Metro Vancouver Transportation & Transit Plebiscite

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I must say I agree that all bridges, old and new, should now be tolled (along with the Sea to Sky corridor since it has so many pinch points where one cannot escape a toll akin to a bridge).

I feel $3 and above it too expensive for our region (and being a flat tax restricts the lower income people much more than the higher income people).

Instead, any old major bridge structure (lets say, completed before 2000) should be a dollar per crossing.

All new / replaced major bridge structures (completed after 2000) should be $2 per crossing.

Therefore everyone pays, and those who have the luxury of newer / safer / better designed bridges pay a little more, but not so much where it deflects too much people to older structures.

This way there is no crowding on "free" alternatives as well.

Everyone doesn't pay though. Someone coming from Port Coquitlam for example doesn't cross a single bridge, but drives much farther than those going over False Creek or Burrard inlet. I agree in theory but there should be a toll for crossing Boundary road too if we're going to be totally fair about it.

Maybe toll the Georgia viaduct too.

[TransitJack]

It still amazes me that the LGB was simply upgraded and not replaced. YES it is an iconic piece of infrastructure for the city, but to add zero capacity improvements (ok the sidewalks are nicer and the wider lanes are better) was simply hogwash.

Imagine if they had replaced with another suspension bridge (ok it likely would have been cable-stayed), that had at least 4 lanes for cars and, hold your hats, capacity for rapid transit on the lower decks.

Skytrain downtown to the west end, through the park and over to the North Shore. A branch at the North side, one going towards Ambleside, one going East along Marine to at least Lonsdale (or better yet along towards Park and Tilford (with a possible future expansion either further East or back over a 2nd narrows crossing). You would slice traffic using the bridges, ease congestion on Marine Dr and Main Street. The Seabus could be repositioned or scrapped.

Stanley Park would have required additional costs to mitigate the noise (dare we say a canopy or cover and park built above) which would have added costs, but a HUGE legacy project that would address the challenges of a growing region. Instead, we are stuck in a worsening traffic pattern with no way to really improve.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by Pinion

Everyone doesn't pay though. Someone coming from Port Coquitlam for example doesn't cross a single bridge, but drives much farther than those going over False Creek or Burrard inlet. I agree in theory but there should be a toll for crossing Boundary road too if we're going to be totally fair about it.

Maybe toll the Georgia viaduct too.

Or just a higher gas tax so no tolling gantries are required...

The tolls argument gets stupid quickly. Tolls also cost money to collect, so small tolls mean more money to fund a bureaucracy, less for infrastructure. BC really needs more bureaucrats!

Roads are cheap, bridges are really expensive. Tolls really aren't required to pay for most roads.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

Or just a higher gas tax so no tolling gantries are required...

Yep I'd prefer that, just arguing against the "tolling bridges is fair" stance since there's a huge part of the population that doesn't cross them despite living far away from their work.

[GeeCee]

A key thing to remember is that you generally want to put tolls in places which cannot be avoided if travelling that corridor - such as on a bridge. If they were to place a tolling gantry on another portion of the highway, people would simply ratrun around it. If they were to do it by Boundary Road as Pinion suggests, everyone would simply get off the highway at Willingdon or Grandview, causing massive traffic jams there. You basically need to toll either one (or more) parts that people cannot easily avoid, or place many tolling gantries.. and that gets very expensive quick.

[Pinion]

I didn't seriously suggest tolling Boundary, and definitely not just Hwy 1 at Boundary. I suggested the length of Boundary would have to be one giant toll booth to be fair, which is of course silly. I'm in favour of raising funds through gas tax or something similar.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

because it costs an absurd amount of $$$$$$ to install sensors/cameras/data centers/servers/wages for people to monitor every single onramp/offramp/HOV lane exit/HOV lane entrance. and then more $$$$ for software that can process car X went from exit 1a-2b and car Y went 1b-2b and exit 1a-2b is 2kms while 1b-2b is 2.3kms. at $0.50/km car X=$1.00, car Y=$1.15. now lets also throw in the car/truck/trailer/motorcycle/semitrailer variables and it gets harder. there would need to be a crazy amount of data stored and processed in seconds for all these cars. from a logistics stand point, it is NOT easy.

it is a ton easier and cheaper to use a bridge for tolls as there is only 1 way on, and 1 way off. car X went on-off and car Y went on-off. on-off = $3.00. car X=$3.00, car Y=$3.00

there was no grand scheme of "hey, those poor losers in the valley, lets make them pay more!!!" "ya lets do that!!!" no, it was "what is the easiest way to collect a toll." and a bridge is the easiest, as mentioned up top. bridges have no variables. you are on, you pay $3.00. then other vehicles are different.

i realize you have massive envy and hate to people who you think are stuck up rich people, but come on, use some common sense.

So in other words in order to avoid putting up sensors etc, you think that the people South of Fraser should pay the whole shot? Now there is some hard core equality for you. The lowest income area of the region should pay the most, is this what you are saying?

Road tolls are categorically unfair and counter productive. They can lead to taxing a person $3 for going a km and nothing for going 30km. I totally disagree with road tolls except on new pieces of infrastructure like Golden Ears. PM, GM, and Pat are not new infrastructure but just an upgrading of current ones that should have be done 40 years ago.

Gas taxes are the only real faire way to go............the more you drive the more you pay and the bigger and less fuel efficient car you have the more you pay. Tolls are unfair but if they are pushed ahead they should apply to everyone and not just those who live in the Valley because they can't afford to live near where they work in hyper expensive Vancouver. If Vancouverites favour tolls for the valley then they should be willing to pay them themselves. If Vancouverites don't put their money where their mouths are then don't be surprised if the people in the Valley balk at the idea of paying tolls so Vancouverites don't have to.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

So in other words in order to avoid putting up sensors etc, you think that the people South of Fraser should pay the whole shot? Now there is some hard core equality for you. The lowest income area of the region should pay the most, is this what you are saying?

Road tolls are categorically unfair and counter productive. They can lead to taxing a person $3 for going a km and nothing for going 30km. I totally disagree with road tolls except on new pieces of infrastructure like Golden Ears. PM, GM, and Pat are not new infrastructure but just an upgrading of current ones that should have be done 40 years ago.

Gas taxes are the only real faire way to go............the more you drive the more you pay and the bigger and less fuel efficient car you have the more you pay. Tolls are unfair but if they are pushed ahead they should apply to everyone and not just those who live in the Valley because they can't afford to live near where they work in hyper expensive Vancouver. If Vancouverites favour tolls for the valley then they should be willing to pay them themselves. If Vancouverites don't put their money where their mouths are then don't be surprised if the people in the Valley balk at the idea of paying tolls so Vancouverites don't have to.

I actually agree with you here. Tolling a new crossing makes sense to recover the costs and build another one, sure. But tolling existing crossings? Just doesn't seem fair. I'm all for creating new funding mechanisms, but at a certain point, how much can you take from people?

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

On an unrelated note, I heard on the radio today that the Surrey council or whatever now wants the referendum to include light rail to Cloverdale and South Surrey. Anybody now anything about this? I want to make sure I have the facts straight before I get all

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

So in other words in order to avoid putting up sensors etc, you think that the people South of Fraser should pay the whole shot? The lowest income area of the region should pay the most, is this what you are saying?

not at all. it just happens that it ended up working out like that because the PMB was replaced and somehow it needs to be paid for, one way or another. i would expect a toll on the new 2nd Narrows or new LGB, as an example. there just arent that many alternatives available, and the other alternatives do cost a fair amount of money to implement, as i said in my other post. tolls suck, for anyone and everyone who has to pay them. i can see why they chose to toll only the bridge, that is by far the easiest and cheapest way to do it. sure, it isn't the perfect or best solution but by making the user pay that is the most "fair" way to do it. it wouldn't go over well for forcing other "poor areas" to pay more for a bridge the never use.

in a perfect world, only new crossings would be tolled, but sadly, this is far from a perfect world. if a new Knight/Oak/2nd Narrows/etc. i would expect to pay a toll for using them as well.

a gas tax could be considered more "fair," but how do you explain it to people that person X, who will never use the new infrastructure, has to help pay for it? the whole "user pays" is just the easiest way to do it. yes, road pricing the whole new route would have been more fair, but as i said before, logistically it is very, very, very complicated to implement. it isn't as easy as people make it sound.

yup it sucks, yup the world isn't "fair," and yup in a perfect world things would be better. but this isn't a perfect world, but please, feel free to run for office with your platform and help make it more fair. more power to you.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I actually agree with you here. Tolling a new crossing makes sense to recover the costs and build another one, sure. But tolling existing crossings? Just doesn't seem fair. I'm all for creating new funding mechanisms, but at a certain point, how much can you take from people?

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

How is it not fair that the SoF people are the one paying the bulk of the tolls?

I agree with ssiguy stance and I don't really understand what the resistance is that the cost is shared by EVERYBODY in Metro Vancouver, not just those that already are less fortunate to begin with?

The more I see people here think its acceptable for the less fortunate segment of Metro Vancouver residents should pay while those lucky enough don't, the more I want the "No" side to win, so property tax will be the only way to pay for transit improvements. That is more fair that tolling just SoF crossings.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

a gas tax could be considered more "fair," but how do you explain it to people that person X, who will never use the new infrastructure, has to help pay for it? the whole "user pays" is just the easiest way to do it. yes, road pricing the whole new route would have been more fair, but as i said before, logistically it is very, very, very complicated to implement. it isn't as easy as people make it sound.

There are a lot of things we pay for that we don't use. My wife and I are in our mid 30s with no intention to ever have kids but we happily pay for schools. We rarely go to the doctor/hospital but gladly pay our share of universal health care costs so others don't go bankrupt when they have some bad luck. It's part of being a top notch society to help out people without any direct benefit, and there's lots of real-world proof that this uplifts everyone.

The majority of Canadians used to have this attitude and it seems to be slowly slipping away into a more me-first attitude, and we're all going to pay more for that. If not directly, then through an uptick in violent crime and social/political unrest that comes with that sort of system.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

How is it not fair that the SoF people are the one paying the bulk of the tolls?

I agree with ssiguy stance and I don't really understand what the resistance is that the cost is shared by EVERYBODY in Metro Vancouver, not just those that already are less fortunate to begin with?

The more I see people here think its acceptable for the less fortunate segment of Metro Vancouver residents should pay while those lucky enough don't, the more I want the "No" side to win, so property tax will be the only way to pay for transit improvements. That is more fair that tolling just SoF crossings.

Sorry, I'm not sure what you're arguing here. I didn't mention South of Fraser at all in my post. All I said was tolling new crossings=good, tolling existing crossings=bad. Regardless of where they are.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Pinion

There are a lot of things we pay for that we don't use. My wife and I are in our mid 30s with no intention to ever have kids but we happily pay for schools. We rarely go to the doctor/hospital but gladly pay our share of universal health care costs so others don't go bankrupt when they have some bad luck.

of course people pay for what they don't use. i pay for a bunch of crap I'll never use and that's fine for me, i get it and understand it. but you have to think as the general population. there is a point when you can only take so much in taxes. I'm not arguing one way or the other. i think it is a bit dangerous to just say "everyone should pay!" because there has to be a point where there is enough. people as a whole are only so willing to pay so much when they hit their tipping point. there has to be a point, though, when taxes are enough. and i think that whole translink gas tax people especially hate. what is is $0.15/L or something? try telling people they are adding another $0.02/0.04 and see if anyone gets reelected.

trying to sell a new tax to anyone is difficult, especially when the tax is for something far away from where person X lives. and the Valley isn't the only place where people arent rich. the majority of people who actually live in Vancouver, and arent off shore investors, are not rich. they just have a house worth money. they don't actually have cash. my parents would be an example of that. yes their house has gone up, since they bought many a decade ago, in value, but no, they don't make buckets of money, and they make it by, but there isn't a lot of wiggle room. i know a lot of people in the same boat. they have owned their Vancouver homes for awhile but they don't have all this money to just spend on stuff. the average person in Vancouver is "house rich, money poor." ie value in the house, but very little actual liquid assets, as houses are long term assets.

the easiest way to make people pay is when you show them quantitative results. Person Y uses infrastructure, person Y pays. Person X doesn't use, Person X pays. the GENERAL PUBLIC, I'm speaking as the population as a whole, does not like having to pay for something that they will never even possibly remotely use.

no matter where anything is built it is just easy to make the people who use it pay for it. that is the least controversial way to get your money back. I'm certainly not saying the less fortunate should be taxed/tolled/pay more, it just happens that is where the new infrastructure was built. i would expect a toll on any new bridge/tunnel built anywhere in the GVRD.

since it irks so many people why arent you trying to run for election to change this stuff? maybe you'd actually win and could change something as it seems this is a common feeling.

[WarrenC12]

I sure hope this stuff becomes an issue in the next provincial election. It was all but ignored last time.

The election will be in 2017, so Evergreen will be done, and likely nothing else will be started.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

How is it not fair that the SoF people are the one paying the bulk of the tolls?

I agree with ssiguy stance and I don't really understand what the resistance is that the cost is shared by EVERYBODY in Metro Vancouver, not just those that already are less fortunate to begin with?

The more I see people here think its acceptable for the less fortunate segment of Metro Vancouver residents should pay while those lucky enough don't, the more I want the "No" side to win, so property tax will be the only way to pay for transit improvements. That is more fair that tolling just SoF crossings.

I think people SoF quickly forget that the Surrey Council doesn't want you to leave Surrey. Be it Work, Shopping or Entertainment.

Tolls do two things correctly:
1. Recover the costs of the infrastructure
2. Shape the growth (eg Jobs/School/Housing) to discourage wasteful commutes.

It should not be a revenue generator. Modern technology even eliminates the needs for bottleneck's caused by Toll plazas.


You're right, people SoF shouldn't be paying so many tolls... because they shouldn't have a reason to cross the Fraser daily. In fact the Surrey Council even believes that if you've been following the stupid light rail arguments.

Rasode - "We don't want mass rapid transit running right out of the city every time. We don't want people to just be transported straight out to Langley."

As for making "driving more of a pain", at some point ICBC will require dashcams that are tied to GPS as a standard safety feature. People in Russia and China have them because of the inherent corruption. It's only a matter of time before Insurance companies see it as a way to reduce fraud and vehicle theft. At that point it would likely be used to "toll" people who use more of the road than necessary (eg time-of-day+distance tolling.)

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by Kisai

I think people SoF quickly forget that the Surrey Council doesn't want you to leave Surrey. Be it Work, Shopping or Entertainment.

Tolls do two things correctly:
1. Recover the costs of the infrastructure
2. Shape the growth (eg Jobs/School/Housing) to discourage wasteful commutes.

It should not be a revenue generator. Modern technology even eliminates the needs for bottleneck's caused by Toll plazas.


You're right, people SoF shouldn't be paying so many tolls... because they shouldn't have a reason to cross the Fraser daily. In fact the Surrey Council even believes that if you've been following the stupid light rail arguments.

I fail to see what Surrey Council has to do with ANYTHING with regards to the unfairness of SoF paying the bulk of tolls. The last time I saw the Port Mann, it was full of SoF people crossing it, same with Patullo.

I did not know that the decision to screw an entire segment of the Metro Vancouver population was solely because of Surrey Council. I also did not know that Surrey Council was in the position to dictate to its citizens whether they want to go out of Surrey or not for whatever reason, whether its work, school, recreation and so on.

What is being argued here is the fairness....everyone should pay their own share. No segment of the Metro Vancouver population should pay more and get less. And yet people like you advocate that the bulk of the revenues be raised by SoF people while the bulk of the benefits and spending, specifically Broadway Subway, benefits the urban, hip crowd of the city of Vancouver! Enough is enough!

Let the referendum fail so property tax is the ONLY way to pay for transit improvements. This way, the most expensive properties pay for the lion share of the funding, which makes sense since the lion share of the costs are in the same area anyway!

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

What is being argued here is the fairness....everyone should pay their own share. No segment of the Metro Vancouver population should pay more and get less. And yet people like you advocate that the bulk of the revenues be raised by SoF people while the bulk of the benefits and spending, specifically Broadway Subway, benefits the urban, hip crowd of the city of Vancouver! Enough is enough!

Actually, half of the people working along the Broadway corridor live outside of Vancouver, so the Broadway SkyTrain benefits people from all over the Lower Mainland. Of the major projects, the only one that's in Vancouver is the Broadway SkyTrain. The Pattullo Bridge benefits New Westminster and Surrey. The light rail transit benefits Surrey and Langley. Of the 11 new B-Line routes, four of them serve Vancouver and the others serve every other community (except Delta).

You say that everyone should pay their own share. Everyone pays PST, whereas not everyone pays property taxes. Why should the burden of improved transit fall only to landowners? Why not visitors to Metro Vancouver too? Wouldn't that be more fair?

Edit: You're also right in saying that it's not fair that people living south of the Fraser have to pay tolls on the PMB to get to Vancouver. If only there were some kind of light rapid transit and improved bus transit that they could take that connects to the SkyTrain so they could leave their cars at home and not pay the PMB tolls...

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Actually, half of the people working along the Broadway corridor live outside of Vancouver, so the Broadway SkyTrain benefits people from all over the Lower Mainland. Of the major projects, the only one that's in Vancouver is the Broadway SkyTrain. The Pattullo Bridge benefits New Westminster and Surrey. The light rail transit benefits Surrey and Langley. Of the 11 new B-Line routes, four of them serve Vancouver and the others serve every other community (except Delta).

You say that everyone should pay their own share. Everyone pays PST, whereas not everyone pays property taxes. Why should the burden of improved transit fall only to landowners? Why not visitors to Metro Vancouver too? Wouldn't that be more fair?

Edit: You're also right in saying that it's not fair that people living south of the Fraser have to pay tolls on the PMB to get to Vancouver. If only there were some kind of light rapid transit and improved bus transit that they could take that connects to the SkyTrain so they could leave their cars at home and not pay the PMB tolls...

And how much does that one subway cost compared to EVERYTHING else?

People can always shop elsewhere to avoid the Metro Vancouver sales tax. They already do so to avoid the gas tax, judging by the never ending border line ups. But people cannot uproot their properties to avoid Metro Vancouver only property tax increase.

And at the end of the day, property owners are the ones that benefit the most from any transit improvement anyway. After all, that is the only reason why a lot of people here support transit improvements at whatever costs, to see condos upon condos to continue to sprout out, right?

Just look at all those threads about projects in Metrotown, Brentwood, and other developments near a transit line....and how people oogle at their grandeur....its not about benefitting the riding public, but rather to spur "urban" development.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

I fail to see what Surrey Council has to do with ANYTHING with regards to the unfairness of SoF paying the bulk of tolls. The last time I saw the Port Mann, it was full of SoF people crossing it, same with Patullo.

I did not know that the decision to screw an entire segment of the Metro Vancouver population was solely because of Surrey Council. I also did not know that Surrey Council was in the position to dictate to its citizens whether they want to go out of Surrey or not for whatever reason, whether its work, school, recreation and so on.

What is being argued here is the fairness....everyone should pay their own share. No segment of the Metro Vancouver population should pay more and get less. And yet people like you advocate that the bulk of the revenues be raised by SoF people while the bulk of the benefits and spending, specifically Broadway Subway, benefits the urban, hip crowd of the city of Vancouver! Enough is enough!

Let the referendum fail so property tax is the ONLY way to pay for transit improvements. This way, the most expensive properties pay for the lion share of the funding, which makes sense since the lion share of the costs are in the same area anyway!

Are you being willingly oblivious to the population density of Vancouver vs the low-density population sprawl SoF? It makes no economical sense to support infrastructure that goes primarily in one-direction. eg SoF commuting to Vancouver because the property prices and taxes are lower SoF. People like you are blindly ignoring that Surrey is not the center of of Metro Vancouver, that all the bus-routes SoF are highly subsidized, and people still drive. It's a catch-22 situation of people don't want to get out of their cars because of slow transit, and people don't want to pay for better service to rectify it.

http://www.translink.ca/~/media/docu...ce_review.ashx




If the BC government decided to just cut Translink in half and put SoF in it's own agency, the North Translink would not have to subsidize SoF, and South Translink would promptly axe all bus service to run Light Rail to nowhere./sarcasm

My point is that people are acting like entitled brats in high school over the plebiscite. The property taxes have always been the right funding mechanism for funding maintenance of infrastucture (eg roads, rails, and all the safety mechanisms) but operational cost should be pushed directly to those who use it, as in transit fares for bus/train riders, and gas taxes for car drivers. If the population base doesn't support the infrastructure they have, then they should just stop operating and maintaining it, and put those tax dollars back into the policing requirements.

Capital projects, should be it's own referendum, and I can practically assure you that SoF would never vote for anything once the long-term costs are disclosed. All P3 projects are front-loaded, which means that you are paying and financing for the project, up front, regardless if nobody uses the project or the project is built-undercapacity due to incorrect data modeling. You can't fix a P3 project once it's underway. On the other hand, Political meddling is how we got to where we are today.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

And how much does that one subway cost compared to EVERYTHING else?

Broadway SkyTrain was pegged at $3b, but that was to get it all the way to UBC. The current plan is to only take it half-way, to Arbutus, so it'll probably cost about $2b.

Surrey/Langley LRT will cost about $2b [source].

New Pattullo will cost about $1b.

People can always shop elsewhere to avoid the Metro Vancouver sales tax. They already do so to avoid the gas tax, judging by the never ending border line ups. But people cannot uproot their properties to avoid Metro Vancouver only property tax increase.

The overwhelming majority of people living in Metro Vancouver shop in Metro Vancouver. The "they'll just shop in the US or in Abbotsford" statement is largely a myth -- it'll be true for a small number of people but not the vast majority.

And people can uproot their properties. It's called "moving to Abbotsford or Chilliwack".