Re: British columbia
 

So it would appear, but with growth into the Valley the reality has changed.
The ease of getting around is about the only downside to this place.
I know plenty of Brits who located in the Valley and have ended up with an horrendous commute on H1,
The exits to downtown Vancouver in rush hour can still involve a 1 hour drive to get in.
I am pretty certain that some interest group will cause chaos when the games hit town. As the trip north out of Vancouver to all the venues is very vulnerable

Re: British columbia
 

There is no 'appear", it's what IS. Growth in the valley doesn't mean the infrastructure is going to change any time soon, unless it's for public transit. There is not much support in the inner burbs/van for more highways and more bridges cutting through their communities because some people want a big house in the Valley. I don't see it happening. I disagree it's hard to get around. it's hard to get around if you choose to live far from DT in a car-orientated 'burb. If you choose to live closer to DT near public transit and amenities, it's a lot easier.

That's why I think people should be aware of that political reality before they move here and think of buying closer to public transit/non-bridge & tunnel commute areas, like Port Moody, coquitlam etc. Because yes, the commute can be a bitch, and there really isn't the will to make it much better. Not to mention there's no money for it.

Re: British columbia
 

It is already changing, H1 widening and twinning of Port Mann Bridge (not sure where this one stands) 2 new bridges out of Maple Ridge send a clear message of intent.
Unfortunately for some the dream of a bigger house is only a reality outside of Vancouver (with a limited budget).
I really do not think there was any master plan or policy to keep away from bedroom communities in the Valley, just short sightedness and a small town mentality.
This boom in population growth has been happening for over 20 years and it did not take a city planner to realise the major growth was going to happen in the Valley.
BC is now playing catch up to keep things moving. The will is not there probably because BC'ers are not wired up to complain ,unlike their European cousins.

Re: British columbia
 

The two bridges are between Surrey and the Ridge, I thought, and had more to do with inter-valley trade and travel. That doesn't change the fact that to get into DT Van, there are only a few routes. THAT hasn't changed. So, go over the new bridge to hit the bottleneck into DT..if you're heading that way. Plus, it's tolled.

Au contraire, there is a master plan.

http://www.metrovancouver.org/planni...s/default.aspx

Hardly small town. Quite forward thinking, I'd say. Why do you think they are trying to develop central surrey? Richmond? Burnaby? This is why there are so many condo towers around skytrain stations in the LM, along with retail etc, with green space included, rather than street after street of endless suburban housing.

BC is not playing catch up. People don't complain because many locals agree with it, that it makes the region as a whole more liveable and healthier.

Re: British columbia
 

Kiwi
The content of your link is the latest manifestation of Metro Vancouver. I would like to believe that the powers that be had a sustainable green master plan, but this is just not the case.
They may be preaching that stuff now, but things are too far gone to turn back the clock.
The problem is each city is doing its own thing, You cant tell me places like Maple Ridge have had any part of this scheme.
The reality of your model i.e growth around skytrains, would support workers moving to more affordable communities to then commute into town??.
The Sytrain just does not cover a large enough area to have an impact on reducing car use.
I have travelled all over the Lower Mainland and I see no sign of these livable healthier communities.(unfortunatly)
The regrettable truth is that North Americans enjoy the surburban life.
And by the way I have heard plenty of grumbles about traffic and getting around, just listen to the traffic radio reports.
Why on earth would any city have planned a highway finishing miles from the city centre?

Re: British columbia
 

Why? Because they looked at other cities that were torn apart by soulless concrete and asphalt, and all the noise and pollution that goes with it. And they said, "no thanks". I, for one, am glad they did.

Instead you get a walkable downtown where people can live and work without the need of a full-time automobile. The trade-off is that it can take longer to get in from the suburbs. IMO it is a good trade-off.

Re: British columbia
 

I agree Jonboy. it's just fine with me too, and just about everyone I know (except people who choose to live far from DT, but that's a choice they make).

happy, I have no idea where you live, but I don't recognise the LM from what you're saying. At all. I see those communities all the time. I live in one, actually.

This plan has been around since 1996. Before that, there was another plan that lead to so much high density housing in Vancouver. Why do you think there are so many bike trails everywhere? This stuff has been planned and built for YEARS. It's no coincidence that there is so much green space around condo towers. It's part of the deal the developers have to make with the city.


I agree with Jonboy, too.

I see towers right next to a skytrain station near where I live. I see people shopping and living there. I see a lot of green space too.

People may choose to live in Abby or the Whack but it doesn't mean that roads are going to be built for them to have the commute they desire. There is not the political will to change that here. You can bitch about it all you want, but there it is. Yes, traffic is bad, and that is a deliberate policy to get people onto transit (though I think there needs to be more transit, for sure). IF you think a highway is going to get carved out of richmond, or burnaby, or east van, or wherever, think again. It ain't gonna happen. SOME people want to live the cheap oil suburban bedroom community dream. However, i know plenty of people living in condos with young families either DT or close to, so you're wrong that it's everyone's dream. Lots of people like walking to work, too.

Re: British columbia
 

BTW, Maple Ridge is in the plan.

Re: British columbia
 

All I am saying is the reality for a lot of expats is to buy in the Valley.
I really cannot agree that any foresight has gone into this mess at all. I am not advocating cutting roads into communities but the fact of the matter having a parking lot on Highway 1 daily, belching out pollution is the least Green of the options.
The road network is a mess not due to a "Green Masterplan" but because of poor planning and execution
Please do not tell me commuters driving through East Hastings or 1st Ave is the best option, or was planned to make Vancouver more user friendly?.
Incidently I do not have a personal axe to grind as I make my own work schedule, but it would be nieve to think Vancouver's public transit is ever going to cope with the demand
This utopia of self sustaining communities is just not happening, especially in the Valley. Let me know where?? The big problem is city zoning which has created this suburban sprawl. Cities in the Valley have been controlled for too long by self interested groups who are more interested in lining their own pockets than any GVRD master plan
The plain fact is places like Pitt Meadows are bedroom communities and rely on the Car
The only people who can actually live in downtown are those who can afford $500K for a condo, that is my point the average working family and that includes ex pats can't afford to live there.

Re: British columbia
 

Experience suggests that building roads doesn't solve congestion problems. A new road can move a traffic lineup somewhere else. It also encourages more people to travel by car. People have a certain level of tolerance for traffic congestion. If a commute takes and hour, and a new road reduces it to half an hour, then more people are encouraged to commute by car until it is back to an hour. There are just more vehicles.

Not building a freeway into downtown is a deliberate policy to discourage people from driving in when there are other alternatives.

I agree that public transit is inadequate, and to the extent that public services always lag demand, they always will be. However, some small steps are being made. The RAV line will be open soon and there are planned extensions to the SkyTrain to Coquitlam and UBC. The problem is not the planners inability to devise effective transit, it is that taxpayers are unwilling to pay for it.

Re: British columbia
 

I agree with some of what you say, but I can't see that building a freeway through the city has any merit at all. I come from a city in the UK where a couple of them go through and the traffic is a nightmare. All it has done is decimate and chop up areas of the cities there. Driving in the UK is even worse, congestion-wise, than here. But what the UK does have is more commuter trains and the underground, on a much bigger scale than here.

As for living and working downtown - thousands do, both singles and families, and very happily.

Re: British columbia
 

:thumbsup: Yep.

Public transit is lagging, and I think that's the real problem. Dianne Watts (sp?), Surrey's mayor, has been asking for more transit in the area for years. We do need more, but it's hard to find the money because unlike most cities in Europe or To., labour and material these days is not as cheap as it was in the 19th century, when most undergrounds were built.

I don't disagree with you. Parking lot traffic is not good. But more transit is the answer imo, not more roads. Also, there are areas closer to transit/DT that don't require 500 thou for a condo. Like parts of East Van, for instance.

Anyway. All I'm trying to say is if you're (general you) moving to BC to live the bedroom community life, you should think seriously about whether you want to deal with the traffic. There are parts of BC I'd love to live, like Whiterock, Tsawwassen, Ladner, but won't do it because of the commute. It really only works if you're able to make your own hours/have own business/work close to home/ work from home.

Re: British columbia
 

Have got a bit side tracked here, cause my original input was really to open up the debate regarding the difficulties of the daily commute. As I know areas outside Vancouver are becoming more popular for ex-pats.
I am not sure about traffic being worse in UK, London probably has more volume for example, but I can't think of a city in the UK with the natural barriers or as geographically challenging as the GVRD.
The Northern Valley can be effectively inaccessible if one bridge is down.
I would say its not the lack of roads but limited/ aging bridges which is the major problem and I really do not believe that it has anything to do with Green planning that it is this way.
I am not sure H1 extending another few miles would have impacted East Van/ Burnaby anymore than having a rat run at Grandview and 1st?