Time for another poll, just to measure the mood at the moment.
This poll asks whether you think the Mayors’ Council proposal – Regional Transportation Investments: A Vision for Metro Vancouver – could pass in a referendum.
Yes, there are no doubt compromises to come, a funding amount to be determined, a question to be formulated, but let’s get your assessment of the likelihood of success – or not. And then add your comments, qualifications and rationale below.
.
I am optimistic because of the broad support the proposal is already receiving.
Even the most stubborn politicians are forced to listen if enough people are talking.
I agree – the proposal is attracting support across the spectrum: not only from transit advocates and environmental groups, but also businesses (e.g. Business in Vancouver). Once enough people and groups put their support behind this, the Province will effectively be obligated to support it too. The big question will then be the funding mechanism.
I am pessimistic because of the complete lack of interest on behalf of the Province.
“Could” it pass? I think so. But the probability is difficult to assess until the Province reveals more details about the referendum and their level of interest in this project.
“I am pessimistic because of the complete lack of interest on behalf of the Province.” Well Don the Province is uninterested because . . .
http://rinf.com/alt-news/media-news/12-numbers-global-financial-ponzi-scheme-burned-brain/
. . . and what with everybody straining to start another war there is just far too much debt floating around already . . . It’s unrealistic to be peachy positive . . .
At the moment, we know the “what” — an excellent list of potential projects and improvements, with a reasonably believable and affordable price tag. Pundit and chattering class reaction is mostly positive, some of it remarkably and unexpectedly positive.
We have some ideas about “how” — how to pay for it, which is the biggest unanswered question, as all levels of pols dance nimbly around the toxic topic of more taxes. But we have no certainty.
We have some leadership from the Mayors, but the Province seems to be standing back in the weeds, tapping their foot and saying “no” every once in a while.
And we have no idea what the referendum question will be, and this is the most important question of them all.
In its way, the Mayors’ transport plan proposes creating a disruptive element in our society. It proposes shifting major money into a major paradigm shift. No longer will the pinnacle of our society’s success and ambition be two Buicks in every driveway. Instead, it will be that vastly more citizens have effective transportation alternatives available to them.
I am dismayed to say that I think our Provincial Gov’t is a long ways off from wanting any part of this disruptive shift in the status quo.
Well said. The benefits of the proposed new taxes and levies will have to be explained far better AND (since people love their cars) a major carrot is required, say no more gasoline surcharge ! Replacing that gasoline tax with road tolls makes far more sense .. and since it will be levied only in congested routes folks in less dense communities like Surrey or Delta will embrace the plan as they save !
For example, living at UBC, not having a train out here for at least 20 years (or maybe never) and not knowing why a bus is actually faster than a car I am not all too happy about this new plan as a trip to downtown now requires two changes, and the bus might still be slow to Arbutus ! So all I see is “more taxes” especially if road tolls are 10+ years out, too. They should pilot roads toll, say on Granville or some other choke points at rush hour and see how it works.
The trip to Downtown should only require one change – you could take the 99 to Arbutus and transfer to the #16 heading Downtown. It’s true that it would be two changes if you want to use Skytrain to get Downtown.
no transfer at all, are and still will be on the menu for UBC Downtown trip:
that is route 4, 14 and 44 (the later being a good candidate to become a B line).
A very probable revamped 84 (becoming B line too), will ensure direct connection between UBC Canada line and Expo Line (to Main station instead of VCC)
I get that. There is a #4 and #44 bus today that goes downtown from UBC, at a very leisurely pace at 33% speed of a car, stopping every two blocks. Buses are for NDP voters. No one that actually values their time takes the bus. [No wonder the Liberals are in no hurry to improve investment in transit]
One day, with an express bus, I (and thousands of others that drive a car today) can be persuaded to take a bus from UBC, or N-Van or W-Van or White Rock or Delta, instead of a car when
a) the car is far slower, due to express lanes and priority signalling for the bus
b) the car is far more expensive due to road tolls
Who takes the bus these days to Calgary or Edmonton from Vancouver ? No one. People fly. Speed of transit is extremely relevant, and in many dense cities only a train (above, below or at grade) can deliver that !
Vancouver, a city built for cars over the last 100 years, will take a long long time to change the car culture.
bus 44 is an express bus stopping no much more than the 99B in Kits
(average speed 23km/h, faster than the 99B, see here) putting UBC at ~31 mn from waterfront, google suggests a drive of ~25mn in daytime. so the bus 44 seems fairly competitive.
it could be better (if the mayor plan was including measure to improve service speed and reliability with measure as you have suggested: it is effectively a critical missing part of the plan) but probably not that much.
A subway up to UBC could not necessarily improve very significantly the UBC-downtown travel time, or at least not enough for a too small market, to justify the expense. A probable reason why the Translink study was finding a subway stopping at arbutus as providing a much better benefit:cost ratio than a subway up yo UBC ( see link in http://voony.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/phasing-the-broadway-subway/ )
If the referendum fails people will still have to pay. They’ll pay with their time. It’ll be a few minutes here and a few minutes there and when you add it all up it’ll be maybe 20 hours/year in 2015. As more people move here things will get worse. Eventually the average citizen will be losing an additional 100 hours/year.
So what is your time worth? Is it $1/hour or $10/hour? Whatever the answer there’s a real “price” to the additional time you will lose if the referendum fails, a price that likely exceeds the cost of the mayor’s proposal.
That’s what the Mayors should be stressing in this referendum – better transit will save you time in your commute.
The way to make the referendum succeed is to show the majority of people that they’ll benefit from it. So far, it’s really nice for people in downtown, along Broadway, and possibly some parts of Surrey. Everyone else, it looks more like just another tax with not much to show for it.
And before you get on my case, I’d be fine with voting yes. But there’s nothing in the plan that’s been described that will benefit me or any of the many other commuters that DON’T travel downtown. So, you the enthusiastic promoters of the plan, better find a way to make it inclusive, or it will for sure fail. And it won’t be the province’s fault.
The proposal includes service upgrades to many areas in addition to Broadway, Surrey, and downtown. For example, the 11 B-line routes, some of which serve the North Shore, and bus service increases of 25% region-wide, and 80% for Nightbus service. So while the Broadway subway and Surrey light rail (I would prefer Skytrain, for the record) are the highlights, there are benefits region-wide.
For example, of the 11 new B-line routes, 3 serve downtown Vancouver, and one runs Joyce-UBC. Most of the money will go in Skytrain upgrades and the Patullo bridge.
No question, the 3 new B lines each serving Metrotown and Surrey are a useful addition – as you say, a benefit region-wide. But still, promising 15 minute bus service at peak times on main routes (which is what you see in the fact sheets) is not going to win a lot of hearts and minds outside of downtown.
Like I said, I’m in favour of better transit. I will even pay more taxes to fund it. But I see very little that will benefit me (or most people whose commute does not involve a trip to downtown Vancouver). My commute will just get more expensive or inconvenient, or both. So, how do you think the people who AREN’T in favour of spending the big bucks are going to be persuaded to support it?
I think the answer is to focus on the places not well served now – the commutes between suburbs, where people have no real choice but to rely on the car. Then more people see the benefits. So you build support. Right now, most people just see higher taxes coming.
Since people love their cars, a major carrot is required, say no more gasoline surcharge ! Replacing that gasoline tax with road tolls makes far more sense .. and since it will be levied only in congested routes folks in less dense communities like Surrey or Delta will embrace the plan as they save !
This truism is getting rather tired. While certainly, some people “love” their cars, it is a small portion of the population. And even those that do, may not enjoy the daily slog of driving to work and, if transit service was good, would commute by transit saving their “love” of their car for weekend drives in the country.
And young people are far less in “love” than older generations. Already, 50% are using transit, walking and cycling to work.
So, really, we don’t need to get people out of their cars to meet the 2045 targets, we just need to make sure there is enough good transit service for those who are already using it.
Not quite. You need to get out more especially into rural areas. Public transit is not an option there, especially in the rain ! That uis why roads are more clogged when it is raining: less bikes, less folks taking the bus as waiting in the rain is a royal pain.
Look at the plan. It expands transit around the region. Sure, you can find people that chose to live far from transit, but that is getting to be a small portion of the population. Even then, many of those people will like fewer people on the roads so they can get around with less congestion.
Let me re-state the referendum question in a bit more drastic terms for car lovers:
Do you, Mrs. & Mr. Resident with 2 kids and 2 mini-vans in Delta (or insert here: Deep Cove, Tsawassen, Surrey, Coquitlam, Langley, W-Van ..) approve of additional road pricing so your commute is a bit faster but far more expensive, or so that you can take an inconvenient bus with 2 exchanges and a 20 min walk (even in the rain and at -3 degree weather), as we intend to toll bridges, tunnels and all major throughfares, especially during rush hour between 6:30 am and 9 am and from 3:30 to 6:30 pm ?
Likely answer: heck, no !
Roads have been around 100+ years in MetroVan and cities have been built around it, so it will take at least another 50 to change that, plus the individual vehicle, albeit far smaller and possibly electric will be with us 400+ years.
I agree that road pricing is the way to go to ease congestion – better than gasoline surcharges – but will 50%+ of voters think so too ?
“so your commute is a bit faster but far more expensive”…
Bias in the question is indicative of bias in the questioner.
The question shown was meant to show the biased version of a brain pattern in the mind of a car lover (with soccer/hockey playing kids) when she/he reads the unbiased version ! Every person has a bias, i.e. set of values or beliefs.
As stated earlier, this was to show that we need a carrot for car users, for example lower gasoline prices, in exchange for road tolls and annual licensing fees for larger cars, which btw, in my opinion are all the right things to do.
With road pricing I could see a large drop in the property values of many outlying properties – whether residential (i.e. condos atop Burnaby mountain) or commercial (i.e. suburban office parks).
People would stay closer to home (staycation anyone?) for many activities – whether shopping, eating out, or recreational activities.
I could see some business failing as a result – i.e. restaurants or attractions in remote locations, or even shopping districts (or malls) not on SkyTrain that draw from outside their immediate neighbourhood.
All in all it may be a good thing.
Who really needs to drive all the way to Riverport to see a movie?
I actually prefer the theatre in Riverport over others downtown or Burrard as driving there from UBC takes almost as long as drivign to downtown, and it is a far nicer theatre with wider seats and bigger screen than the crammed shoeboxes elsewhere. So, the mayors’ plan needs to include choices by car, as driving a less busy Sunday afternoon surely costs less road tolls, or none, than Friday 5pm or even Saturday 10 am to 5 pm. I would likely still drive, perhaps less frequently though, if the road tolls cost me $10, as taking a train plus bus there is just not going to happen as it takes 3x as long.
@Guest, given that neighbourhood movie theatres have been disappearing at an alarming pace, a lot of people do. Or all we all just supposed to stay home isolated in our cocoons watching Netflix? Not a recipe for great neighbourhoods.