paulhillsdon.com

First off, an interview with Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon on the Christy Clark Show. He reveals a few more details about the plan, such as the funding mechanisms.

Click here to download or play the MP3 

Then we have the full Global news story on the plan, with a brief overview at the beginning, and then political correspondent Keith Baldrey giving some scope to the proposal. He also mentions that the public will likely see Expo Line stations upgrades and the RapidBus routes coming in the first phase of the plan.

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

With the huge influx of people discovering my South of Fraser “Transit 2011″ plan, enough to take my site down for a bit over bandwidth overload, I’d thought I should write an quick lil update about it.

First off, thanks for all the very supportive comments. While it is easy to poke fun at TransLink’s plan, in comparison to mine, we must remember that they do truly only have limited funding and other political constraints to getting anything done these days - something I didn’t have to face while developing mine. That doesn’t mean however, that I didn’t try to keep mine realistic. Frankly, while it may be completely unscientific, I did try to get a reasonable cost analysis and keep the plan actually doable. The funding required for it isn’t *all* that much different than that which would pay for the Evergreen Line.

Just to recollect: As of now, while I haven’t gotten much way in response from TransLink officials concerning my plan, we know that the Livable Region Coalition, Stephen Rees, VALTAC, Gordon Price, the City of Surrey planning department, and a handful of transit riders love my plan and consider it far better than the official TransLink plan. Hehe, maybe that’s what you get when you give transit supporters what they want!

To that end, I received a comment on the old post suggesting that I go out and find more vocal support for the plan. Originally, while I was conceiving it, these types of ideas were in my mind (taking it to council meetings and such). However, as you may understand, I eventually lost interest in my plan as my views changed, and barely got it up on my site in a readable, concluded fashion. I do not consider my plan fully developed, nor fully backed by sources - and I don’t have the motivation, certainly not in 2008, to go back to it and update it. It was not exactly designed to be an official alternative to TransLink’s plans - in fact, mine was created before TransLink even released their draft version - it was more of a suggestion of creative, and reasonably priced solutions to our transit problems in the SoF area.

So, to both gnoble and Ken Hardie, no need to fret, I am not shopping this plan around town.

To reiterate, certain aspects of my opinions at that time have evolved - such as the use of the Interurban line for community rail. You can stay tuned however, because, in a very short time, I will be releasing a long overdue update to both my vision for transit in the SoF, and across the region.

That is, as long as the provincial government doesn’t do it first. Ken Hardie:

If you look at the real substance of the complaints by the five muni’s South of the Fraser, their issue is with timing. What we’ve proposed is in line with what we heard from the public and stakeholders, and the timing is dictated by what we can afford to do given the current revenue streams. If we get more provincial support…which may well be indicated on Monday…then of course we can do things more quickly.

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:

2008

• New route on 64 Avenue between Langley Centre and Scottsdale
• New route on 88 Avenue between Walnut Grove and 22nd Street Station
• Continuous service on Scott Road - 72 Avenue
• Frequent Bus Network service on King George Highway between Newton and White Rock Centre
• More frequent service along 152 Street and on other core routes in Surrey

2009

• New route across Golden Ears Bridge, connecting Langley and Maple Ridge
• New route between White Rock Centre and Langley
• Integration of several routes with Canada Line rapid transit at Bridgeport Station in Richmond, including significant increases in service levels and reliability
• Introduce all-day local service in South Surrey
• New Community Shuttles in West Whalley
• More frequent service and extended hours for Langley Community Shuttles, including introduction of higher capacity “midi-buses”
• Improved service on Fraser Highway between Aldergrove and Langey Centre

2010-2011

• Improvements throughout the South of Fraser aera to achieve baseline transit service levels (6:00 am - 11:00 pm, seven days a week on key routes)
• Development of new transit infrastructure, improvement of existing transit exchanges
• New Community Shuttles on 68 Avenue in Surrey

2012

• Introduction of limited-stop B-Line service on Fraser Highway
• Improve service between Scottsdale and Langey
• New Community Shuttle route between Langey City and Walnut Grove
• Improved Community Shuttle service in South Surrey/White Rock and South Delta

2013

• Introduction of bus rapid transit from White Rock Centre to Guildford via King George Highway and 104 Avenue
• New transit services on Highway 1 and Port Mann Bridge
• New Community Shuttle route in South Surrey/White Rock

———————-

A few more interesting facts I gathered:

• The B-Line is a very poorly defined service, as anyone who rides the three routes can tell. They are basically nothing more than limited stop, express routes. Well then why aren’t all limited stop, express routes B-Lines? TransLink doesn’t know! But apparently they are looking into this. The guy told me that most likely there will be B-Lines (limited stop services), and a new identity for real rapid bus lines (with ITS, etc. which is what the 98 B-Line has). I assume this identity update will also include a designation for these new “midi-buses” planned for Langley (as seen above).
• The Interurban route is not being looked at any deeper because that’s not where the population is, and because they can get more bang for their limited buck adding buses around the area than upgrading the rail route for passenger service.
• The introduction of the new east-west connector routes is being championed as a very important improvement to the area

———————
Quite frankly, I am rather disappointed. From what I had heard, and I’d have to clarify on this, these improvements are based on a budget of around $600 million. And what do we get? More buses, and three semi rapid bus lines by 2013. No real rapid transit that actually shapes communities. Again, no reuse of the Interurban line (though the corridor is to be “secured for future use”). Just the same old standard improvements.

And that’s great, and it’s realistic, but there’s a significant issue here that continues to be neglected. The South of Fraser area is growing exponentially faster than any other place in the region, and is far behind in it’s transit usage and transit infrastructure. If most of the people moving to Metro Vancouver are going to live there, and there’s no major funding in place to provide *real* rapid transit to these residents, we are simply going to get a continuous increase of cars on the roads. And that’s without even mentioning the effects of the Gateway Program.

I would be excited if there was a major investment. But there isn’t.

And I understand that TransLink faces funding deficiencies, and based on what they have in their forecasted budgets, this is what they can realistically provide. I just hope that either they will dip into their reservoir of $400 million, or the provincial government will step in and put some of that 2.2 billion from Harper into the South of Fraser area. We need real options. And rapid buses in six years isn’t going to cut it.

The thing that annoys me most is that the King George/104th route (currently the 321, and part of the 320), at least from Guildford, to Surrey Central, to Newton… it’s already got 10 minute service at it’s peak, and is consistently packed throughout the day. It’s more than ready for articulated buses, and designation as a B-Line. That’s today. Imagine what’ll be like in 2013, when rapid bus is supposed to finally arrive.

What’s weirder is the route now known as the 502 (Surrey Central to Langley Centre, and sometimes beyond) is to become a B-Line before the King George route! Just based on my experience, it’s not usually as busy, and I could understand TransLink waiting a year or two to turn it into a rapid bus route. But they are gung ho about upgrading a route that doesn’t quite need it yet (if we are prioritizing…).

I find it odd that all these rapid bus routes seem to be timed with the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge around 2013, and when that highway rapid bus service will begin.

B-Lines would not take long to implement. I was going to suggest they put the 98 B-Line buses on a route in Surrey, but, of course, those buses are being diverted to the 95 and 91 B-Lines in Vancouver.

What does it take to buy a handful of articulated buses and stick them in Surrey/Langley?

TransLink has been working over a number of months on a new South of Fraser Transit Area Plan. Up until now, there’s been one document released going over the results of the first community open houses, discussing a transit vision for the South of Fraser area. TransLink has formalized that vision into a plan, and despite being behind schedule, it’s now prepared to take this plan to the public for final consultation. This is your last chance to make an major impact on transit South of the Fraser. Area plans define specific improvements, and are supposed to occur every 5 years. The South of Fraser area’s last plan was done in 2000, so obviously TransLink isn’t always good at keeping on schedule.

It is imperative you attend at least one session, and *make* everyone you know voice their opinions on the plan.

• Delta
  • Nov 6 - Ladner Leisure Centre - 4600 Clarence Taylor Way : 2pm - 8pm
  • Nov 8 - London Drugs - Trenant Park Square : 10 am - 6pm
  • Nov 9 - Scottsdale Mall - 7031 120th St : 9:30 am - 9pm
  • Nov 14 - Sun God - 7815 112 St : 2pm - 8 pm
• Langley
  • Nov 3 - Willowbrook Mall : 9:30am - 6pm
  • Nov 5 - Aldergrove Kinsman Community Centre - 26770 29th Ave : 2pm - 8pm
  • Nov 19 - Langley City Hall Public Library - 20399 Douglas Cres. : 9am - 8pm
  • Nov 22 - Walnut Grove Rec Centre - 8889 Walnut Grove Dr. : 2pm - 8pm
• Surrey
  • Nov 7 - Central City SFU Mezzanine - 13450 102 Ave : 12pm - 9pm
  • Nov 10 - Guildford Mall - 2695 Guildford Town Centre : 9am - 6pm
  • Nov 13 - Newton Wave Pool - 13730 72 Ave : 2pm - 8pm
  • Nov 15 - Fleetwood Community Centre - 15996 84 Ave : 9am - 8pm
  • Nov 28 - Cloverdale Kwantlen Univ. College - 5500 180 St : 12pm - 9pm
• White Rock
  • Nov 4 - Semiahmoo Mall - 1701 152 St. : 9:30am - 6pm

By the way, TransLink’s South of the Fraser site also has a very informative FAQ section discussing rapid transit, reuse of the Interurban line, Abbotsford connections, and express buses being rerouted to the Canada Line.

I recently attended a “limited” public forum with about 60-80 other stakeholders from the region helping TransLink to develop their strategy for the next 30 year regional transportation plan: Transport 2040. Let me be clear however, that this was a very broad look at the transport system, and they attempted to avoid any specifics. It was a deliberate attempt to form 7 main strategies for the new plan, and then, perhaps, some more particular policies that could reinforce these strategies. Yes, it was very, technospeak (aka: public relations picky-wording).

To begin, I will link you to two important documents that we were given at the forum. There is a backgrounder, and a discussion guide. I have absolutely no idea why these are not currently public on their website (they should be! TransLink isn’t even private yet and they hold back this info!).

The main outline of the Transport 2040 plan revolves around 7 strategies. The ones proposed by TransLink, which were discussed at the forum, are as follows:

1. Use our assets to their fullest potential and keep them in a state of good repair.
2. Strategically expand the supply of transportation to provide real alternatives to single-occupancy vehicle travel.
3. Minimize environmental impact of transportation.
4. Build and operate a safe, secure and accessible transportation system.
5. Secure funding that is stable and predictable, and that influences transportation choices.
6. Implement and manage transit investment in ways that encourage development of communities that are designed for transit, cycling and walking.
7. Work collaboratively with other transportation and planning agencies and stakeholders in the Lower Mainland.

When I first arrived, it struck me how many suits there were in the room. Obviously, TransLink is more than just transit, as it’s mandate covers the whole regional *transportation* system. However, it was funny overhearing the “business” people talk about taking the SkyTrain downtown, as if it was something they rarely ever did. Frankly, SkyTrain is a very attractive rapid transit system that everybody in the region, even politicians and business people, should be using.

The concept of a “limited” public forum was odd to me. It seems like TransLink invited organizations with whom they have a good relationship (aka: BEST, Gateway Council, Vancouver Board of Trade, etc.). This was very upsetting to me. I mean, first of all, they seem to be rushing through this whole 30 year plan development process, trying to complete it all in less than 3 months. Not that it’s impossible, but it seems very rushed for something so important for the future. Furthermore, the public is not at all informed that the development of this new plan is even going on, let alone allowing them to have a voice in it.

However, it wasn’t all doom and gloom. As things got going, people began to participate, and the mood was very Canadian. While there was a number of strong positions on certain topics, people were not as polarized as I would have expected. The business people rarely mentioned Gateway, and continued to show much support for environmental protections and vastly expanded, and efficient transit. The transit and eco people, while tending to knock Gateway at every chance, ensured that roads were still very much a vital part of the economy and of the transportation system as a whole. The amount of symbiosis on the many struggles and suggestions for improvement of the transport system was very surprising to me.

Throughout the discussions, everyone, from the cyclists, to the TransLink staff, to the business leaders seem to be on the sustainable bandwagon, specifically using the term “sustainability” over and over. I wonder though how many fully understand the very deep and complex values that real sustainability entails with it.

Also, when we went into each of the seven strategies, reuse of the old Interurban route throughout the Valley for rail transit continued to be brought up time and time again. Many times by John Buker, of Rail for the Valley, but also from business people from the South of Fraser, like Peter Holt. It’s obvious that many people support the revival of the Interurban, and understand the benefits such a line could bring to the region. Unfortunately, TransLink hasn’t been very receptive to the idea so far, so I’m not sure how much help it did talking about it at the forum.

There was also a very resounding underlying thought throughout the forum that congestion pricing needed to be looked at as a new funding source. Basically, it’s an idea whose time has come. People wanted TransLink to do a comprehensive review of congestion pricing options, from bridge tolling, to distance charges, to emissions charges, etc. and develop a long term strategy for the implementation of the recommendations.

There were many other intriguing tidbits that I noted throughout the day. Some range from suggested improvements, project, and policies, to general comments. The list is long, so beware!

• New thinking on choice of travel, mode, time
• Dedicated transport corridors for personal travel, goods movement, etc.
• Industrial Land Reserve
• “User pay” and other traffic demand management strategies
• The good investment/return rate of Intelligent Transportation Systems
• The issue of aging infrastructure
• Increasing/diversifying modal choice
• Transport’s strong connection to land use
• Developing a 5 year plan for capital projects with rolling schedule
• Develop/expand/secure greenspace & agricultural reserves
• The need for affordable, mixed housing
• Increase in local job creation
• The problem of senior governments principles conflicting with local governments
• Reducing the amount of municipal governments
• Make the LRSP binding to all Metro Vancouver municipalities
• “Gateway” Land Reserve (aka: Industrial Land Reserve)
• Increase densification along transit corridors
• Creation of buffer zones between Industrial/”Gateway” areas & local communities
• Government funding holistically - not one project at a time, timed for elections
• Problem of converting commercial and industrial lands to residential (i.e. in Downtown, along SkyTrain routes)
• Creation of unfragmented/continuous greenspace
• Better transit outside the Growth Concentration Area
• Ensuring affordable transit
• Transport system offering community spaces
• More inclusive process (i.e. more public forums)
• Stable planning, financing, governance
• Protection of transport corridors
• “Green” transit, using alternate energy sources than gasoline
• Fixing the grid road network in the region
• New town centres growing into second Downtown/taking over Downtown
• Mitigation efforts for future earthquake
• Environmental consultation on all developments
• Road/Transport pricing strategy (supported by the BC Chambers of Commerce)
• 37% of population immigrants
• 83% service sector workforce
• Travel patterns changing from hub and spoke to pick and sticks
• Climate change affecting infrastructure design life and service reliability
• Accessibility big issue in future when 25% of people will be over 65
• Frequent service most important. Fit size of vehicles around demand, but keep steady frequency at a high rate throughout the day and night
• Remove property tax from funding schemes
• Do not rely on gas tax, because funding will decrease as people shift out of cars, or to other fuels
• Reintroduce parking levy
• Look at transportation demand management, or carbon tax
• Senior governments need to invest in transportation
• Create a diverse list of funding sources
• In Abbotsford, local businesses are paying for sidewalks and cycling lanes, understanding their impact on livability and on the overall health of the local economy
• Market a “transit lifestyle”, in particular to youth
• There was no representative on site from the Ministry of Transportation and Highways, despite TransLink’s Transport 2040 *having* to fit the growth goals of the provincial governments (aka: accepting Gateway)
• More public forums!
• New governance structure though out backwards. Decided on new structure, funding then did 30 year plan, versus other way around
• Very risky aftereffects yet to be seen from P3s (public private partnerships. aka: Canada Line, Port Mann twinning). Investments made by private corporations will limit the control and flexibility on local governments on how to use these services. i.e. tolls from new Port Mann would go to private corp, instead of back to TransLink to fund transit initiatives
• Road diets

If there was one thing that annoyed me most, it was the lack of true public awareness and input on this plan. They said it will be made available on their site in November, but we will see…

For your information, we were all seated inside the large roundroom at the Morris J. Wosk Centre for Dialogue. Most of the seats were filled. Each strategy had discussion on it from 10-15 minutes, and people were allowed to voice their opinions. However, as time was limited, sometimes those who wanted to talk were not able to. And considering it was such a large room, it was very difficult to do any real creative brainstorming with one another, not to mention rather scary for those who aren’t great ay public speaking in front of big crowds (who isn’t?!). A number of the organizations invited were allowed to submit their own specific ideas as well to TransLink, and they each did a short 5 minute summary of their proposals to the larger group.

Your thoughts?