Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisai
|
I think the only reason people in Surrey want LRT is because it has been hyped and pitched as "attainable".
I think if Translink or the Province stepped in and said, "No, you are getting Skytrain and that's that", most people would be fine with that. You would only get a few hardcore light rail advocates and a lot of people who are just against any spending complain. Outside of LRT fans, most people who support LRT in Surrey just think it will result in the smallest bill possible, and don't actually care about the results/success of the line as they will never use transit ever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulsparrow
What I don't understand about Surrey is why they continue to keep their taxes so low. They are one of the lowest in the lower mainland and you can tell by the crappy single lane roads, lack of sidewalks, unfinished streets (especially ones they where they widen one block and not the next), lack of police enforcement etc.
I believe if you raised taxes and supplied the public (and enforced it with advertisement) the improvements would make this hillbilly city into a real city and the tax payers would by into it. I know I would.
As well think of all the revenue you could collect if you cracked down on all the illegal suits, removed the stipulation of only one and make them all pay taxes for each additional suite.
Then maybe Hepner might be able to get Surrey out of debt (thanks to Watts) and get her LRT (not that I support it).
|
As a Surrey resident I support raising the taxes to finish roads and sidewalks. So many need it so badly.
I would also like to see a legalization of suites and a crackdown on unreported ones. Not only is it lost revenue, but the city hasn't planned for them, resulting in streets that are swamped with parked cars at night. And they can't plan for proper transit because they don't know how many people live where.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jebby
It has more to do with the fact that the majority of Surrey has very, very low density that does not warrant spending on larger roads or installing sidewalks.
|
I don't think this could be further from the truth. There is low density in parts, but there is also very high density in areas, and some of those areas have unfinished roads with no sidewalks.
The roads are from a legacy of low density, when they went through the empty countryside, connecting vast ranches. But as land has been subdivided and turned into townhouse and condo complexes, the roads between are left in their original horse trail state.
There will be a subdivision of hundreds of townhomes and Condos, then the sidewalk won't go through the next block to the major road where there is a bus line. There will be an area that was always industrial, that has had housing built up around, and new office/retail complexes built in it, and the streets are now a major corridor linking one side of Surrey to the other, but untouched from 30 years ago. like so:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.14818...7i13312!8i6656
And I love this:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.14818...7i13312!8i6656
In South Surrey at Morgan Heights, the roads in the area are horrendous, but more people live there per sqkm than in many parts of Vancouver or Burnaby.
I do find it a bit insane that Surrey would be tempted to go do and finance LRT on it's own, when it can't even find money and finish streets that are major arterials and have been needing upgrades for decades.
Prev
Linear Mode
