This just arrived on my doorstep, from a clearly unhappy city employee not thrilled with the removal of employee parking, which has been traded for bus passes et all.
rom: COV Broadcast Server
Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 3:26 PM
To: City Hall Campus Staff - DL; Sustainability Group Staff - DL; SEFC Team - DL
Subject: COV Broadcast: Sustainable Commuting Program
Sustainable Commuting Program launches June 1, 2009
On June 1, 2009 the City of Vancouver will launch a Sustainable Commuting Program with the goal of reducing the carbon footprint of employee commuting.
Staff that work at City Hall campus buildings will have access to:
o 35-50% rebates on transit passes and FareSavers
o $30/month ride-sharing, or carpooling, incentive per participating employee
o Programs and incentives for cycling, walking and other active modes
o Guaranteed Ride Home program
o Use of car share vehicles for work and personal needs
The incentives are being funded through the introduction of pay parking at City Hall area lots. Pay parking at City Hall lots will start on July 1, 2009 at an introductory rate of $4.50/day. It will move up to $6/day in September.
Expanding the program to other City worksites will be considered once it is running successfully at City Hall.
Details on how to sign up for the incentives and pay parking rates can be found on the program website
44 responses so far ↓
1 Living in the City // Apr 8, 2009 at 5:32 pm
>Programs and incentives for cycling, walking and other active modes
From what I understand this basically amounts to getting one free 1-zone Faresaver book every 2 months if you bike to work every day, and every 3 months if you walk.
Also, it’s interesting that $6-per-day has been determined to be the “market” rate for parking at City Hall when their own Real Estate branch is leasing parking spots just down the street at 438 W Broadway for $90 a month.
2 Forthingham // Apr 8, 2009 at 8:54 pm
City Hal “Campus” .. really?! LOL.
$120.00 = the rich drive the rest will take to two wheels or two feet.
3 spartikus // Apr 8, 2009 at 9:15 pm
Personally, and as a commuting cyclist, this sounds good to me. Unless this employee is driving from Squamish every day, little sympathy here….
4 gmgw // Apr 8, 2009 at 11:16 pm
Since most of the minority of City employees that can afford to drive to work are management and/or supervisory types, this could prove to be a valuable lesson in egalitarianism for them. Now is there any way Translink could be persuaded to adopt a similar program for their upper-level employees, especially transit planners?
gmgw
5 Darcy McGee // Apr 9, 2009 at 5:07 am
Suck it, city hall employees. How the city is supposed to advocate for mass transit while providing free, premium parking spots for their employees never made sense to me. Even The Mayor should have to pay (which would be awesome, because our current The Mayor doesn’t have a car, or doesn’t drive much.)
City Hall employees act like prima donnas, and it needs to stop. Parking in Vancouver even at market rates is a BARGAIN compared to any other large city I’ve lived in or visited. Try finding a spot in anywhere near the city centre for $6/day in T-dot.
(I cycle most everywhere, but do own a car.)
6 City Hall Insider // Apr 9, 2009 at 5:13 am
As a regular transit user, I will personally benefit from the program but the program penalizes people who need it the most. The young mothers who need their vehicles to function.
There is no mention of daycare incentives for the ones that need it the most.
Why is their not a mention of the Compressed Work week? The original “sustainable initiative” introduced years ago by the City that was abruptly cancelled for reasons no one can explain.
If our new “green council” was really serious about reducing employees carbon footprint, this initiative should certainly be reinstated.
Why does this not apply to all city facilities? The skeptics are assuming it has something to do with the fact the City Hall lot sits right beside the new Canada Line station.
7 Patricia // Apr 9, 2009 at 6:33 am
It’s not often I agree with Darcy, but this time I must. My only complaint is that now buses to and from City Hall (my neighbourhood) will be more crowded than ever.
8 Chris // Apr 9, 2009 at 7:01 am
I’m happy to see the City showing leadership on this. Now, if only Translink could improve service so we’re not all jammed in like sardines every morning…
9 rf // Apr 9, 2009 at 7:23 am
Who gets free parking for work anymore in a busy area? Ask the city worker whiners if they want my $308/month bill to park downtown.
I can’t believe they’ve had free parking until now. That should be the outrage.
10 CMK // Apr 9, 2009 at 7:36 am
There are many City Hall people such as myself that make informed choices about how to get to work - I picked a home close enough to allow me to walk to work.
Its about time parking at City Hall begins to reflect the true cost of providing that parking space. The cost of parking should be the market rate to further assist the City out of its budget shortfalls, as well as showing that City Hall staff “walk the talk” of sustainabilty and EcoDensity.
11 Desmond Bliek // Apr 9, 2009 at 7:40 am
“…not thrilled with the removal of employee parking, which has been traded for bus passes et al…”
Frances- from what follows, it doesn’t sound like any parking is being removed at all, nor that it’s being traded for bus passes. It sounds more like the phased introduction of market rates, which according to most research on parking management (see Don Shoup’s ‘The High Cost of Free Parking’) is a very good thing indeed. It doesn’t seem like any parking’s being removed at all, but that employees will now have to pay for the privilege, like most other workers at a location like 12th and Cambie.
Following rf, I’ll also express my surprise that the City would have been subsidizing employee parking at such a prime location for so long. Also @rf, if the $308/month is such a burden - and it is a lot of money - why not consider other options (curious, not judgmental)?
12 a friend // Apr 9, 2009 at 7:52 am
I have a thought.. never live more than 20 minutes from your job, and never take a job that requires a whole new wardrobe. Welcome to the real world.
13 T W // Apr 9, 2009 at 7:59 am
Does this apply to our elected representatives as well as city staff?
14 Alex // Apr 9, 2009 at 8:05 am
Hats off to the staff at City Hall who worked tirelessly putting this program together. Most other corporations would simply phase in pay parking then take the revenues. In this case, the City has implemented a cost and revenue neutral program which gives staff a number of sustainable commuting options that are not available at other organizations. Good job!
With respect to pay parking, I am a part time driver who needs to drive a couple of days a week to get my child to daycare. I bike the other days so this program will cost me in the range of $40 a month. However, I think it’s a step in the right direction and I think once staff get used to the program (and if they are adaptable types) may even realize some personal advantages to the new options available.
15 L // Apr 9, 2009 at 8:09 am
Before we go slagging all City Hall employees, my experience has been that most city hall employees are thrilled with the plan since none of them drive.
16 Jeff Lee // Apr 9, 2009 at 8:14 am
I’m sure that some people who have free parking will feel aggrieved by this new plan, but how could the city justify keeping the lot free for staff when you have a mayor who cycles or rideshares everwhere and a traffic system that is overwhelmed? With Canada Line also coming on at City Hall, isn’t it time that city staff take a bit of a leadership role in showing the rest of the city how to travel?
If you still need your car for your job (as I do) or are unwilling to make the switch to a less harmful means of transportation, shouldn’t you be willing to then pay for the cost of it? (In our house we buy carbon offsets.)
17 Hall employee // Apr 9, 2009 at 8:18 am
As a City Hall employee who has been angered at the blatant favouritism shown to drivers (free parking, in the case of those who have fleet cars 24/7, free gas and insurance) while those of us who make sustainable choices (including hours on the bus) were S.O.L., with inadequate bike parking and showering facilities and no incentives or perks for making the sacrifices that come along with not driving around in a vehicle by oneself.
Some feel that pay parking amounts to a loss of a benefit. However, I think pay parking is justified - because there is an environmental, health and social COST to me and my community to driving by oneself to work every day.
If you wish to drive and receive the benefits that affords you, I think you should pay a price for that.
18 spartikus // Apr 9, 2009 at 8:25 am
There is no mention of daycare incentives for the ones that need it the most.
We live in an economy where - for most families - both parents must work. The lack of a coherent child-care policy is a great burden.
19 MB // Apr 9, 2009 at 8:41 am
A very good policy. Now if they would just offer me a job at city hall I could walk to work and finally dump the car.
One senior Vancouver planner commutes to work by skateboard. Maybe they’ll offer a subsidy for 3-in-1 oil and new soles for the runner on his pumping foot.
This trend could also lead to a trial lane removal on the Cambie Bridge for skateboards.
20 rf // Apr 9, 2009 at 9:21 am
There goes spartikus with his list of entitlements. “(Those without kids, many by choice, should now supplement those who have them)”.
What’s next, Sparty? City meal plan?
Should day-care be a right for all? Even if it’s only needed by many? Should it be a taxable benefit to those who are granted it?
Just admit it, you are Tim Louis.
21 Not running for mayor // Apr 9, 2009 at 10:05 am
What the city should’ve done is left it’s lawn alone and when this program gets implemented at full market rates and the noticed parking reductions, they could’ve taken those extra spots and turned them into the community gardens.
Jeff Lee while buying carbon offsets are probably better then nothing, you’d acutally be better off buying up raw coal with the money and burying it in your backyard. You’d help drive up the cost of coal making it less desirable for others to bury, and the coal you bought wouldn’t get consumed. It’s the ultimate in carbon capture technology.
22 spartikus // Apr 9, 2009 at 10:12 am
Just admit it, you are Tim Louis.
LOL…only if you admit you’re Niels Veldhuis
23 rf // Apr 9, 2009 at 10:30 am
I will need to google Niels Veldhuis first to check, but probably not.
24 rf // Apr 9, 2009 at 10:37 am
Nope, I’m not him, but I sure do like the stuff he writes about privatization.
On that note, who will the city hire to monitor these parking lots? Will it be outsourced? Can we rely on city parking enforcement to enforce upon their own? (ie. will this be the least monitored parking lot in the city?)
25 spartikus // Apr 9, 2009 at 10:53 am
It will probably be run by City co-owned EasyPark
26 Senior Planner that skateboards to City Hall // Apr 9, 2009 at 11:39 am
While I appreciate the suggestion that the Sustainable Commuting Program offer me a free pair of skate shoes or a deal on bearing oil, the main issue for me is to enjoy my commute to work each day. It is alot more fun riding my bike or skateboard than drving my car. Also, getting some exercise each day is a big plus as well.
By the way, none of my skateboarding friends have suggested we want a skateboard lane on the Cambie bridge. But we do appreciate the wide sidewalk on that bridge…it’s a fun place to roll downtown.
27 blaffergassted // Apr 9, 2009 at 11:47 am
Sounds like socialists at city hall are trying to impose a new transportation system on their employees - the Cash Cow!
That’s stepping on TransLink’s territory, you know!!!
28 Darcy McGee // Apr 9, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Praise you with my screams as I watch them fall away.
And when Spartacus was up on the cross,
I betcha he had no illusions
What he was an advertisement for,
As he sang his last song-prayer:
Volcano God, Volcano God,
Which one of my treasures will you take from me today?
29 Darcy McGee // Apr 9, 2009 at 12:16 pm
> My only complaint is that now buses to
> and from City Hall (my neighbourhood)
> will be more crowded than ever.
The theory is that as more people ride mass transit, mass transit gets better.
I’m not suggesting that it always HAPPENS. I’m just saying that’s the theory.
In any case, cycling is a better way to get to work. Your own schedule, there’s a huge fitness benefit and the other argument made above related to wardrobe is just ridiculous: I carry a suit to work in a garment bag that fits a bike rack. It’s not that hard, and the bag cost less than 1 month’s car insurance.
30 Darcy McGee // Apr 9, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Spartikus: I don’t see a direct connection between day care incentives and the removal of parking.
I see an obtuse connection, but it’s far from direct.
31 spartikus // Apr 9, 2009 at 12:35 pm
It was in response to comment#6. I even included the sentence I was responding to.
You are, of course, free to ignore dialogue between two other people.
32 Stephanie // Apr 9, 2009 at 1:51 pm
Alas, Darcy, as more people ride mass transit, mass transit gets better for people who ride it by choice. Those who for economic or other reasons ride mass transit suffer through more crowded buses and ridiculous delays on profit-making routes that help to subsidize fancy new projects created to lure people out of their cars.
In other words - the Canada Line will be lovely, but conditions on the 20 route will continue to be horrendous.
33 Stephanie // Apr 9, 2009 at 1:53 pm
One other thing to note: people who have to ride mass transit for economic reasons might be able to cycle, but many people who ride transit cannot cycle. Cycling is not always a reasonable alternative to driving.
34 SV // Apr 9, 2009 at 2:11 pm
While cycling may not work for everyone it can be the answer for some. I’m now on child # 2 and I use my bike and trailer to get my child to the daycare he attends-yes it’s difficult when it snows(quick call citycaucus!) but works great the rest of the year.
35 citywatch49 // Apr 9, 2009 at 3:22 pm
personally, I also think this is a good move. Change is never popular, but if we really think global warming is a problem, then sooner or later we have to make changes to our lifestyle. I feel the City is taking leadership, as unpopular as it may be with those who like to drive their car to work. (Wonder how many drive alone to work?)
36 Glissando Remmy // Apr 9, 2009 at 4:33 pm
37 Darcy McGee // Apr 9, 2009 at 4:46 pm
I guess the point is, Stephanie, that there *should* be fewer crowded buses and ridiculous delays. Buses should be added to those routes in order to address the demand and maintain capacity at what is considered a “reasonable” rate.
I recognize that there isn’t always a similarity between what *should* happen and what *does* happen.
Cynicism shouldn’t prevent us from striving to achieve the goal of making mass transit a *better* alternative than driving. It’s a noble goal.
In the Netherlands 30% of commuters choose cycling over other forms of transportation. In Vancouver it’s 3. There’s lots of room to grow there.
SV provides a good example and it *is* possible to do quite a bit by bicycle (and go SV!!! I hope to pass you on the bike path one day. I love seeing parents with children in tow!)
As for Spartikus…sigh…so civilized. So civilized.
38 Glissando Remmy // Apr 9, 2009 at 4:56 pm
I’ve tried to post some comments a few minutes ago but they did not go through, apparently. I’ve tried to post them again and I’ve got a message with “duplicate comment already being posted”. Still, there is nothing showing, Frances. Any comments on this?
39 Darcy McGee // Apr 9, 2009 at 5:04 pm
BTW, Spartikus…yes you included the excerpt, no your comment did not address a person specifically, and the fact that you included the original sentence doesn’t in any way address or change the validity of my question.
You seem to be agreeing with the comment you excerpted, yet neither you nor the original commenter have drawn a direct connection between a lack or parking and child care.
The original poster said ” The young mothers who need their vehicles to function.” and yet we know that thousands of mothers in Vancouver don’t “need” their vehicles to function. SV provides a great example (again with the Go SV!!!)
So perhaps you or the original poster could do that…
40 jaymac // Apr 9, 2009 at 5:09 pm
So does this mean that there will actually be some more visitor parking at City Hall? I have watched over many years the erosion of visitor parking under the east wing. During this time, the city has become more complex requiring far more time for “outsiders” to deal with the City. The City has responded to this by “removing” approx. 50% of the visitor stalls and converting them to City use. A classic case of the bureaucracy neither understanding nor respecting that it is those “on the outside” who keep them in their jobs, complete with parking privileges.
41 oldwhiteguy // Apr 9, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Paying for on-site employee parking? Great idea. Now let’s do it at the schools. See who has more influence, civic CUPE or BCTF. Free parking should have been a taxable benefit anyway.
42 Glissando Remmy // Apr 9, 2009 at 5:20 pm
43 fbula // Apr 9, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Glissando,
Not sure what is happening here. You are a poster who has been approved in the past, so your comments actually appear automatically as soon as you make them without me having to moderate them.
It looks to me like you wrote something but maybe accidentally deleted it as you were submitting, as your name is there but not your comments.
44 LP // Apr 9, 2009 at 6:34 pm
One word:
translink
For all those who have commented about how “transit” should get better when more use it, I would suggest to sit back and think about how well translink has managed to date.
Personally I don’t hold much hope for their better management of our transit system, or the management of their budget.
Leave a Comment