Babble Book Club: Straphanger by Taras Grescoe

141 posts / 0 new

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:36

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

Catchfire wrote:
I think it's fair to say that Grescoe wasn't writing a deep critique of transit and its more of a "love letter"--but that doesn't stop him from making political statements about eliminating jobs through automized systems, encouraging certain privatization measures, and dismissing the concerns I low-income groups (like his glib dismissal of the LA bus riders union). So yes, he wanted to reach a wide audience, but that doesn't need to come at the expense of grounding it in solid progressive politics.

Yes his flagrant hate of buses and ingrained love of subways is kind of annoying. He makes statements that bus service shouldn't be sacrificed for subway costs and lines, but like that's it.

Eric and I were chatting before the conversation that subways/metro aren't necessarily the best option for Canada. I mean, we're big geographically, but small population wise.

Subways are expensive and take forever, and might not be the right choice. The bus systems, BRTs, he highlighted in Bogata seem like a good match for some larger Canadian cities. Edmonton has an LRT and a ton of buses in the downtown.

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:40

#103

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

EricD wrote:

Kaitlin McNabb wrote:

I'm gonna repost Catchfire's comments here in reference to the Montreal highways, and more specifically the line "the rich don't suddenly work in the people's interest when they agree to build a subway" and I think Vancouver is a major example of that.

Very true. And I think it is quite interesting that freeway builders also tend to like subways. One of the main reasons for buiding subways rather than surface rapid transit is to get transit out of the way of the private automobile. Certain powerful developers want to sell high-end condos along the Broadway corridor in Vancouver, therefore they want a subway rather than a much more cost effective surface light rail or bus rapid transit line. Basically, the subway is largely about preserving space for the 1%'s Range Rovers.

PS - I don't think trolley buses and bus rapid transit gets enough serious consideration in Canada - http://www.vancouverobserver.com/politics/commentary/humble-trolley-bus-...?

[/quote]

This kind of goes hand in hand with my point about environmentalism and health being the only reasons to take transit (which are good reasons).

Grescoe points out that if you put bike paths where bikes want to go, not around cars, and designate lanes for buses, not cars, and make it difficult to drive, then the transit use will happen.

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:40

#104

lagatta

Well, a prime example of wanting métros/subways where unwarranted by ridership is non other than Rob Ford, who wants to eliminate trams as they "block traffic" - when they should get dedicated lanes.

I'm not opposed to bus or trolley transport, but it is for ridership levels lower than trams. Montréal needs at least a couple more tramlines parallel to the Orange line (a U), which is utterly saturated from about Jean-Talon into the city centre, since the extension to the huge northern suburban city of Laval. The extension proved very popular, and is a great success, but it requires something beyond bus lines to take up the increased passenger flow.

There already is an express bus along avenue du Parc, through the downtown core, and up Côte-des-Neiges (Parc and CDN are major, basically north-southish arteries on either side of our so-called mountain).

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:43

#105

Catchfire

Eric, this is somewhat outside the discussion of the book but if you get the chance, I'd love to hear what you think about a mass transit solution to Vancouver's Broadway line. It looks like the city now prefers a subway line. I had originally wanted to see a light rail, but I heard that LRT will only decrease trip time by six minutes while I subway will cut the trip from Commercial Dr to UBC in half. If we're going to and this massive investment, doesn't it make sense to go for the most effective option?

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:43

#106

EricD

derrick wrote:

Eric,

The book opens with a quote from Margaret Thatcher about how anyone over 26 still riding the bus is a loser. But from what I've read the cultural peer pressure and aspirational pathologies of our society weren't explored in much depth in the book -- though he does hold out some hope that young people wanting hands free to text would boost transit riderships. Do you know of examples of educational campaigns, or cultural efforts, to serious tackle this 'car culture' in North America, and the various ways young people have these toxic 'values' driven into them. (pun unintentional)

I think that the most sucessful efforts to tackle car culture have been the U-pass systems at colleges and universities. But very little research has been done on what factors are most important to 'peak car'. All we really know is that Big Auto & Big Oil have lost the grip they used to have on our brains and egos. The only group that still loves cars (in the rich world) is men over 45.

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:46

#107

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

Catchfire wrote:
Eric, this is somewhat outside the discussion of the book but if you get the chance, I'd love to hear what you think about a mass transit solution to Vancouver's Broadway line. It looks like the city now prefers a subway line. I had originally wanted to see a light rail, but I heard that LRT will only decrease trip time by six minutes while I subway will cut the trip from Commercial Dr to UBC in half. If we're going to and this massive investment, doesn't it make sense to go for the most effective option?

I wondering that too.

I would love to hear Eric's opinion on the transit clusterfuck that is Vancouver.

(sorry about the swearing, it's the only way I could think to describe it)

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:47

#108

EricD

Kaitlin McNabb wrote:

lagatta wrote:

Eric, I agree that Sandy, as it hit one of the most important centres in the capitalist world, has been a tipping point.

Unlike Katrina, which hit picturesque but deprived New Orleans, and was mainly an opportunity for "disaster capitalism", as Naomi Klein put it.

That's a really interesting point to make Lagatta.

The 1% had their beach homes wiped out. That has to be more important that anything that happens to the rif raff. But whatever it takes, I am not complaining.

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:50

#109

lagatta

It should be remembered that there are reasons other than snobbery that make tramlines superior to buslines, where they are economically feasable. Trams have a MUCH smoother ride - as Grescoe stated about the first ones built when they were still pulled by horses - if a commute is fairly long, this is important because you can read or perhaps even work during your commute, unlike on buses (bump, bump). I've never seen any buses as universally accessible as the modern trams in Amsterdam and some other European cities - very low floor, some have assistance for people in wheelchairs to board, sound and visual signals to accommodate both visually and hearing-impaired users. Great for parents pushing strollers and prams as well, and people carrying items.

Another positive for trams (which might at first glance seem a negative) is that they are less flexible than bus lines. A positive because, like métros, but not to the same extent, they are structuring, and favour the emergence of denser construction along their routes.

However, the lesser flexibility does require at least a few tramlines, allowing for deviation in the event of a hold up or of maintenance work (I've observed this a lot in Amsterdam).

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:50

#110

Catchfire

I should add that Grescoe's statement that Vancouver doesn't invest/waste money in freeways. The multimillion dollar Port Mann bridge is a poster child for encouraging congestion and car use (with ice bombs as a bonus gift) and the same week Mayor Robertson announced the B-line subway, the BC Libs started to muse about replacing the Massey tunnel. Just to name a few.

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:51

#111

EricD

Kaitlin McNabb wrote:

Catchfire wrote:
Eric, this is somewhat outside the discussion of the book but if you get the chance, I'd love to hear what you think about a mass transit solution to Vancouver's Broadway line. It looks like the city now prefers a subway line. I had originally wanted to see a light rail, but I heard that LRT will only decrease trip time by six minutes while I subway will cut the trip from Commercial Dr to UBC in half. If we're going to and this massive investment, doesn't it make sense to go for the most effective option?

I wondering that too.

I would love to hear Eric's opinion on the transit clusterfuck that is Vancouver.

(sorry about the swearing, it's the only way I could think to describe it)

To deal with the climate crisis, we need to put most of the transit on the surface. The cost of underground and elevated transit is too high to quickly build the rapid transit networks we need. That said, I would rather see money spent on subways than freeways - the transit vs freeway expansion dichotomy is key. Different forms of transit are important issues, but secondary points.

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:53

#112

Catchfire

Don't get me wrong, lagatta. I *love* tramlines. But in the incident I the book in referring to, the woman of colour representing the bus-rider union was explaining the social context and historical record of transit inLA and he dismissed her position as short-sighted, even though she was quite clear that divesting of busses would disproportionately hurt workers of colour.

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:53

#113

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

Yes the Port Mann expansion was so dumb. I read somewhere that for the cost of the expansion that could have made a fully integrated bus system in surrey, but instead they widened the bridge two lanes (to have it taper back two lanes like a foot later)

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:55

#114

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

Minor break, it has already been an hour and then end of of featured guest Eric Doherty! Big thanks to Eric for jumping on!

Are there any last comments that you would like to make Eric?

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:56

#115

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

Catchfire wrote:
Don't get me wrong, lagatta. I *love* tramlines. But in the incident I the book in referring to, the woman of colour representing the bus-rider union was explaining the social context and historical record of transit inLA and he dismissed her position as short-sighted, even though she was quite clear that divesting of busses would disproportionately hurt workers of colour.

The thing that sucks about buses is that they are subject to the same congestion that cars are. I can't remember if he makes the point about LA, but I know he makes it somewhere, that for buses to work for the people they need to be given right of way and their own lanes.

In LA buses don't seem to be the answer because of congestion, but I think they just need to be restructured for priority.

Fri, 2013-04-12 14:59

#116

EricD

lagatta wrote:

It should be remembered that there are reasons other than snobbery that make tramlines superior to buslines, where they are economically feasable. Trams have a MUCH smoother ride - as Grescoe stated about the first ones built when they were still pulled by horses - if a commute is fairly long, this is important because you can read or perhaps even work during your commute, unlike on buses (bump, bump). I've never seen any buses as universally accessible as the modern trams in Amsterdam and some other European cities - very low floor, some have assistance for people in wheelchairs to board, sound and visual signals to accommodate both visually and hearing-impaired users. Great for parents pushing strollers and prams as well, and people carrying items.

Another positive for trams (which might at first glance seem a negative) is that they are less flexible than bus lines. A positive because, like métros, but not to the same extent, they are structuring, and favour the emergence of denser construction along their routes.

However, the lesser flexibility does require at least a few tramlines, allowing for deviation in the event of a hold up or of maintenance work (I've observed this a lot in Amsterdam).

The point about a networks with parallel transit lines allowing for detours is very important. No transit line is 100% reliable, so a grid of good quality transit lines is inherently more resilient than one that relies on a few trunk lines. This is one of the points in favor of less expensive surface rapid transit lines, you can afford to build multiple lines forming a resilient network.

In defense of bus rapid transit, it can provide quite high capacity rapid transit but with more drivers. Trolley bus drivers are a great example of green jobs. (That said, light rail does generally provide a smoother ride)

Fri, 2013-04-12 15:02

#117

lagatta

Catchfire, as I stated before the discussion, I hadn't had time to read the whole book as I picked it up yesterday (all library copies out in Mtl) and I had other work, so I just glanced at every chapter, reading the onese that dealt with cities I'm familiar with.

Yes, of course eliminating buses ANYWHERE without putting in better alternatives AT THE SAME FARE will disproportionally harm poorer people. This is true even in cases like Mexico City with its beautiful underground system, as well as Cairo. I don't know if this is still the case in these huge cities, but when I read about them, the métros were twice the fare of the bus or other above-ground systems, which means a kind of social apartheid.

We have been waging a campaign here for a "social fare"; a much lower fare for poor people - starting with people on welfare or Employment Insurance, but also encompassing low-wage or precarious workers. We currently have a senior fare (which starts at 65 - I'd like to see it cut to 60) and student fares that extend as far as full-time university students up to age 25. There is nothing for low-income people under 65, including mature students over 25. I wrote an article about this campaign for my tenants' association paper a few years ago.

Fri, 2013-04-12 15:06

#118

EricD

Kaitlin McNabb wrote:

Minor break, it has already been an hour and then end of of featured guest Eric Doherty! Big thanks to Eric for jumping on!

Are there any last comments that you would like to make Eric?

Just that this has been a great discussion. I have to run now, but will check back later and comment.

Also, some of you may be interested in the CCPA report Transportation Transformation i co-authored. You can find it at http://ecoplanning.ca/selected-projects If you do Twitter, I am at https://twitter.com/Eric_Doherty

Fri, 2013-04-12 15:07

#119

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

That's awesome thanks Eric!

Fri, 2013-04-12 15:09

#120

lagatta

Guess it is time for me to sally forth into snowy reality, where i have to run some errands (on foot).

Fri, 2013-04-12 15:10

#121

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

Thanks for coming Lagatta.

As always the thread will remain open, and ready for continued commentary.

To everyone, please feel free to keep chatting about the book and the issues, even though we have lost our transit guru!

Fri, 2013-04-12 15:14

#122

derrick

Eric, I hope you're right about car culture and young people. And good point about U-pass initiatives.

Fri, 2013-04-12 15:14

#123

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

Caissa wrote:

It's been awhile since I read the book. I'll re-post my comments from March 13, below.

I finished the book about a week ago. I found it a bit of a hard slog until I forced myself to finish it on a vacation day.I felt the book didn't seem to know what it was: part travelogue, part critique and very short on prescription.

I had a hard time getting into it as well. The New York section was sooo loooong.

I felt the book gained speed and purpose when it was discussing more specialized cities -- as in Bogata: the BRT; Philly: growing city, etc.

And like catchfire said, he was great when critiquing transit in comparison to freeways and cars.

I liked the travelogue style of it though. He's a good writer.

Mon, 2013-04-15 08:03

#124

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

Catchfire wrote:

I realize that his project is to make the case for public transit broadly -- and I am pretty much a straphanger fanatic -- but I'm disappointed with what I perceive to be gaps in his analysis. He works best when he takes on the freeway as a public/private works project and the damage it's done to North American society in particular--because his critical guns are firing full blast -- but it would be nice if he applied that to how transit has been deployed for good and ill. Because the rich don't suddenly work in the people's interest when they agree to build a subway.

this is such an important point to make Catchfire, and one that I totally forgot.

I'm curious, what do you think a good solution for Vancouver transit is?

Mon, 2013-04-15 13:27

#125

Catchfire

Well, the significant thing about the lower mainland--and BC in general, in fact--is that it's cut fairly close to the middle in terms of car-hugging radicals and bike-riding conservatives. Which is why Grescoe's laudatory analysis rang pretty false to me. They can't even put in a bike lane downtown without the whole city losing its shit.

To answer your question, there's nothing wrong with the Canada Line per se--although the fact that it makes it easier to get to the airport should put paid to the myth that public transit is all about stopping climate change. A fast path to Richmond has been needed for a long time. But to take a point Grescoe made elsewhere, you need to do whole city planning when it comes to transit--not one Trophy line so that when Scandinavians come to visit during the Olympics they'll mistake YVR for a world-class city.

Vancouver and environs is fairly sprawling--but it's the dense bits that are actually causing more social problems: displacement of poor and marginalized people, taking waterfront property away from the general public, visual pollution and so on. So this is where I disagree with Grescoe that density > sprawl full stop. Yes, there should be limits on urbanization: the development of prime farm land in Langley and Tswwassen for example is disgraceful. But--and Grescoe mentions this occasionally--we need to find and deploy alternatives to the towers of silver and glass which seem to bring casinos, stadiums, boutique shopping and shitty night clubs wherever they go.

So if I were to recommend an approach, I would work to connect the Lower Mainland's cluster of municipalities through a network of Light Rail--which would include the Evergreen line and a B-line to UBC (I currently prefer the subway option, but I take Eric's point about subway's clearing room for cars above ground). I'd like to see streetcars down Hastings and probably one down Marine Dr. and 33rd/41st Ave. I don't know Surrey at all, but I hear calls for extensive transit needs there too. I'd put a gondolier up Burnaby Mountain to SFU (Students end up dishing out a lot of money to fund transit while their needs are always overlooked.)

I'd stop investing in car bridges and tunnels. I'd add a pedestrian ferry to Victoria leaving from downtown. I'd increase and improve the train service south to Seattle. I'd add an express rail system to the suburbs. I would win the lottery and retire with a border collie in Tofino where I would do voice overs for movie previews. I would die beloved by my children, my partner, by babblers and by all Canadians.

Mon, 2013-04-15 14:10

#126

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

I want to live in your Vancouver. If you had better hair, you could lead the liberal party.

Mon, 2013-04-15 14:20

#127

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

Also:

1. "But to take a point Grescoe made elsewhere, you need to do whole city planning when it comes to transit--not one Trophy line so that when Scandinavians come to visit during the Olympics they'll mistake YVR for a world-class city." -- yes. One somewhat functional line to the airport does not an 'awesome transit city' make. Especially when that line is unable to expand or really improve in anyway, except putting in turnstiles three years later to replace rent-a-cops.

2. none of Vancouver's 'visions' (governmental pun intended) ever include displaced and marginalized people and impacts on that community. I dislike when Vancouver trying to make bike lanes overrides lack of social housing for people.

3. I liked Eric's point that subways just means more room for cars, and funnily enough how Grescoe loves the sub. Also, I don't think subways would really work in Vancouver -- I can't imagine Broadway for like five years in construction. The city would riot and be the worst.

4. Comprehensive transit for the win! If there were a pedestrian ferry to Vic when I was going to school their I would have died from happiness. It would take about seven hours for me to get from Victoria to Port Moody. IT WAS THE WORST.

What do other Vancouver citizens think of the transit and possible transit solutions?

What about people from other cities?

I'm curious about Maritimes transit.

Mon, 2013-04-15 14:33

#128

kropotkin1951

Interesting take on the Lower Mainland. Two things. First like many Burnaby residents I think the gondolier idea is a really bad idea. From my perspective it is not about student needs but is far more about Univercity and selling real estate on the top of a mountain. The proposal does nothing to solve the big problem which is too much volume during a few hours in the day and no volume the rest of the time. I agree with the studies that show it will cost far more than it is worth.

As for a pedestrian ferry to Victoria from downtown you seem to have missed the fact that the current ferry only goes to Swartz Bay outside Sidney and is just about the shortest distance between the Mainland and the Saanich Peninsula. To get from downtown Vancouver to downtown Victoria would more than double the distance the ferry would have to travel and turn it into a very long ferry ride, in excess of 3 hours and likely approaching a 4 hour trip. As well the waters from Sidney to Victoria Harbour are not sheltered waters.

Mon, 2013-04-15 14:50

#129

Catchfire

Yes many "residents" are often against student transit needs -- that's why they never get done. Although I don't live in Burnaby, I do listen to students. And they want the gondolier, so I support them. I also resist development of public or university land for real estate speculation.

There is already a pedestrian ferry from Victoria to Seattle. There are also pedestrian ferries from Vancouver to Downtown Vancouver, and of course, room for luxury cruise ships. I guess you don't often take the Tswwassen ferry (it makes sense, since under the BC Libs it has become prohibitively expensive) but your generously estimated four-hour trip would still take less time than the six hours it currently takes to take public transit from downtown Vancouver to downtown Victoria. Of course, fast ferries would do the trip in 90 minutes, which would obviously be preferred.

Mon, 2013-04-15 14:57

#130

Catchfire

Kaitlin McNabb wrote:
Especially when that line is unable to expand or really improve in anyway, except putting in turnstiles three years later to replace rent-a-cops.

Gah! I know! The one visionary thing I loved about YVR transit when I moved here was the no turnstiles at skytrain stops and express bus lines. Fluid and fast transit's only enemy is friction, in all its forms. Turnstiles add friction to a fluid system. Up yours, turnstiles, I say.

Mon, 2013-04-15 15:02

#131

kropotkin1951

Good luck in convincing people to build catamaran hulled ferries for BC waters. I thought they were a good idea but apparently like many things I am in the distinct minority when it comes to that view.

Mon, 2013-04-15 15:08

#132

Catchfire

Good luck in convincing people to build catamaran hulled ferries for BC waters. I thought they were a good idea but apparently like many things I am in the distinct minority when it comes to that view.

Yes, well I am fairly certain that the likelihood of any of the above dream scenario coming true, with the exception of the border collie, to be zero.

What I think will happen: Newly elected Mayor Gregor Robertson will turn one parallel parking spot on Hamilton Street into a vegetable garden allotment plot. Citizens will riot, and the plot will be repaved.

ETA:

I say up yours rent-a-cops.

And here I thought we were all sympatico. This is why nothing ever gets done in this city.

Mon, 2013-04-15 15:08

#133

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

Catchfire wrote:

Kaitlin McNabb wrote:
Especially when that line is unable to expand or really improve in anyway, except putting in turnstiles three years later to replace rent-a-cops.

Gah! I know! The one visionary thing I loved about YVR transit when I moved here was the no turnstiles at skytrain stops and express bus lines. Fluid and fast transit's only enemy is friction, in all its forms. Turnstiles add friction to a fluid system. Up yours, turnstiles, I say.

I say up yours rent-a-cops. It seems silly to do an honour system, especially one that would create fast-loading, and then police it with assholes writing tickets (you heard me, assholes), who stand around corners and surprise people.

Vancouver's reasons for not putting in turnstiles in the first place was that they "wouldn't be able to handle the load of people from the olympics." 1. the Olympics were for two weeks, so good job planning around that, especially when your line was so backed up that it was rendered ineffective 2. Most cities, waaaay larger than YVR, use turnstiles. So, I dunno.

They set up the honour system to save money on not building turnstiles, but then used a gaggle of cops at every station because people weren't paying their fares. Also, they started checking passes on the b-line, which is possibly the dumbest thing I have ever seen. I say either no turnstiles and deal with it, or turnstiles and do it before you finish your damned lines. gah.

Mon, 2013-04-15 15:13

#134

kropotkin1951

Of course there are no turnstiles on the new tolled bridges. Apparently you can just drive across and they send the bill to the registered owner. I wonder how the collection is going for out of province visitors getting a bill for $5.30 in the mail when they get home.

The two new bridges prove that if you want to reduce congestion of a bridge you don;t have to build a new or bigger bridge you just have to put a toll on it. If you listen to traffic reports you almost never hear about any congestion on the Port Mann or Golden Ears. The traffic is now idling through Burnaby but mysteriously clears up just after the Coquitlam exist. However the Pattullo and Alex Fraser are always busy. The traffic on Cariboo Hill is insane.

Students want the gondolier but the question for me is not who wants it but rather is it the best and most cost effective way of moving people. I am not convinced it meets that criteria.

Mon, 2013-04-15 15:20

#135

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

Catchfire wrote:

I say up yours rent-a-cops.

And here I thought we were all sympatico. This is why nothing ever gets done in this city.

Well I don't live there anymore so the point is moot.

I just really don't like the transit police and checking fares. It doesn't make sense to set up an honour system and police it with a million transit cops. In Italy its honour system and they don't police it, except at certain station where there is one person checking tickets on the way in. And that is the same in Austria. Other European cities I remember had some form of gate or turnstile.

I think the hate just stems from Vancouver's lack of foresight in issues of city planning. "You mean people aren't paying the transit fares. NO WAY" Or, like 40 years later they think it's a good idea for rapid transit to UBC, but then still don't do it.

I just don't get that city.

Maybe it's because I'm from London where everything is terrible and everybody knows it.

Mon, 2013-04-15 15:23

#136

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Of course there are no turnstiles on the new tolled bridges. Apparently you can just drive across and they send the bill to the registered owner. I wonder how the collection is going for out of province visitors getting a bill for $5.30 in the mail when they get home.

haha, that is kind of hilarious.

The Golden Ears Bridge is backed up often, from what I hear from my parents and other in the neighbourhood.

And, even if not, like Catchfire says, money should be devoted to comprehensive transit, not building more bridges and tolling them, even if that does curb congestion, 'cause like, what's the point then?

Why not build awesome BRT or LRT and give people an easiest faster way to get to work, instead of just not taking a bridge because it is tolled.

Mon, 2013-04-15 15:28

#137

infracaninophile $infracaninophile's picture$

Quote:
I would win the lottery and retire with a border collie in Tofino where I would do voice overs for movie previews. I would die beloved by my children, my partner, by babblers and by all Canadians

Beloved by the border collie aficionados as well ;-)

Mon, 2013-04-15 15:32

#138

kropotkin1951

I never meant build more bridges what I meant was just toll the existing ones and use the money for transit. The tolls will do the trick without having to actually spend the money to build a new bridge.

Mon, 2013-04-15 15:43

#139

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I never meant build more bridges what I meant was just toll the existing ones and use the money for transit. The tolls will do the trick without having to actually spend the money to build a new bridge.

Oh, I was thinking more in retrospect because the Golden Ears is so new.

I can't remember that bit in the book that Grescoe mentions about tolls and using the money for transit. Ah, shoot. I already returned my copy.

I wonder if that would work, of if car-people would rather see the money go back into existing roads...

Mon, 2013-04-15 16:02

#140

lagatta

It is stupid to put cycle paths up against social housing. Both are absolutely necessary. So much money is wasted on crap that promotes car use, and real estate speculation.

(she says, writing from her co-operative apartment, looking down at the as yet uncompleted cycle path along my street). Cars kill. Speculators too.

Catchfilre, I agree with you about the kind of tower construction plaguing central Vancouver, but I can't go along with low density. It is possible to densify housing without building the kind of stuff you are decrying; I posted a long article earlier in this thread about transport-friendly, midrise development. I don't see how you can get rid of cars with sprawl based on single-family houses.

Wed, 2013-04-17 09:02

#141

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

Lagatta, I agree that one does not cancel out the other, and that is the way I sort of perceive this government in Vancouver. By being 'hip' and djing with 'youth' at the biltmore, and promoting bike riding and bike paths and greening Vancouver, doesn't make up for that lack of this like social housing that are very important in Vancouver.

I found it interesting that Grescoe praised YVR's extending policies, like high parking, because I feel like those aren't actually done to promote alternative transportation, but because owners know they can hike up prices and still get the moment.

Maybe I'm too jaded?

Babble Book Club: Straphanger by Taras Grescoe

Pages