Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[casper]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

Why would UBC provide money? They're a public institution with a mandate that has nothing to do with providing transit.

The same reason UBC builds parking lots, install bike racks, builds walking trails. Very similar to the reason it trying to engage the local community through open houses, seminars, gardens, galleries, an athletics program, extension programs and on and on.

It has a broad education mandate and that involves makes education accessible and affordable to the community in general. It is about removing barrier that hinder the ability for the university and the rest of the city to interact on multiple levels.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by AMTDGT

And YVR's mandate includes transit?????????

They are a major transportation hub, as well as a place where people work. I don't see how an airport wouldn't want more options for transportation to and from there. Who knows, maybe they would want a freight rail line and an expansion of Grant McConachie Way in the near future.

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

Why would UBC provide money? They're a public institution with a mandate that has nothing to do with providing transit.

I agree. UBC isn't the UEL. UBC won't be able to get a lot of zoning uplift as they want to save a lot of land for instructional/sports/lab purposes in the future, and not turn them into high-value commercial/residential. Even the UEL has increasingly limited areas for further new development and existing areas and can't densify like No 3/cambie/brentwood.

Originally Posted by casper

The same reason UBC builds parking lots, install bike racks, builds walking trails. Very similar to the reason it trying to engage the local community through open houses, seminars, gardens, galleries, an athletics program, extension programs and on and on.

It has a broad education mandate and that involves makes education accessible and affordable to the community in general. It is about removing barrier that hinder the ability for the university and the rest of the city to interact on multiple levels.

I totally agree that UBC will be a stronger institution with a transit line but I am unsure what funding they can squeeze from UBC students/faculty/business. IMO the UPass gives more bang for the buck than any complex funding arrangement that UBC can offer for a skytrain line. IMO to keep UBC vital, UBC funding would be better steered towards ongoing financial aid and improvements to classrooms/teaching/research than a new kitty for a rapid transit line.

Ultimately, the province will be the driver of UBC transit funding. It will be done if the province deems it a priority, with or without any ante from UBC.

[Meraki]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

They are a major transportation hub, as well as a place where people work. I don't see how an airport wouldn't want more options for transportation to and from there. Who knows, maybe they would want a freight rail line and an expansion of Grant McConachie Way in the near future.

Pretty sure that was sarcasm.

UBC has reasons to contribute (the UEL, and a major education and employment hub) the same way YVR has reasons.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Meraki

Pretty sure that was sarcasm.

UBC has reasons to contribute (the UEL, and a major education and employment hub) the same way YVR has reasons.

...and SFU has reasons to contribute to a gondola up Burnaby Mountain - and I've been told they were quite willing to before that got pushed to the back burner.

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

I agree. UBC isn't the UEL. UBC won't be able to get a lot of zoning uplift as they want to save a lot of land for instructional/sports/lab purposes in the future, and not turn them into high-value commercial/residential. Even the UEL has increasingly limited areas for further new development and existing areas and can't densify like No 3/cambie/brentwood.

Being a bit confused about land development at UBC proper brought me to to their property trust page. Not sure how much potential there is for further growth but all objectives go towards UBC's activities. A large portion of land gets reserved for price-controlled faculty and student housing. even market housing is lease only. not sure if the numbers here would work out towards significant funding for UBC rapid transit.

[Aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

I totally agree that UBC will be a stronger institution with a transit line but I am unsure what funding they can squeeze from UBC students/faculty/business. IMO the UPass gives more bang for the buck than any complex funding arrangement that UBC can offer for a skytrain line. IMO to keep UBC vital, UBC funding would be better steered towards ongoing financial aid and improvements to classrooms/teaching/research than a new kitty for a rapid transit line.

Ultimately, the province will be the driver of UBC transit funding. It will be done if the province deems it a priority, with or without any ante from UBC.

As someone who went to UBC for 3 years, I can tell you I would have killed to have had the Skytrain extended there. The 99 B-Line is a living hell during the school year and all the other buses are pretty crowded now.

As for finding ways of funding it, in order to raise $500 M, you could do it by raising tuition by around $350 per year per student for 30 years. If you find other sources of funding (say from development) that number will be even smaller. Although no one likes tuition increases, this number is not a ridiculous amount.

[GlassCity]

There is absolutely nothing right about raising tuition by $350 (that's 10%!) for students that will be long gone before the line is built.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by Sheba

...and SFU has reasons to contribute to a gondola up Burnaby Mountain - and I've been told they were quite willing to before that got pushed to the back burner.

It's an order of magnitude. The SFU Gondola was $70M when first envisaged. Compared to any significant contribution that UBC makes on the subway it would be tiny.

It would also save SFU from the several days a year where campus is shut down or people get trapped up the hill do to ice. That's potentially lots of incurred costs that could be avoided.

UBC almost never shuts down, I can only think of it happening once in the years I went there and it was because fallen trees closed most of the roads and brought down power lines.

[Genauso]

Originally Posted by casper

Most capital funding for university research is done through CFI. Here is the list:

https://www.innovation.ca/funded-projects

BC has around 13% of Canada's population. Quebec is around 23%. Looks like BC getting a bit more than half of Quebec.

On the transit front, I would expect that standard three way split that has been the case for decades in Canada.

Thank you, very much. I searched and just couldn't find that.

I was going off the news stories I recalled seeing on cbc.ca, and when I didn't see UofT or UBC I assumed they were using the program to preserve the universities in the maritimes that were over built in the past and are struggling to stay open.

Hopefully we see more transparency, online publishing of what is being done by the government. I don't expect a strict division of funds, just that it adapts to needs over time. The evidence of inputs and outputs over time should be out in the open for people to make their own decision.

[Aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

There is absolutely nothing right about raising tuition by $350 (that's 10%!) for students that will be long gone before the line is built.

Fine. Then borrow the money and charge the students after it's built.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Meraki

Pretty sure that was sarcasm.

UBC has reasons to contribute (the UEL, and a major education and employment hub) the same way YVR has reasons.

Isn't it Translink's job to serve traffic generating points? Why didn't downtown businesses have to shell out to get transit lines?

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Genauso

...Someone in the field of political science published their thesis about this as a book, and what I remember is that under Jean Chretien's government all BC got was the renovation of the Stanley Theater on Cambie St thanks to Hedy Fry I guess, at a time when other places got highways and bridges. It is comical, the running tally of regional sacrifice and benefits would be ridiculous.

p.s. :
I searched for the circa 1999 announcement for the renovation of the Stanley Theater to provide a comparison of the projects that received 100x-1000x more money, but what came up was Hedy Fry 2 weeks ago glowing about $300,000 for the Cultch theater which she made sound like a very important thing...

The fact that the Stanley Theatre is on Granville tells me all I need to know about your research of the subject.

[Vantage]

Provincial, and Federal Governments, along with transit users (translink), should pay. Leave private corporations out of it.

[Migrant_Coconut]

And why not? The developers are poised to make millions from densifying the corridor, and the businesses around the stations will see a giant upswing in foot traffic - surely it's fair to take a small cut of that profit to pay for the SkyTrain that'll make it all happen in the first place?

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by Vantage

Provincial, and Federal Governments, along with transit users (translink), should pay. Leave private corporations out of it.

Why wouldn't you want a business that could take advantage of having transit NOT chip into it? If I were a transit authority, I would go straight to the businesses and promote it.

[oy1234]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

Why wouldn't you want a business that could take advantage of having transit NOT chip into it? If I were a transit authority, I would go straight to the businesses and promote it.

Many will end up paying for it, through higher property taxes.

[Genauso]

Originally Posted by oy1234

Many will end up paying for it, through higher property taxes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_capture
Value capture strategies can be applied to developers or landowners, and they can be applied before or after a public improvement is built.[1] In the case of new public transit facilities, the property value premium nearby can be as high as 167%.[2] Types of value capture include the following:[3]

• Land value tax (LVT)
• Tax-increment financing (TIF)
• Special assessment districts or improvement districts
• Infrastructure impact fees (such as traffic or utility fees)
• Joint development
• Air rights
• Exactions, public easements, or other nonpossessory interests

I would be open to one-time fee paid upon redevelopment, by any property that benefitted from transit-related upzoning. Similar to the Hong Kong MTR leasing or selling(?) land near subway stations.
That being said, we still have a problem of uniting who benefits (even indirectly) and who contributes. Fast moving land prices don't help, as that will redraw travel patterns and exacerbate any miscalibration of benefits+contributions. Suburbs don't want to pay, Vancouver doesn't want to allow new lanes in.

[WarrenC12]

The Translink property tax should be variable based on your location's access to transit. Highest near Skytrain stations, etc.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The Translink property tax should be variable based on your location's access to transit. Highest near Skytrain stations, etc.

Would this not also encourage people to live further from transit? Seems to go against traditional TOD intentions.