going to get is a major swing right because at the end of the day most people drive, most people value their time, most people value their democracy, and most people hate being manipulated and taken advantage of. And anytime you get swings someone or something suffers, like say transit. And right now there is plenty of stuff festering in Vancouver.

The metro board is so out of touch with the actual residents of this region that its only a matter of time before everyone points their fingers at them for all their problems.

That's what drives me the craziest: urbanist social engineers that act no differently than a religious zealot. Come at me like a zealot, and you'll never win me over.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by s211

That's what drives me the craziest: urbanist social engineers that act no differently than a religious zealot. Come at me like a zealot, and you'll never win me over.

You could say the same about drivers or people who support pipelines.

Bottom line is we still live in a democracy. All of these groups are accountable to elected officials at some level.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

You could say the same about drivers or people who support pipelines.

Bottom line is we still live in a democracy. All of these groups are accountable to elected officials at some level.

Definitely. Building cities for cars and thus promoting their use as the dominant form of transportation was just as much social engineering as current investment in transit and cycling infrastructure is.

[s211]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

You could say the same about drivers or people who support pipelines.

Horse-hockey.

You could only say that about drivers, for example, if they only support driving, and disparage anything else. In that case, you have a zealot.

I drive, walk and cycle. Hell, I'll even take transit sometimes, but don't ever call me a zealot because I drive sometimes. If anything, call me a zealot for balanced transportation networks because I believe in multi-modal responses to the widely varying needs of users, not "transit only" "biking only" mantras that spew out of the likes of the Sierra Club-funded Vision Vancouver.

You can't just view all drivers with your zealot-coloured lenses. You've just confirmed your zealotry.