commuting thread

[vitaminG]

i think we need a thread to put all the transit/roads/commuting stuff

had to deal with this shit today which gave me a lot of time to think about our commuting situation. i rarely take the alex fraser anymore even if its the most direct route because of this crap which seems to happen everyday from what i hear on AM730

Alex Fraser Bridge snarled by rush hour accidents - British Columbia - CBC News

and also read this

B.C. government ?underfunding? of transit to blame for traffic congestion: report | Vancouver Sun

really agree that transit is underfunded. the roads will never be enough to keep up with the population growth. I also think we need to take steps to reduce congestion on certain routes, whether its region pricing or additional bridge tolls or whatever. I pay the port mann toll almost everyday and its more than worth it since it keeps all the cheap idiots off there.

[snowball]

The BC government underfunds everything on purpose: transit (and infrastructure), education, healthcare and then blames the union employees for taking up a highest proportion of funding. It's systematically creating a culture of blame towards the public sector.

I won't agree or disagree with unions, but Christy Clark can't expect people not to strike with rising costs of living and wages that don't keep up with inflation.

[Traum]

I have a feeling this thread is going to turn into a political discussion, but the I agree with Gatorade that the Liberals are underfunding nearly everything on purpose -- it makes the balance sheet looks good, and too many idiots place too big an emphasis on a sunny-looking balance sheet when they are deciding which party to vote for, all the while ignoring various cuts and service reductions that are taking place to keep up the facade of that healthy looking budget.

[Acura604]

yes. Monday 4pm from BCIT to North Delta. left at 4:05 got home 7pm. 3 hrs in the BS. makes me want to post my traffic video !!!! this morning again it's a parking lot but I'm gonna wait it out or take the patullo.

[Tapioca]

The problem is that the transportation system was designed to take people from the suburbs to Vancouver. The reality is, however, that most people commute from suburb to suburb. This is where the bottlenecks are apparent - bridges and inadequate arterial roads that really should be highways.

Also, some municipalities have taken it upon themselves to build new, higher density neighbourhoods without the corresponding capacity to keep people moving. Some neighbourhoods have been built with transit in mind when there have been no commitments to bring transit in the area.

Translink has such a sour reputation that no reasonable plan can be put forward without organizations like the Canadian Taxpayers Federation putting it down before it can be analyzed and debated among the public. Basically, Translink needs to be given to new governing model and rebranded.

Until then, we're basically stuck with what we have. Is it any secret why the number of registered cars in the Lower Mainland has doubled since 2000? The people have spoken.

[4444]

it makes Vancouver almost unlivable when compared to so many other cities in the world.

i used to commute, but then moved downtown solely because those extra 10-15 hours a week could be better utilized than sitting in my car or on a bus and skytrain.

great place to visit, would hate to have to live and work with the BS leadership that is in Vancouver.

[Armind]

Fuck transit.

Hate it when two buses arrive at the stop the same time, fucking everything up.

[meme405]

Originally Posted by Gatorade

I won't agree or disagree with unions, but Christy Clark can't expect people not to strike with rising costs of living and wages that don't keep up with inflation.

You are never going to see raises in Vancouver which will make this city affordable. To believe we are going to pay some city secretary (no offence to any secretaries) 120k a year just because the cost of living here is ridiculous, is ridiculous in itself.

There is no private sector office secretary or receptionist that makes 120k a year. Why should the public sector be like that.

The cost of living here is high, but you cannot use that high cost of living as justification to overpay all the public servants. Otherwise taxes are just going to keep going up, and eventually everyone who doesn't work in the public sector is gonna move away (including all the businesses).

I contract to multiple companies, and 3 out of 5 which I have been doing work for continuously over the last 3 years, have not had any raises. That's right those 3 private sector companies have had a wage freeze for 3 years. Why? Because the industrial sector is shit right now, and tanking commodity prices mean they can't afford to give raises even just to account for inflation.

Yet if this was to happen in the public sector there would be outrage and strikes all over the place.

[originalhypa]

What blows me away is that the new bridge and highway system isn't more than a couple of years old, but it's now starting to see the same traffic issues that the old bridge had. We doubled the capacity of the bridge and highway, but tripled the population.

Originally Posted by Gatorade

I won't agree or disagree with unions, but Christy Clark can't expect people not to strike with rising costs of living and wages that don't keep up with inflation.

The next provincial election is coming up on May 9, 2017.
If the other parties were smart, they would make real estate control a major part of their platform. Back in the early-mid 2000's everyone was doing well and wanted a Liberal gov't. But times have changed, and with the declining numbers in the middle class, it could be time to change.

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by originalhypa

The next provincial election is coming up on May 9, 2017.
If the other parties were smart, they would make real estate control a major part of their platform. Back in the early-mid 2000's everyone was doing well and wanted a Liberal gov't. But times have changed, and with the declining numbers in the middle class, it could be time to change.

The tools to control the real estate market are largely out of the hands of the provincial government. Interest rates, the banking system, and the CMHC are controlled by the federal government, while zoning and density is controlled by municipal governments. All the province can do is collect data, impose transaction taxes, and get into the housing business via social housing or other forms of non-market housing. People already complain about social programs, so can you imagine if the province started building co-ops again? People would be furious.

What the province can do is to make it easier for people to get around by building infrastructure.

The problem with the NDP is that it represents the old guard. Lots of donors and members of the NDP have a lot to lose too if they were to dabble in the housing market. The only person who seems to be making noise is David Eby, but he lives on the West Side, so his appeal is limited. There needs to be a 30-something to early-40s leader who's both versed in policy and is good in front of a camera that can break the political stalemate in BC politics. A political outsider who's pro-business but with roots in a blue-collar past. Unfortunately such people are tough to come by - they're either too successful in the private sector or they're not willing to put their personal lives on the line for a shot at doing something good for society.

Young people don't vote (instead, they're too concerned with maintaining their social media presence) and the 30-somethings who have paid the price recently by getting a foothold in the market don't want to see their hard-earned equity decimated.

The best solution politically is to let the market do its work. People will start leaving in droves, or there will be some shock to the financial system that will facilitate a drop in land values.

[Traum]

^^ Disagree -- a very popular (and do-able) idea right now is to place restrictions on RE property foreign ownership. That tool is entirely within the province's jurisdiction and control, but of course Crusty Clown would never do anything like that.

Then, with RE prices at some slightly more reasonable levels, the need to increase density would slow down. We get fewer high rises, and congestion doesn't get worse as fast. We'd still need other solutions to tackle the commuting and traffic density problems, but we would have bought ourselves more time.

[meme405]

Originally Posted by Tapioca

The best solution politically is to let the market do its work. People will start leaving in droves, or there will be some shock to the financial system that will facilitate a drop in land values.

This is the best solution to the housing market. Just like the stock market leave it alone and let it do its work.

Obviously back to the subject of this thread, this solution is not one that will work for transit. The only way I can see us even moving towards a plan to fix our infrastructure system is to Pay a specialized firm to come in and do a 1-3 year study on the current network we have, and analyze our growth and put together a master plan for the next 25 years. The government can then update this plan every other year or every year, and see how it is going.

I simply don't trust the current people in charge of developing our plans, considering how fucked up everything is out here. I'd much rather pay a firm 50 million, rather than spend 10 times that over the next 5 years and still get absolutely no where with our infrastructure.

[originalhypa]

Originally Posted by Traum

^^ Disagree -- a very popular (and do-able) idea right now is to place restrictions on RE property foreign ownership. That tool is entirely within the province's jurisdiction and control, but of course Crusty Clown would never do anything like that.

Combine that with closing the Quebec loophole, and the province does have some power in the game.

Investor immigrants using Quebec as back door to Vancouver - NEWS 1130

But you have to admit, tapioca makes a good argument. That's the biggest issue with real estate control today, is that there are dozens of factors that need to be taken into account. For every action, there is an equal reaction.

[Tapioca]

^ There would be ways to circumvent that via purchases through limited companies that are registered in BC. And who is considered a foreigner? Someone who doesn't have PR? Would such a policy be legal under Canadian law?

But, even if such a policy were legal, what kind of message does that send? Foreign investment is welcomed, but only on a limited basis?

With that said, who's going to start the BC Party?

[meme405]

Originally Posted by Traum

^^ Disagree -- a very popular (and do-able) idea right now is to place restrictions on RE property foreign ownership. That tool is entirely within the province's jurisdiction and control, but of course Crusty Clown would never do anything like that.

Yes it is popular to everyone who doesn't own anything, and extremely unpopular for everyone who does.

What you guys are effectively saying is that the provincial government should deliberately make moves to kill RE prices.

Name another market where this practice would be even remotely acceptable. Why is this something people believe is acceptable in RE?

I know the counter argument everyone is going to make as well:

Because everyone should be able to afford a roof over their heads.

Yes absolutely, but nobody said that roof has to be in Vancouver, the most expensive market in the world.

[Traum]

Regardless of the policy that has been put in place, people will always find loopholes to circumvent them. I'd say the goal here is to close the floodgates and not be too insistent on whether the closure is 100% leak-proof. When the leaks become bigger problems again, we will find new ways to tackle them.

Originally Posted by meme405

Yes absolutely, but nobody said that roof has to be in Vancouver, the most expensive market in the world.

An aspect that I do not agree with this statement here, the "Vancouver" that you describe here doesn't just pertain to CoV. At a practical level, it encompass the bulk of Richmond and Burnaby as well. Parts of the Tri-Cities and Surrey can also be included. As that circle expands, we go back to the central topic of discussion for this thread -- the horrible commute that everyone faces.

The appalling state of housing affordability and transit are intimately tied. Unfortunately, our provincial government still has its head stuck in the sand.

[m3thods]

Originally Posted by originalhypa

What blows me away is that the new bridge and highway system isn't more than a couple of years old, but it's now starting to see the same traffic issues that the old bridge had. We doubled the capacity of the bridge and highway, but tripled the population.

A friend of mine was an engineer who worked for Kiewit as a project planner. Long story short, given the time it took to plan and approve everything and by the time it took to get boots and shovels on the ground, the project was going to be at 100% capacity once it completed.

In this case I'm not sure we can blame short-sightedness (as you could probably argue for the Canada Line stations not being expandable to accommodate bigger trains). But these large-scale projects all seem to be at a disadvantage from the get-go.

[originalhypa]

Originally Posted by meme405

What you guys are effectively saying is that the provincial government should deliberately make moves to kill RE prices.

Name another market where this practice would be even remotely acceptable. Why is this something people believe is acceptable in RE?

Australia.

Foreign investment in residential property

In December 2008, the federal government introduced legislation relaxing rules for foreign buyers of Australian property. According to FIRB (Foreign Investment Review Board) data released in August 2009, foreign investment in Australian real estate had increased by more than 30% year to date. One agent said that "overseas investors buy them to land bank, not to rent them out. The houses just sit vacant because they are after capital growth."[20]

In April 2010, the government announced amendments to policies to "ensure that foreign non-residents can only invest in Australian real estate if that investment adds to the housing stock, and that investments by temporary residents in established properties are only for their use whilst they live in Australia."

Under the rules, temporary residents and foreign students will be:

• Screened by the Foreign Investment Review Board to determine if they will be allowed to buy a property.
• Forced to sell property when they leave Australia.
• Punished if they do not sell by a government-ordered sale plus confiscation of any capital gain.
• Required to build on vacant land within two years of purchase to stop "land banking".

Failure to do this would also lead to a government-ordered sale.

Several Australian Banks and lenders provide home loans to non-residents for the purchase of Australian real estate. This is also thought by some to have contributed to the increases in Australia's property prices.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austra..._planning_laws


It didn't kill the market, but it definately curtailed foreign investment, or "land banking".

[quasi]

Originally Posted by meme405

You are never going to see raises in Vancouver which will make this city affordable. To believe we are going to pay some city secretary (no offence to any secretaries) 120k a year just because the cost of living here is ridiculous, is ridiculous in itself.

There is no private sector office secretary or receptionist that makes 120k a year. Why should the public sector be like that.

The cost of living here is high, but you cannot use that high cost of living as justification to overpay all the public servants. Otherwise taxes are just going to keep going up, and eventually everyone who doesn't work in the public sector is gonna move away (including all the businesses).

I contract to multiple companies, and 3 out of 5 which I have been doing work for continuously over the last 3 years, have not had any raises. That's right those 3 private sector companies have had a wage freeze for 3 years. Why? Because the industrial sector is shit right now, and tanking commodity prices mean they can't afford to give raises even just to account for inflation.

Yet if this was to happen in the public sector there would be outrage and strikes all over the place.

My wife is in the same boat. She's union and the company she works for is private but she was brought over from the public sector so they have decent benefits and what not. Up until this last negotiation that just ended in May she hasn't had a raise in over 6 years, not to cover inflation or any type cost of living increases.

Her office made the move downtown from Burnaby which has increased her commute. We live in Clayton a few minutes from Willowbrook, she parks near the highway and takes the bus across the bridge and then transfers to the train. Total commute one way is an hour and 15 minutes.

Since moving she's looked for other jobs but I think she's finally getting to see how good she has it where she is despite no raises and having to commute downtown. When you take into consideration the amount of Holidays, Y-Day's, sick days, benefits, pension she gets she'll be very hard pressed to find that anywhere else. With "Y" Day's she gets 8 weeks + holidays and did I mention almost unlimited sick days? I'm lucky if I take 2 weeks off a year and I have no pension it's hard to put a price on some of that other stuff but if you could the price is high.

[Liquid_o2]

Originally Posted by originalhypa

What blows me away is that the new bridge and highway system isn't more than a couple of years old, but it's now starting to see the same traffic issues that the old bridge had. We doubled the capacity of the bridge and highway, but tripled the population.

That's because it has been proven that it doesn't matter how big and how many highways you build, you can't solve the transportation problem with only one mode. Look at Toronto or LA, they have huge highways but the traffic is just as bad.

Only proper way is to offer a full range of modes of travel such as highways and bridges, Skytrain/bus, biking, walking. The Provincial government has to ensure that ALL of these are continually being upgraded. Problem is that people who only take transit don't want any upgrades to highways, or vice versa.

Have to think of the greater good for Metro Vancouver. Province has to dump serious cash into all modes of transportation before it is too late. Upgrade to the Massey Tunnel is a step in the right direction I suppose, but funding is desperately needed for a Broadway skytrain/subway line, and increased bus service routes along major streets.

[meme405]

Originally Posted by quasi

My wife is in the same boat. She's union and the company she works for is private but she was brought over from the public sector so they have decent benefits and what not. Up until this last negotiation that just ended in May she hasn't had a raise in over 6 years, not to cover inflation or any type cost of living increases.

Her office made the move downtown from Burnaby which has increased her commute. We live in Clayton a few minutes from Willowbrook, she parks near the highway and takes the bus across the bridge and then transfers to the train. Total commute one way is an hour and 15 minutes.

Since moving she's looked for other jobs but I think she's finally getting to see how good she has it where she is despite no raises and having to commute downtown. When you take into consideration the amount of Holidays, Y-Day's, sick days, benefits, pension she gets she'll be very hard pressed to find that anywhere else. With "Y" Day's she gets 8 weeks + holidays and did I mention almost unlimited sick days? I'm lucky if I take 2 weeks off a year and I have no pension it's hard to put a price on some of that other stuff but if you could the price is high.

8 weeks of vac time .

I have taken a total of 2 weeks off my entire adult working life (8 years).

[snowball]

After rereading my post I didn't mean to justify the public sector's pay and benefits, but I meant to say that the underfunding is a scheme to put more blame and sway popular opinion against the public sector, something that is currently happening, hence increased support for privatized education, transportation, infrastructure. Who knows, maybe it wll be better, maybe it won't. It will be another lesson for the history books whatever happens now.

[DragonChi]

Step 1: Use Waze or google maps + traffic
Step 2: Plan route without accident/least busy
Step 3: If it's a shit show, work/school an extra hour
Step 4: ???

[meme405]

Originally Posted by Gatorade

After rereading my post I didn't mean to justify the public sector's pay and benefits, but I meant to say that the underfunding is a scheme to put more blame and sway popular opinion against the public sector, something that is currently happening, hence increased support for privatized education, transportation, infrastructure. Who knows, maybe it wll be better, maybe it won't. It will be another lesson for the history books whatever happens now.

I didn't really take it that you were justifying or defending that position.

But people have to understand that there is a limit to the budget the government has, and that limit is directly tied to how much tax it's citizens are willing to and capable of affording. Considering we are already seeing all these reports about how the average citizen can't afford a house without saving for like 2 decades, and that we have some of the highest tax incomes per citizen in the entire country, I'd say we have reached the point at which most people wouldn't be able to afford any more taxes.

So the government is at its max in terms of budget. So where is all this extra money for new projects and paying people going to come from? Well it has to come out of the money they already receive, that means that cuts need to be made in certain places to make room for capital projects, or to properly fund actual necessities instead of luxuries.

You see it in the private sector all the time, when the going is good, there is all sorts of luxuries; events, lunches, bonuses, etc. But when the money dries up, the private sector is very good at tightening the belt and curtailing these expenditures.

The public sector on the other hand is BRUTAL at this, they continue to spend because to them, the money just continues to flow, and most government departments feel that if they don't spend their allocated part of the budget it's going to get taken and given to other departments. This procedure is just ridiculous, it's time to cut the luxuries, it's time to tighten the waist band, and start spending where necessary to fix this fucking place. Otherwise we're all headed down shit creek without a paddle.

[nah]

If you think about it, there hasn't been a net new crossing anywhere in the Lower Mainland (Golden Ears doesn't count) since the Alex Fraser in 1984. We've refurbished and replaced, but there's not been a new avenue for people to cross. At the same time, Metro Vancouver has at least doubled. We need to stop ripping out bridges that could still be usable and add to the infrastructure.

Upcoming projects:
Massey Bridge (replace)
Pattullo (replace)