HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2010, 8:26 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 38,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKaz View Post
Just build to Port Moody for now, would be a good start. I think the plan east of Port Moody needs work anyway, they should plan a future PoCo/Pitt Meadows/Maple Ridge extension. Skytrain should be closer to Newport Village, go down Guildford Way, meet up with Coquitlam Central, and eventually go parallel to the CP tracks through to PoCo and beyond.
Yeah, the original PMC Line plan - makes way more sense for future extensions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2010, 9:00 PM
Alex Mackinnon's Avatar
Alex Mackinnon Alex Mackinnon is offline
Can I has a tunnel?
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: East Van
Posts: 2,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberdeen5698 View Post
YES - that's exactly what I'd hoped for, and it's exactly what we would NOT have gotten if the Province thought the mayors were going to cave and approve the property tax increase.

Now we'll finally get to see whether this "memorandum of understanding" the Province and the cities signed is worth the paper it was written on.
Actually this is bad. We end up with a bunch of dumb taxes with additional overheads to administer. Cell phone tax anyone?
__________________
"It's ok, I'm an engineer!" -Famous last words
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2010, 10:25 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,593
What happens to the money from the Feds that was supposedly going to disappear after December 31st unless Translink could figure their shit out?
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2010, 10:39 PM
aberdeen5698's Avatar
aberdeen5698 aberdeen5698 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon View Post
Actually this is bad. We end up with a bunch of dumb taxes with additional overheads to administer. Cell phone tax anyone?
Not necessarily. For example, the Province could agree to simply raise the cap on the existing gas tax.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2010, 11:07 PM
golog golog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberdeen5698 View Post
Not necessarily. For example, the Province could agree to simply raise the cap on the existing gas tax.
which people living near the border would just avoid by filling up in Washington state, or in Abbotsford.

as for the idea of redevelopment charges, sounds like a system called Mello-Roos in California.

what concerns me most is that the mayors may simply be seeking a funding mechanism for personally selfish reasons. the complaints are about the added tax burden, but there is nary a word about reducing costs within their own municipal fiefdoms.

there are many possible ways to raise funding, but I have yet to hear what the Mayors Council's goals are, and why they are united in opposing a share from property taxes. if the intentions are polluted, then they can screw up any possible method
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2010, 11:13 PM
Canadian Mind's Avatar
Canadian Mind Canadian Mind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberdeen5698 View Post
YES - that's exactly what I'd hoped for, and it's exactly what we would NOT have gotten if the Province thought the mayors were going to cave and approve the property tax increase.

Now we'll finally get to see whether this "memorandum of understanding" the Province and the cities signed is worth the paper it was written on.
ok, now what about the contribution from the feds? Is that not due to expire soon?
__________________
"you're eating chicken periods" - Vid
"I love eggs, especially the ones with runny yolks" - Me
"EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, you're disgusting!" - Vid
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2010, 1:56 AM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Mind View Post
ok, now what about the contribution from the feds? Is that not due to expire soon?
This is what I've been wondering for weeks. No one seems to have an answer.

This blog post over at Civic Surrey basically sums up my position on this whole mess

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Hillsdon
Civic Surrey

Watts expected to vote down proposed King George B-Line

Despite years of rhetoric touting the expansion of transit within Surrey, now that a reasonable and affordable option is on the table that would, among other things, begin a long-planned B-Line service down King George, Mayor Watts has decided that she cannot support such plans. In just three weeks, the Mayor’s Council will be presented with two supplemental plans for TransLink – the first, which will pay for the region’s share of the Evergreen Line and a section of the North Fraser Perimeter Road, is expected to cost an average $36 to property owners; the second, which includes the former two projects, also adds a number of other region wide improvements to the transit system, including:

- King George Boulevard B-Line service, every 7.5 mins from Guildford to White Rock, starting in 2011
- White Rock to Langley bus service, every 30 mins, starting in 2011
- Expansion and upgrades to transit hubs and SkyTrain stations, including: Main Street, Metrotown, Surrey Central, New Wesminster, and Lonsdale Quay
- Additional bus service to accommodate U-Pass expansion, population growth, and increased demand along crowded routes Highway 1
- Rapid Bus service, every 10 mins from Walnut Grove to Lougheed, starting 2013
- Restored funding to TransLink’s Bike Capital program
- Restored funding to TransLink’s Major Road Network program

This second package in front of the mayors is expected to have an average cost of $61 on property owners – that’s just $5 a month for the significant transit expansion, region-wide, that many have been calling for, including myself.

As of now, there are only two mayors expected to support the proposal: Council Chair and Mayor of Langley City, Peter Fassbender, and Mayor of Coquitlam, Richard Stewart. All other mayors have publicly stated, or are expected to, vote down the supplement, leaving the Evergreen Line on hiatus indefinitely and stalling much needed transit expansion. These mayors need to wake up to the reality of this situation.

Fact: There is only one taxpayer. Transit expansion costs money and we will pay for it, one way or another. The mayors want the province or feds to cough up additional money. The reality is that both provincial and federal taxes have decreased over the last decade. With this in mind, there is more than enough leeway to increase municipal taxes – the mayors simply don’t want to pay the political price of doing so. They want to have their cake and eat it too. Well, it doesn’t work that way. The taxpayer understands that they will pay, one way or another, regardless of whose tax pool it comes out of. All they want is to see actual value for their tax dollars – something sparingly evident for those of us South of the Fraser. TransLink’s proposal changes that entire calculation, finally giving us some viable alternatives to the automobile.

Fact: There is so much for Surrey to gain from this supplement. Not only do we get our first B-Line route, a service that was supposed to arrive after the 2010 Olympics, but we also will get renovations to Surrey Central station, a long awaited transit connection through Grandview and Campbell Heights, increased bus frequencies on Fraser Highway and 104th Ave, Rapid Bus on Highway 1, and money to continue the Fraser Highway expansion. That’s a tall order and a significant service increase for just $5 a month.

Fact: Throughout the past decade, all municipalities in the region have collectively paid for the Millennium and Canada Lines, major rapid transit services that have benefitted the western cities of Vancouver, Burnaby, and Richmond. Now, those same mayors are refusing to chip in for the Tri-Cities to get their SkyTrain connection. Now, those same mayors are refusing to help pay for Surrey’s first B-Line service. If we are to maintain the integrity of regional relationships in Metro Vancouver, those cities must understand that it is their turn to contribute to the pot.

Long have we complained that TransLink has neglected our neck of the woods – they have finally listened to our cries and responded with this proposal. For $5 a month, we get a boatload of immediate transit improvements – a King George B-Line, SkyTrain station upgrades, the Evergreen Line, Hwy 1 Rapid Bus, and more.

And Dianne Watts is going to let it pass us by.
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2010, 6:23 AM
golog golog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 356
re: what happens to federal funding

I posted this a couple weeks ago
Ken Hardie's post on Frances Bula's blog

Quote:
Ken Hardie // Nov 10, 2010 at 11:55 am

Too many media out there today reporting that TransLink wants mayors to raise property taxes. In fact, that’s precisely what our recommended plan is trying to avoid.

Thanks to penny pinching, TransLink can cover year one of the improvement costs out of reserves, giving mayors and the province 15 months to act on the Memorandum of Understanding they signed in late September and find a better funding option.

Property taxes are a backstop if no new source can be found — the Transportation Commissioner would not approve any plan that didn’t have financing from a currently-approved source.
Quote:
Ken Hardie // Nov 10, 2010 at 12:52 pm

By the way…the plan would not represent an overall increase of 30% on property taxes — perhaps on the TransLink portion — but not on your total tax amount.

But we reiterate, a property tax rise is moot if a better source can be created over the next 15 months.
which implies to me that even if there were project deadlines associated with federal funding, that Translink could proceed on its cash reserves without jeopardizing the federal funding... but if they did go ahead with construction and did not get the funding increase, then Translink would be bankrupt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2010, 5:14 PM
queetz@home's Avatar
queetz@home queetz@home is offline
Go Rotem! Die Bombardier!
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Ortigas
Posts: 3,684
Its interesting to read Paul Hilldson's comments. I remember he was this young guy who wanted to run for councillor, and because of his initiatives, Dianne Watts was quite impressed with him. Of course, the article is now outdated due to recent events but hopefully he will continue to hold her feet under fire, especially come election time.

I'm also hearing Carol James and Harry Bains saying something about $60 million of carbon tax dollars per year which are apparently allotted to corporate tax cuts by the BC Liberals and should instead go to transit. I don't know where that comes from, maybe they are seeing something in the legislature that we're not, or maybe its there but I just don't know about it but if its true....WTF??? The NDP would be the last group of people that I would think say something that makes sense but in this case, it surely did it. To their credit, this is the first time Carol James and Harry Bains (I actually like this guy) actually suggested something concrete in solving Metro Vancouver's transit woes instead of just whining and complaining.

As for Ken Hardie, I can't stand that guy! I think people like him, their jobs should be contingent to producing results. If they fail, they should be fired, and failure of building the Evergreen Line is simply not an option. Sadly, no matter what happens, people like him still keep to keep their cushy jobs and six figure salaries while the rest of the public wallow in the hopeless situation they are stuck by their bad decision making.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2010, 7:08 PM
jsbertram jsbertram is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by twoNeurons View Post
So... no more September 12th vote.
nor a December 9th vote ...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2010, 12:26 AM
BCPhil BCPhil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by queetz@home View Post
Its interesting to read Paul Hilldson's comments. I remember he was this young guy who wanted to run for councillor, and because of his initiatives, Dianne Watts was quite impressed with him. Of course, the article is now outdated due to recent events but hopefully he will continue to hold her feet under fire, especially come election time.

I'm also hearing Carol James and Harry Bains saying something about $60 million of carbon tax dollars per year which are apparently allotted to corporate tax cuts by the BC Liberals and should instead go to transit. I don't know where that comes from, maybe they are seeing something in the legislature that we're not, or maybe its there but I just don't know about it but if its true....WTF??? The NDP would be the last group of people that I would think say something that makes sense but in this case, it surely did it. To their credit, this is the first time Carol James and Harry Bains (I actually like this guy) actually suggested something concrete in solving Metro Vancouver's transit woes instead of just whining and complaining.

As for Ken Hardie, I can't stand that guy! I think people like him, their jobs should be contingent to producing results. If they fail, they should be fired, and failure of building the Evergreen Line is simply not an option. Sadly, no matter what happens, people like him still keep to keep their cushy jobs and six figure salaries while the rest of the public wallow in the hopeless situation they are stuck by their bad decision making.
The carbon tax is supposed to be revenue neutral, and not just for individuals. If a corporation is responsible and has a small carbon footprint, should it not too be rewarded for it's environmentalism?

The property taxes in the lower mainland are among the lowest in Canada. We have a lot of wiggle room before we catch up to cities like Montreal and Toronto where they fund heavy subways and massive commuter rail.

Montreal bypasses the whole property tax thing, and the City just pays a direct subsidy out of general property taxes to STM for the service they provide (almost as if it were a contractor). In Ontario, there is a province wide gas tax that goes to cities for transit (Toronto only got about $91M). The TTC runs their operations completely on fares, but runs a deficit, which the city covers with "subsidies". Collected taxes don't count towards their income as taxes are collected by the city. The city just pays the TTC whatever it is short.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:56 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.