paulhillsdon.com

I haven’t ever done this, but with a recent increase in readership, I thought I may as well try.

You’ve seen the plan. You’ve viewed the news reports.

Now, what do you think?

There’s a poll below, and I’m leaving this posts comments wide open. It’s a free for all.

What are your concerns? Does the plan meet your needs? How will this effect you? What bumps in the road do you predict?

If you have anything to say, say it!

Premier Gordon Campbell put our money where his mouth is and the proposal is quite satisfying. 9 new RapidBus lines, 3 new Rapid Transit lines, 1500 new clean buses across the province, a commitment to turnstiles and a smart card system. Overall, it is quite huge, comparable in fact to a 2020 transportation plan set out in Ontario by Dalton McGuinty’s government, which also included a vast expansion of transit services. We should all be commending the provincial government for taking this necessary step - certainly a far more balanced situation than just getting Gateway.

However, as always the devil is in the details, and it’s the details that are lacking in the plan.

Funding

For example, the provincial government is not spending $14 billion. Only $11.1 billion is actual new money, and of that, the province is only putting in $4.75 billion - over the next 12 years. One could argue they aren’t really pulling their fair share of a plan they have initiated.

How’s the rest going to be paid? Well, Campbell is relying on Harper putting in a share of $3.1 billion - something the federal government has yet to do with Ontario transportation plan that also required a 1/3 share from Ottawa.

Then, the estimates are that TransLink will have to put in almost $2.75 billion. The agency currently has a surplus fund of $400 million - something that used to sound like a lot; not so much anymore. TransLink’s only way of raising any money is through a combination of increased fares, property taxes, and gas taxes. Over the course of 12 years, that means TransLink needs to raise an additional $230 million. The recent fare increase raised an additional

Seems likely that the $5 three zone fare is going up some more soon. Or maybe they’ll move forward on pursuing possible money from transit oriented development near stations…

In other areas of the province, municipalities will be throwing in about $500 million as well.

But don’t forget the private corporations. As we’ve already seen with the Golden Ears Bridge and the Canada Line, the provincial government is keen on having private corporations foot part of the bill as well. Kevin Falcon has already stated that even smaller projects, like the estimate $100 million it will cost to install turnstiles, will be handled by a private corporation through a P3.

Timeline

Compared to the past, when the Lower Mainland received 1 rapid transit line per decade, we are now getting three in 10 years. A good increase for sure.

But, what you have to realize is that many of these routes should have already been built. So in fact, we are playing catch up - and with this plan, the lines will continue to be 5-10 years away. Is that fast enough to relieve the congestion we have already? How much transit demand will there be that far away in the future? What intermediate steps will be taken to fix the situation in the meantime?

The fact remains, we need these rapid transit expansions today. What lines will we be needing by 2020, when the current extensions are just finishing?

Furthermore, there has been no estimate at all for the RapidBus BC system. Obviously, the Highway 1 route won’t be possible until the Port Mann is expanded - potentially completed by 2013.

The whole point of using buses is that they are a low cost option that can be launched in under a year. Whether these advantages are adopted has yet to be seen. It would be a very big shame if the routes took a number of years to implement, especially since we could start right now and get many of them in place immediately.

Routing

One of the things I find most interesting about the Rapid Transit and RapidBus plans is their routes. Frankly, it’s not all that surprising to see the UBC Line where it is, and the same goes to a lesser degree with the Evergreen Line. However, having the Province decide something like a possible extension of the Expo Line in Surrey doesn’t seem like the best choice to be made.

The Province doesn’t have a full grasp on the area first of all. I mean, just looking at where they’ve proposed it makes no sense at all. It seems like it attempts to get a station close to Guildford, even though it’s obvious that it’s quite a few blocks away from the mall no matter what. Then, it goes southeast towards 88th and Fraser, cutting right through a neighbourhood. I personally think that the current terminus is the best situation, but if they are going to extend it into Surrey further, it should just continue directly down Fraser Highway, and should end in an area where a large transit exchange and park and ride could be built - potentially at Fraser and 168th St.

I also found it amusing that the Province promotes RapidBus on routes that already have or are soon getting a B-Line: i.e. the Hastings to SFU route and the Joyce to UBC route via 41st. TransLink has been planning these for a while, and put the money in this year to create these B-Lines. What’s going on? Where is there overlap? Is it going to be a B-Line or a RapidBus BC route?

Same thing goes with the planned King George Busway by TransLink that has been adopted by the Province.

You’d also notice the White Rock to Richmond route - which is already a semi premium express coach route by TransLink.

What’s going on? Why is there overlap? What’s with the lack of coordination?

Where’s TransLink in this?

With this plan, what is the new role of TransLink. It seems that not only has the Province literally chosen the routes, timelines, and technologies for future rapid transit - not just rail based, but road based as well! Why should TransLink pursue a new regional transportation strategy if the Province is just going to institute a plan from the higher ups? Is TransLink simply going to be the agency that draw up the feeder routes? Is TransLink just the scapegoat of the Province - the operator, per say, that gets all the rider’s complaints?

The Reality of Governments and Plans

First off, we must understand that this is not so much a plan as it is a vision. That’s because, well, the money, past the first phase, is not at all guaranteed, and the government that’s in office in 2012 or 2017 could easily just scrap this plan altogether.

Take a look at what the Campbell government did to the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the Clark government for the Millennium Line. That was a government agreement that the province would provide the funding to complete the rapid transit line, following a detailed routing and technology analysis. Once the NDP got booted out in 2001, whatever happened to that Memorandum of Understanding? Gordon Campbell through it out with the outgoing government.

Plans change and evolve so much these days that it’s very difficult to look at the maps and routes as something concrete - that is until funding is secured and the real work begins. Until then, this is nothing more than a vision.

Thankfully, however, we will soon see what amount of money the province is truly committed to when they release the February budget. At that time, we will find out what is included and is actually going to happen in the short term.

Wishful thinking

The plan is great. But there are definite concerns and it’s unfortunate that they released this plan without much of any coordination with TransLink or the municipalities. We are taking a huge step forward with this initiative - I just wished it happened faster and it looked out farther into the future.

Maybe that’s for my generation to plan once Campbell retires. But with more visions like these, I don’t think he’s going to leave the Premier’s office anytime soon. And maybe that’s a good thing. Hey, it worked out alright for transit in Metro Vancouver…

These are all taken from the Provincial Transit Plan

Rapid Transit

• They are including the Canada Line under the Plan. Completion is set for 2009.
• $1.4 billion for the Evergreen Line by 2014.
• $2.8 billion for the UBC Line from Broadway to UBC by 2020
• $3.1 billion to double capacity on the Expo Line - major improvements at stations starting 2009, and 6km extension in Surrey by 2020. Station improvements include:
  • Lengthening platforms to handle 6 car trains
  • Vehicle storage depots
  • Maintenance facilities
  • Adjacent transit exchanges
• $1 billion for new rail cars

RapidBusBC

• Frequent, reliable service with regular intervals
• Express service with few or no stops
• Priority movement in traffic by dedicated/HOV lanes, signal priority, and queue jumping
• Contemporary, conveniently located bus stations with nearby amenities
• Seamless integration with other transit options and coordination with cycling and walking infrastructure
• Effective security measures
• 9 lines across BC
  • Westbank to UBC Okanagan in the central Okanagan
  • Douglas Street in downtown Victoria to Langford on the West Shore
  • Highway 1, connecting Lougheed Station to exchanges in Surrey and Langley across the Port Mann Bridge
  • Hastings Street from downtown Vancouver to SFU
  • 41st Ave from the Canada Line to UBC
  • Highway 99 from White Rock to the Canada Line in Richmond
  • King George Hwy from Surrey Centre south to White Rock
  • Fraser Hwy connecting Langley to the Expo Line in Surrey
  • Highway 7 from the Evergreen Line in Coquitlam across the new Golden Ears Bridge

Buses

• $1.6 billion in 1,500 new clean energy buses
• Clean technologies include
  • Hydrogen
  • Hybrid
  • Electric
  • Natural Gas
  • Low emissions diesel
• Customized sizes and types of buses
  • Community shuttles
  • Custom transit
  • Para transit
  • Articulated and double decker buses
  • Conventional buses

Cycling

• 1000 new bike lockers at key transit locations by 2020
• Comprehensive cycling strategy to be released in the next few months to complement the Provincial Transit Plan

Security

• Installing electronic gates and closed-circuit cameras at rapid transit stations
• Launching a smart card system for rapid transit and buses that users can reload at vending machines or on the Internet
• Taking action against people who do not pay fares with on-the-spot fines and other measures
• Increasing security personnel in and around rapid transit stations
• Improving safety for bus drivers

I don’t want to jump the gun before any real details are released. Besides, as Keith Baldrey says in his report below, there hasn’t been any leaks so to speak - he’s more… connecting the dots. Have more tomorrow on this.

UPDATE: The announcement is at 10:30 AM. Check back here shortly after for full details and analysis.

Vaughn Palmer thinks it’s coming. And why shouldn’t it be? A carbon tax is one of the clearest forms of market regulation possible, producing the fastest results for reducing greenhouses gases possible. The simple thing it does is puts a price on carbon emissions, something not truly ever taken into the account of anything till now.

Carole Taylor has apparently been discussing revenue neutrality, meaning the tax will go directly towards green projects. Almost like photosynthesis: in goes the carbon, out comes the oxygen!

For example, a proposed gas levy would begin at 4 cents/litre, immediately brining in $200 million for the government. This would escalate to 24 cents/litre by 2030. Presumably, because this is a gas levy, the revenues would go towards green transportation, such as transit projects or HOV lanes. No, it doesn’t seem like all that much money, especially when our Metro needs $3 billion alone just to do the Evergreen Line and finish the Millennium Line. And considering this is province wide, with other places like Victoria also clamouring for LRT and Commuter rail, it seems unlikely that this money will be enough. But hey, it’s a start.

Most pollsters seem to say the majority of people would support a carbon tax, at least in BC. However, the Canadian Taxpayer’s Federation, continuing to argue that we pay too many taxes, says it will never fly and be political suicide for the government that implements it (not that this matters to Carole Taylor, who will be stepping down before the next election).

I think the thing the CTF misses though is that Canadians are generally more willing to pay minor taxes for the greater good, as long as their money is being spent properly. For example, most Canadians would probably like their healthcare system improved, something that simply requires a whole lot of cash to do. Meanwhile, the federal government brings in billions of dollars of surplus, and throws it into the military and paying down the debt. With actions like these, it’s no surprise people want less taxes. It’s a simple case of the consumer wanting their money back for crappy service!

So, I figured I’d test the BC blogosphere and see what you guys think of a carbon tax. Please take part in the poll below :)

Most people in the know about cycling have heard about Copenhagen. It’s one of the most world renowned cycling cities. In fact, over 30% of all people in Copenhagen travel by bike. Just check out some of these sites to get a feel for what they’ve accomplished:

• Treehugger: In Copenhagen bikes overtake cars
• C.I.C.L.E.: Why Copenhagen is wonderful for two wheels
• City of Copenhagen: The City of Cyclists

But, Copenhagen doesn’t plan to stop now. I’ve spoken about bold visions before, and it doesn’t get any better than this. The city’s latest goal is to become the world’s unrivaled bike capital by 2015.How do they plan to do this? Well, it may sound amazing, at least compared to the type of funding cycling gets in North America, but Copenhagen already invests $15 million (US) per year into cycling infrastructure. To achieve their latest goal, the city plans to *double* this budget to $30 million per year! Just to compare, Vancouver recently announced a multi-year project, worth around $650,000, to make “best buys” to vastly improve our network. Here, that’s considered quite a feat.

The city of Copenhagen recently held workshops with citizens to do visioning exercises to see what specific improvements that could be made to become the cycling capital of the world. Here’s what they see for the future:

• A Cycling Mekka
  • Cyclists have conquered the streets
  • There are few accidents
  • There is room for both fast and slow cyclists
  • Cyclists get a tax break for riding
  • The main boulevards are now underground tunnels for cars
• Infrastructure
  • Cycle tunnels under and bridges over the harbour
  • Bike paths all the way along the harbour, on both sides
  • Bike motorways straight to the city centre
  • Cycling allowed in all green areas (some parks are bike-free zones)
  • Three lane bike lanes for different speeds
  • Green Wave system on all traffic lights
• Lifestyle
  • Trendsetting bike design
  • Bikes that symbolize who I am
  • Our City Bikes are gorgeously designed
• Experiences
  • Beautiful routes with great views
  • More trees planted along bike routes
  • More bike events
• Service
  • Creation of service stations along bike routes where you can pump tires and charge bike lights
  • The City loans out free bikes
  • Free City Bikes to all Copenhageners
  • Free bike lights
  • Mandatory warning sounds on buses when turning
• Behaviour
  • Cycling courses for locals and tourists
  • A city without bike locks
  • No bikes left behind
  • Everyone checks over their shoulder before turning
  • Cycling training tracks for kids
  • Everyone is friendly and smiles
• Parking
  • Many smart bike racks
  • Fantastically gorgeous bike parking
  • Newly-invented multistory bike parking
  • Bike racks with attached service centres
  • More covered bike racks

You know what I like most about this plan? Copenhagen, one of the most famous cities in the world for cycling, is not resting on their laurels. They are upping the bar, higher and higher each time. They don’t stop.

They are striving for the world’s finest cycling system! By 2015! That’s a hefty goal, made even heftier by a quick timeline.

This city is not doing the lowest common denominator, dragging their feet, doing anything but improving; oh no, not Copenhagen.

And you know, having such a good reputation attracts a certain types of people. Which in turn improves the city even more! It’s like a cycle of progress and improvement.

Can you imagine what our region would be like if we took such bold steps forward, each and every day?

[The Copenhagen Bicycle Culture Blog via CommuterPageBlog]

————————————-

More Copenhagen videos:

[via Sightline Institute]

[via Treehugger]

You may have noticed a few trends throughout my many transportation related posts: I’m a transit man thru and thru, I spend a crazy amount of time coming up with solutions that will never be implemented, and I have a disdain for Kevin Falcon. One you may not have picked up on though is my lack on stance on the Gateway Project. It’s because, unlike some organizations, I see both sides of the story, and I know the world is just not as black and white as some would like as to see it. Polarization and arguments don’t help solve the problem.

Growth, at least at this point in time, is nearly inevitable. Whether that is in population, the service sector, or goods movement. We are living in good times and should be glad this is not the recession of the 80’s. That said, we should capitalize on our healthy economy to make the investments today to ensure this wealth continues for years to come.

Based on the projections, Vancouver is going to grow and become a national Gateway to the Pacific. And, heck, why should we turn down all the new tax sources? Why send the ships down to Seattle or L.A. when we’re the best suited for the job? Let’s embrace this opportunity.

And so, the federal, and provincial, governments, along with business organizations have developed what amounts to a Gateway strategy - implementing strategic upgrading of important transportation corridors to enable this expansion to occur. I’m glad governments are so gung ho to invest in the Lower Mainland.

However, we must take into consideration that there are more stakeholders in the region than just truckers and businessmen from China. There are 2.1 million residents, expected to grow past 3 million by 2030. Our region is one of the best places on Earth to live in, and we don’t want to sacrifice this lifestyle, but improve it for the future.

Does this strategy of a livable, and sustainable, lifestyle conflict with the concept of becoming a national Gateway? Perhaps, at least conceptually, but I think if any place is best suited to find creative solutions to satisfy all parties, then it’s Metro Vancouver. We’ve got an incredible history behind us of using communication and cooperation to move our region forward, and now’s not the time to stop it.

Unfortunately, I feel that a lot of this will fall on deaf ears. I hate to be so critical of another human being, but based on the actions of Mr. Falcon, I have seen nothing that tells me he is willing to make some important changes to the Gateway Program.

In my personal view, these should include:

• Regional bylaws to ensure there is a green buffer zone between all strategic Gateway routes and areas (ports, truck stops, etc.) *
• Implementation of a toll system whereby funds are returned to public coffers, and once the bridge is paid off, funds go directly to TransLink (i.e. The Golden Ears Bridge)
• Work with TransLink to incorporate any tolling system into a region wide travel demand management system, ensuring equity to residents around the region *
• Ensuring that, based on the new Regional Growth Strategy currently in development by Metro Vancouver, that said board has the powers it requests - this may include overseeing and tracking development goals for all municipalities, reserving key transportation corridors for future use, preserving and enhancing the Green Zone, development of an Industrial Land Reserve, etc.
• Prohibiting parking on any Gateway route *
• Participating in the development of guidelines and goals for efficient road movement. Headed by TransLink with all stakeholders as part of a goods movement strategy. *
• Discouraging the single occupancy vehicle by promising extensive funding for more transit expansion, in partnership with TransLink’s regional plans, and by implementing a proposed provincial wide carbon tax *
• Changing from HOV (high occupancy vehicle) lanes to HOT (high occupancy tolled) lanes. This new definition puts real time variable tolls on the lanes, allowing single occupancy vehicles to purchase access onto the lane, based on the current number of vehicles on the lane. This number of vehicles/hour for optimal lane efficiency would be defined in the proposed studies above. The HOT definition would also be expanded so that carpools, transit vehicles, motorcycles, hybrid vehicles, and smaller than normal vehicles (i.e. smart cars) could drive in the lane for free.
• Plan for the future designation of a second lane of Hwy 1 to become either HOT, or for goods movement only.
• Limiting SOV access to the North and South Fraser Perimeter Roads. This could be anything from defining them as goods movement vehicles only, or installing them as HOT laned routes. As a HOT route, SOV users could buy their way on if necessary, while restricting a huge increase of SOVs that would congest the routes.
• Ensuring the North and South Fraser Perimeter Roads are built in way so as not to prevent public access to the Fraser River waterfront, and without any major disruption of the environment surrounding the routes.
• Ensuring that all new facilities in the Gateway Program provide safe and secure cycling routes. Planning of said routes should include intense dialogue with the stakeholders, including the very proactive and vocal cycling groups in existence.
• Pursue Public-Private Partnerships. However, they must not be detrimental in any way to the public land, public amenities, and the public’s interest. Furthermore, once the contracts are up, the P3 facilities must return into the full control of local and provincial authorities.
• Work with stakeholders to shift goods movement travel to afterhours when the least amount of people are travelling.
• Either update the Gateway Program to be an encompassing transportation plan for the whole Lower Mainland (means including large transit, walking, and cycling components), in coordination with regional plans, or develop a parallel plan with regional authorities in which promises are made to provide substantial provincial funding for transit, walking, and cycling improvements.

It may shock you, but a number of these proposals are also supported by the Gateway Council, the group which has been pushing for this whole Gateway strategic infrastructure upgrade for over a decade. All the suggestions with a star behind them are supported by the Gateway Council.

This approach of mine is all about the devil in the details. It’s understanding and approving the concept, but tweaking the plan and policies that implement to ensure a better overall life for the public.

I think this notion is something the NDP really has to work on, so that they don’t alienate potential supporters. They’ve done it to South of the Fraser residents by opposing Gateway, and to First Nations communities and their allies with the Tsawwassen Treaty. Sure, they may keep their backers in Vancouver (Gateway), or farmers and land-use planners (Tsawwassen), but they are just responding to big issues with simple answers. Which is just making things more polarized than actually bringing stakeholders together and working collaboratively to improve the situation.

Last week, the UN Development Program singled out Canada for hurting the world’s poor through its refusal to take serious action on climate change. Canadians are the second largest per capita emitters and therefore among the very worst contributors to what the UNDP calls the “defining human development issue of our generation.”…

At the Commonwealth summit in Kampala, Uganda, Nov. 23-25, Harper scuppered a British-led initiative that would have seen developed countries take the lead in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. He insisted that binding commitments must be adopted by every country or none at all…

Harper’s antipathy to international environmental co-operation is well known. He once dismissed the Kyoto Protocol as “essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealth-producing nations.” But his concerns about burden-sharing and free-riding are misplaced. Firefighters don’t check tax records before responding to an emergency call…

——————————————————

Whatever his motives, Harper’s stance is downright nasty. For rather than simply sitting on the sidelines, he’s actively seeking to block urgent action on the part of other countries.

It’s time to put the long-term interests of humanity ahead of domestic politics.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown understands this. So does California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. So too does Australia’s new prime minister, Kevin Rudd, who has promised to ratify the Kyoto Protocol.

Want to see a small man, van Loan? He’s sitting right beside you – playing games while the planet burns.

[The Toronto Star via Queer Liberal]

Heck, you’d think that this week’s coast to coast snow storms is evidence enough of the impacts of climate change - apparently not for Mr. Harper. The fact of the matter is that this government was elected in only to punish the Liberal party for the sponsorship scandal. They have no real objectives, no real plan, to move Canada forward in the 21st century. Once the people realize, maybe we can start being part of the solution once again.

Yes, I’m boosting an event here, but I personally think it’s not only for a good cause, but is an amazing deal.

Zipcar is a large North American car sharing company, and quite frankly provides an excellent product. Basically, you buy a cheap annual membership, then can choose from one of two driving plans: extra value (for those who drive several times a day), or pay as you go (for those that drive once in a while). What’s more: there’s no deposit, and gas, parking, and insurance is all included in the fees. It’s as easy as getting a membership, reserving a vehicle through phone or online, picking it up, and driving. Just make sure to return it to the same spot.

Zipcar launched in Vancouver not too long ago, and based on their maps, have developed an excellent network of “car stations”, mostly around the Downtown area. Which is weird though, cause if you live Downtown, it’s probably easier to just walk or take transit. Zipcar should really expand into the lower density areas of South and East Vancouver, and would actually do quite good in the regional town centres in Burnaby, Coquitlam, New Westminster, and Surrey. There, people are far more likely to drive. Zipcar should really partner with TransLink to have some stalls at the Park and Rides, and see how business goes.

Car sharing is, I believe, the perfect compliment to transit for the green generation. If I had my license, and was 21, I would already be a member. I mean, I never know when I’m going to want to buy some furniture at IKEA, and car sharing is quite a bit more convenient than arranging a time and date with friends or family who drive. Car ownership just doesn’t make fiscal sense these days in our region, if your work is easily accessible by transit.

Despite them becoming a large monopoly in the market (which helps nobody in the long run), and slowly killing off Vancouver-based Cooperative Car Network, Zipcar is the Apple of car share companies. I’ve already noticed the company sponsoring a number of community events. This next one is going to be huge. Here’s the quote from the media release:

On November 29th, Zipcar will host a free screening of the film Arctic Tale, while at the same time asking car owners to help get privately owned automobiles off the road by donating their car to charity. Vehicle donors will receive a lifetime membership to Zipcar along with a $500 Zipcar driving credit. Funds raised through vehicle donation will be donated to the Vancouver based charity BEST (Better Environmentally Sound Transportation). Victoria based filmmakers Adam Ravetch and Sarah Robertson (co-directors of Arctic Tale) will introduce the film and host a Q&A following the screening.

Thursday, November 29th, at 7pm
The Van East Theatre, 2290 Commercial Drive [map]

If you were smart, you’d buy a cheap used car, donate it, and get the lifetime membership and Zipcar credit. I really wonder how many cars they are going to get. Cause, I mean, no rich business person from Downtown is about to donate their Porsche. In any case, it’s a good deal if you car isn’t worth much…