paulhillsdon.com

From The Province:

People love their cars and need more roads, so gas taxes should be directed to encourage the car culture, not fund public transit, says Maureen Bader, spokeswoman for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

WOW. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anything that could be more *wrong*! It’s like saying, people love to drink, so let’s build a ton of bars! With free drinks for all! 

*shakes head*

At a press conference yesterday to promote the CTF’s 10th Annual Gas Tax Honesty Day, Bader attacked Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s federal Conservatives and Premier Gordon Campbell’s B.C. Liberals as unprincipled tax-grabbers.

“About 30 per cent of the price you’re paying at the pump here in Vancouver is in tax,” said Bader.

“In Vancouver, 20.5 cents of each litre is provincial tax. What’s worse is we’re about to be hit with a carbon tax. Starting July 1st we’re going to be paying an additional 2.4 cents per litre, then we pay GST on top of that.

“This is just wrong.”

Yes, the gas tax is getting high. I would possibly argue a little too high, considering we aren’t seeing very many big improvements to cycling or transit infrastructure. However, market demand isn’t going to suddenly drop - even with people supposedly reducing car usage - so trust me, getting rid of the gas tax will do nothing but provide customers with a short term reduction in gas prices. Ironically enough, if you were to slash the tax tomorrow, demand would spike as people would rush to fill up - causing the price to increase!

She called on Ottawa to transfer five cents per litre of the federal gas tax to municipalities for roads.

Now, this does make a bit of sense, as long as municipalities aren’t forced to use the money for roads. Cities have been demanding a bigger transfer of the gas tax or GST for years, because they just don’t have the means to support the infrastructure they require. It’s the smart cities that would put this money into providing alternatives to the car, not building more roads and highways for the status quo. 

And she questioned the widely accepted opinion of world scientists that human CO2 production is causing dangerous global warming.

“More and more scientists are coming on record and saying that man-made global warming is probably not the cause of the global warming that we have been experiencing over the past few years.

“We’re spending billions of dollars, and really, what we’re doing is allowing politicians to essentially finance their next election campaign,” said Bader.

I’m not even going to touch this one, because we all know how ridiculous her claims are. I thought we got past the point of asking “is this happening” and “did we cause it”, to “how are we going to fix this”.

She sneered at governments’ funding of public transit.

“Taxpayers have got to ask themselves: ‘Do we really need to have a $14-billion Cadillac transit plan when all the government is really expecting to see is maybe a five-per-cent increase in transit use?’ People here want to use their cars.

I agree. $14 billion for such a small increase in usage is a complete waste of money. However, we must look at what we are paying for. Due to the construction of the Millennium Line as SkyTrain, it would be foolhardy to not complete it, with the eastern UBC Line extension, and the western Evergreen Line extension, in a different technology. In a sense, we are locked into the expensive proprietary SkyTrain. But, it must be built - and frankly, we need it ASAP. 

Once we spend the billions for those routes, then we can begin to look at cheaper alternatives that wil increase transit usage such as Light Rail Transit or Bus Rapid Transit. 

And don’t forget about one of the cheapest modes of transport, not just in acquiring the vehicle, but also the construction of infrastructure - cycling!

“Governments cannot pick winners [in business] and they shouldn’t be determining for us what we should be doing with our money and with our time.

“It didn’t work in the Soviet Union, it’s not going to work here either. People are driving more now than they ever have and gasoline prices are the highest that they have ever been.”

Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon couldn’t be reached for comment.

To summarize,

• BC is not Soviet Russia, 
• we need a gas tax to fund alternatives *before* everyone stops driving due to insane fuel prices, 
• climate change is real and needs to be solved, 
• Canadian Taxpayer’s Federation doesn’t speak for all taxpayers, and 
• Maureen Bader is an ignoramus. 

I was rummaging through some statistics this morning about Surrey. Stumbling upon the Transportation graphs, I found something rather bewildering - the stats showed that SOVs, or single occupancy vehicles, were, beating the trend, so to speak, and decreasing in usage in Surrey! 

This is quite amazing, especially considering our options out here in terms of transportation alternatives. 

It’s a spectacular feat and a wonderful trend. Especially since Vancouver won’t get all the attention now!

Private vehicles were the primary mode of transportation in 2006 of those who commute to work.  The share of commuters traveling by vehicle as driver declined from 2001 to 2006.  This was accompanied by a complimentary growth in travel by vehicle as a passenger and by public transit.  Carpooling activity may be captured by either category of vehicle use since this statistic tracks an individual’s most common mode of transportation. 

The primary mode of transportation throughout Metro Vancouver in 2006 is vehicle as driver. This mode is used by a smaller share of the commuting labour force in the inner municipalities of Vancouver, Burnaby and New Westminster.  The Metro Vancouver average excluding these municipalities is 75.8%.  Surrey is in line with this at 76.1%. 

What the paragraph above tells us is that Surrey residents are doing the best they can to go out of their cars with the resources they have. It is the cities of Vancouver, Burnaby, and New West that have some of the best transit in the region - for this exact reason, they were taken out of the equation. So, in terms of comparing our driving usage with other places that have crap transit - we’re about equal. Just imagine our transit usage if we had viable alternatives - like rail or BRT!

The more I cycle, the more I realize that bikes should become a whole new category in legal and urban planning terms.

Right off the bat, most people would, at least presume, it’s unsafe to cycle on the same road as a car - at least without any good physical separation. This is, all things considered, a huge deterrent to cycling as both a mode of recreation or of transportation.

Now, legally, bikes are considered in the same league as motor vehicles. Thus why they are destined for the road and not the sidewalk.

It’s funny how some laws just become benign though. I could understand why, legally, in a city’s core you wouldn’t want bikes interacting with the people on the sidewalks and would rather them be in the same league as cars. However, the case is completely different in the suburbs. Out here, there’s either not enough population density, or attractions to gather in one specific area, that would require bikes to get off the sidewalks out of the safety of pedestrians.

Frankly, that’s the reason most people I see in the suburbs bike on the sidewalk! There’s nobody to run into! Unlike on the road where they are supposed to be…

Anyways, the problem you get in the city core is, although cars may be driving slower, the deterrent is still there. In this urban space, you essentially require three main infrastructure elements for a complete street - designated, separated space for cars and buses; designated, separated space for bikes; and designated, separated space for pedestrians. Of course, this becomes strenuous in terms of the ultimate amount of space available. However, if you take space away from the cars, and give it to bikes, you’ve created a market based situation and traffic will naturally redistribute.

With the suburbs, it’s a different story. Right now, in Surrey, they’ve adopted a policy of building “complete streets”, which basically amounts to: designated, separated space for trees and plants; designated, separated space for cars and buses; designated space for bikes; and designated, separated space for pedestrians. This means boulevards, car lanes, bike lanes, and sidewalks.

Now as I mentioned, it’s actually quite a waste of space to build sidewalks where pedestrians don’t walk. It’s even stupider to also designate space to bikes which bikes won’t use.

It’s actually a very easy solution. And there’s two steps about it.

1. Allow bikes on all sidewalks that don’t have the pedestrian traffic to necessitate separation due to safety and collision concerns.
2. Stop building sidewalks - start building multi-use pathways with separation from the cars’ road space.

Step 2 is a more long term plan and policy, but it’s an improvement - it gets bumpy after a while from cycling down sidewalks.

Here, instead of using street space for small sidewalks and small bike lanes that nobody uses, you combine the space and end up creating a wider path for both users. Furthermore, it attracts more cyclists due to the separation factor.

What say you? Time to change a little policy?

I was at the Surrey Archives today, and while going through a *ton* of documents, I came across an old timetable from the BC Electric Railway’s Interurban Line. Here’s a quick rundown of what I found from the 1924 timetable:

• Service ran three times a day in both directions, for a total of six runs both east and westbound, all the way from Chilliwack to New West and back again. There was additional runs leaving from Jardine (in Langley), and from Cloverdale (in Surrey).
• Times were spaced out throughout the day, rather than the rush hour commuter service the West Coast Express provides.
• Westbound from Chilliwack to New West: 8:05A, 1:40P, 6:20P
• Eastbound from New West to Chilliwack: 12:15P, 5:50P, 9:00P
• From New West, it took:
  • 24 mins to Newton
  • 40 mins to Cloverdale
  • 53 mins to Langley City
  • 1 hour and 40 mins to Abbotsford
  • 2 hours and 40 mins to Chilliwack

Nathan Pachal, former writer of the VALTAC blog, started up his own site today. I found some more recent timetable information on his Document Archive. This rundown covers Interurban service in 1950, just before it was shut down:

• Service ran three times a day in both directions, for a total of sux runs both east and westbound all the way from Chilliwack to Vancouver and back again. Service was express from Vancouver to New West - local service on this stretch was provided by the Central Park Line (the equivalent of the Expo Line SkyTrain).
• Westbound from Chilliwack to Vancouver: 8:00A, 1:30P, 6:10P
• Eastbound from Vancouver to Chilliwack: 8:25A, 1:20P, 5:30P
• There was special early runs on Fridays, and late night runs on Saturdays (i.e. leave Vancouver at 11:33P, leave Langley at 1:50A)
• From Vancouver, it took:
  • 45 mins to New West
  • 1 hour and 9 mins to Newton
  • 1 hour and 25 mins to Cloverdale
  • 1 hour and 38 mins to Langley City
  • 2 hours and 25 mins to Abbotsford
  • 3 hours and 25 mins to Chilliwack

I personally find it fascinating that we were able to run a regional rail service, throughout the day, back in the 20’s, compared to our terrible lack of service today. I suppose that’s what happens when your rip up a transportation network - it takes a while to rebuild.

I can hardly imagine how much of a boon restoring service on the Interurban would be, even just for my transportation needs. My main places of travel are Cloverdale, Newton, Whalley, Fleetwood, Langley, Burnaby, and Vancouver - and the Interurban would serve five, possibly six, of them! That’s nearly everywhere I go.

That said, it doesn’t really help the denser areas in North Surrey. However, it would be huge to communities east in the Valley! I can’t even imagine how convenient and enjoyable a rail ride would be, going from Cloverdale to Langley in 13 mins, Cloverdale to Newton in 16 mins. Having a direction connection from downtown Vancouver to Surrey, without all the stops that the SkyTrain necessitates, would be AMAZING!

Please. Bring back the Interurban. I’ll do anything. Just give me my rail service!

Oddly enough, there’s been two articles from the major media recently that are clamouring for improved rail in Canada. This topic is something I actually experienced recently during a trip to Regina.

As everyone knows, rail in Europe is essentially “the” way to get around. Unfortunately, while Europe and parts of Asia were investing in rail, North America put all it’s money into highways. It’s this “road first” mentality that has destroyed John A. MacDonald’s dream of a coast to coast railway for Canada.

Throughout the past 5 decades, the government has refused to properly fund passenger rail, and has handed over complete control of the rail system to private corporations.

To put it into today’s perspective, during my recent trip to Regina, I examined the three ways to get there without a car: Greyhound, Via Rail, and WestJet. Now, as most know, flying in Canada is almost as expensive as our cellular data plans! Course, many will pay the premium to skip the long travel time that a train or bus presents.

Now, due to funding cuts, Via no longer even runs trains through Regina - closest I could get was Saskatoon. This routing has also eliminated any national rail connections through Calgary. All rail from Vancouver is looped north through Jasper and Edmonton, to Saskatoon and Winnipeg, and finally to Toronto.

Beyond that “small” annoyance, the cost comparison of rail to a coach service like Greyhound is unbelievable. For example, it was almost $600 one way for me to get to Saskatoon from Vancouver, whereas a return trip via Greyhound could be obtained for only $400. Not to mention the rail trip took longer!

Same scenario for rail south to Seattle or Portland - two wonderful day trips that could easily be a wonderful experience via rail transport. Unfortunately, the provincial government refuses to cooperate with Amtrak and the federal government of the States, which are trying rather futilely to upgrade the “Cascadian” route to handle high speed rail. BC has chosen to implement the cheapest of the proposed upgrades - a couple of rail passes. Like that will speed things up much!

It’s all a very disappointing state of affairs. With three major corridors ripe for high speed rail, governments across Canada are neglecting our rail system at a time when considerable investment is needed. With the advent of both climate change and peak oil, not only are citizens going to look for rail as a “green” form of transport, corporations are going to shift from trucking to rail for continental shipping.

And we’re still stuck with a 100+ year old rail bridge in New Westminster causing numerous backups and limiting expansion and growth of our rail system - with no plan or funding in place to replace it!

What in the hell is going on here?

I don’t seem to recall this news hitting the Van-blogsophere, although it seems as though it’s rather old now. Maybe we Vancouver bloggers don’t visit Pacific Centre very much ;)

We all know the endless questioning of why Vancouver has been gipped by Apple for years with the lack of an official store. At one time, it seemed as though the company was planning to redeem our patient waiting with a flagship store, similar to the one in San Francisco. Apparently, it’s going to be *that* cool, but we are getting more than just a typical mini mall store.

We’ve known for a bit now that Pacific Centre had been chosen as the site. The rumour was that it would be in the space formerly occupied by Holt Renfrew. Now, finally, the walls have been put up with the lovely white Apple logo and a link to the Canadian site.

This of course means that construction is officially underway! The walls went up at the beginning of this month. According to the reports, the store will take over two levels!

Now, if the timeline follows that of previous Apple stores in Canada, Vancouver’s could very well be ready in time for summer!

This is all corroborated by Pacific Centre’s website:

We expect the exterior portion of the project to be complete by March 2008 and the interior portion including new store openings by Summer 2008.

We are pleased to share with you that, Apple, Browns Shoes, H&M and Teenflo will be joining the Centre and will reside in the old Holt Renfrew location on the upper level. We expect to announce the other new tenants in the coming weeks.  On the lower level Geox and Jacob are now open.

There’s a story in The Province today about Surrey continuing it’s so-called “made in Surrey” approach to regional growth, although this time the city has a leg to stand on.

There’s a strong possibility that following the LRSP update, Metro Vancouver will gain stronger powers to enforce cities in the region to play along properly with the regional growth strategy - something Surrey has a reputation for “derailing” due to it’s sprawled development.

One of the current large problems in the region is a growing lack of industrial land. As most should be aware, Vancouver and Burnaby are actually making the situation worse by rezoning industrial land for high density condos. Just take a look downtown: False Creek North and South, Yaletown, Coal Harbour - all former industrial lands. Burnaby is playing a similar game, building condos along the SkyTrain lines, usually on land that is or was industrial.

Now, it’s perfectly debateable whether or not these rezonings were justified and are actually improving quality of life. Certainly, it’s a very complex debate, ranging from the Province building rapid transit along industrial corridors in the first place (in an attempt to avoid NIMBYs), to Vancouver pursuing a word renowed smart growth strategy for the Downtown Penninsula.

The fact remains though, that industrial land is disappearing quickly and cities north of the Fraser are doing nothing to replace the lost plots of industrial lands.

This leaves Surrey is a difficult situation. Jean Lamontagne, General Manager of the City of Surrey’s planning department:

“Many municipalities have converted large areas of industrial land to higher uses, such as residential,” Lamontagne said in a report to council.

“Surrey is now being expected to make up for the shortcomings of others.

“It is expected to provide storage, distribution and truck storage for the region. It is clearly not acceptable . . . as they do little for the tax base of the city,” he said.

In the article, Dianne Watts, Mayor of Surrey, outright dismisses the option that Metro Vancouver will be able to overrule the City’s land use authority:

“The pressure to convert industrial land to residential is very high in Surrey, but we’re saying no,” she said.

“The region is looking at other communities to pick up the slack. It wants to fix mistakes of the past, but one community can’t supply industrial land for the region.”

Then, Vancouver Councillor Suzanne Anton steps in and completely misreads the whole situation with this statement:

“Surrey wants to be able to upgrade industrial land to commercial land [and produce more tax revenue]. Surrey is saying more loudly than others that they don’t want to be told what to do,” said Anton, who sits on the Metro planning committee.

Surrey has never wanted to replace industrial with commercial. Frankly, industrial lands provide better jobs in the long term for residents. In fact, Surrey has pursued a very intense strategy of protecting or expanding industrial lands in the city.

But it gets better. Anton then goes in for the knockout:

She admitted Vancouver recently converted industrial land in Southeast False Creek for a future residential community of 15,000. But she said Surrey shouldn’t point fingers.

“Do we want to get into who shoots up on the Downtown Eastside and where they come from?” she asked.

BAM!

How dare Anton try and claim that all the homeless, mentally ill, and drug addicted in Vancouver are somehow Surrey’s problem?! How dare she reinforce a negative persona on both Surrey as a city and claim to define it’s type of residents?!

That type of verbal attack on a neighbouring community should not be occuring by any mayor or councillor in the region.

In fact, it’s quite debateable, but if it wasn’t for the SkyTrain, Whalley wouldn’t have even gotten half the problems it did in the 90’s. And where do you think those people were coming from - oh, right, VANCOUVER!

I’ve been periodically working on this project since mid 2007. I was originally planning to release it Monday, but Gordon Campbell was too quick to steal my thunder as I found out Sunday night. I have chosen to hold it off a bit unless the dust on that announcement settled.

I originally thought that my plan might become redundant with the Province’s announcement. Thankfully, it turns out that my plan is almost an extension of the Provincial Transit Plan.

Transit Metropolis Vancouver is my extensive plan based around the idea that transit in this region should work for 90% of the population, not 10%. As you can already tell, this far surpasses the Province’s goal of reaching a 20% transit modal share.

Two unique parts of my plan that weren’t at all touched in the Province’s: expanded commuter rail, and a whole new LRT, or “SkyTrain mini”, rail network. The goal, as I said, is to allow anyone to get anywhere in the region - quickly, conveniently, and comfortably.

Transit Metropolis Vancouver, in my mind, is almost a personal visioning practice for transit past the Province’s plan that ends in 2020. Check it out and let me know what you think.

I don’t even know how this makes the news. Damn old media is screwed up bad.

First off, just because Facebook growth is slowing compared to in previous months, and Nexopia is still growing at a steady pace, does not mean that people are switching.

You also ought to compare the number of users as well as the areas in which these users live. For example, I have heard that Piczo is huge in the Maritimes.

As anyone who knows the social networking industry would understand, you choose a site based on where your friends are - not features. Features only contribute to where people initially head, and can lead to an eventual switch. But, if 80% + of your friends are on MySpace, versus a handful on Orkut, you’ll use MySpace more often, and eventually attempt to convince the other 20% to switch.

Frankly, Nexopia is the has-been in social networking, at least in Vancouver. Everyone used it, then eventually switched almost a year ago. In terms of usage actually, Vancouver and Toronto are two of the three regions where Facebook is used the most - the third city is London. With a stranglehold on the area, it’s unlikely people will switch anytime soon, at least until there’s a site with cool enough features to warrant it.

Perhaps kids in Edmonton are still using Nexopia. But as far as I understand, most big cities in Canada have graciously embraced Facebook as their social network of choice - especially adults, one of the largest growing markets using the service.

Furthermore, teens *cannot* hide out in Nexopia. One of Facebook’s strengths is that it’s a closed platform: people cannot see your profile or almost any of your info; they have to be your friend for that access. And even then, you can limit who sees what. So the claim that teens are using Nexopia to hide from their parents on Facebook makes absolutely no sense.

And as for worlds colliding, just because your parents or other family add you, doesn’t mean you have to accept them. Smart parents would understand there needs to be some distance between them and their kids and won’t be too upset over it.

Misty Harris: You are one poor journalist.

CBC RadioOne has been trying to shift to the FM dial for over 10 years now, and the opportunity has finally come up. But, to make it a reality, the CRTC requires over 300 handwritten support letters. With this in mind, the CBC is asking for your help to send in a message within the next two weeks before comments deadline on January 23rd. Final decision occurs on February 26th.CBC RadioOne brings us several great radio programs including the ever-popular Early Edition, On the Coast, and of course Quirks and Quarks. Surprisingly enough, Vancouver is the only city in the country where RadioOne is not available on FM.FM provides users with way better reception and audio quality. FM also has a far larger userbase than AM (and has for a *long* time now).So come on, help out the only news service with any journalistic integrity these days in Canada. Here’s how:

Electronic Interventions/Comments Form

• By using the electronic interventions/comments form located on the CRTC’s website under Public Proceedings. 
• Go directly to the form on the CRTC website and send your comments click here and click on the button #2007-18.
• Then, check the box beside #200714239 (in the list, this is the second CBC application) and go to the bottom of the page and select next.
• Follow the instructions to complete your letter of support.
• And please remember to also copy CBC on your e-mail at REGULATORYAFFAIRS@CBC.CA

Fax

• Or fax your comments to: The CRTC Secretary General at 819-994-0218, copying CBC Regulatory Affairs at 613-288-6257, and referencing Broadcasting Notice of Public Hearing CRTC 2007-18.

Mail

• Or mail your comments to: CRTC, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N2, copying CBC at Senior Director, Regulatory Affairs, CBC/Radio-Canada, P.O. Box 3220, Station C, Ottawa, Ontario K1Y 1E4, and referencing Broadcasting Notice of Public Hearing CRTC 2007-18.