Like many, Tsur Somerville is ambivalent toward the ongoing transit referendum.

The director of the UBC Centre for Urban Economics and Real Estate says he’s stumped about the probable outcome if either side of the nonbinding vote prevails.

“If you vote ‘yes’, there’s a sales tax, but there’s no guarantee of matching revenue from the feds or the province,” Somerville told the Georgia Straight in a phone interview. “If you vote ‘no’, does this mean that in the long run no one’s going to put money into transit? So I don’t know what ‘yes’ or ‘no’ means.”

That said, the associate professor noted that what he can “talk honestly about, as opposed to the referendum”, is the importance of transit to real estate in Metro Vancouver. According to Somerville, the housing market reflects the health of the economy and the desirability of living in the region.

“For both of those,” Somerville said, “an effective, comprehensive transit network with good, affordable access to public transit is essential.

“It’s easier to see how a ‘yes’ vote is better for transit than it is to say that a ‘no’ vote is better for transit, right?” Somerville asked.

As for affordability in terms of housing cost as a percentage of income, Somerville said that transit does two things. One, better transit means a household with two cars will need one less. “And so that affects their own economic calculus in a way that yields more money for housing,” he explained.

Two, people seem to be more willing to accept high-density developments, which, typically, produce more affordable units (compared to single-family homes) when tied to public transit. “Therefore, more public transit…seems to be a way to get more housing supply,” the academic said.

With no new transit investment in a region that expects one million additional residents by 2041, it becomes an “unlivable mess”, Somerville said.

“Housing prices plummet. Now it’s affordable but it’s a horrible place to live, right? I mean, the most affordable places are the least attractive places to live.”

Personally, Somerville thinks that the proposed half-percent increase in the region’s sales tax is a “horrible way to fund transit”. He also doesn’t like that the TransLink board is unelected. Plus, “they made a hash of the Compass card.”

“We don’t get lots of ways to express our dissatisfaction…and the problem with, you know, throwing the bums out is the bums you might bring [in] may not be the people you like,” Somerville said. “So you hold your nose and vote but you’re still dissatisfied.”

He also suggested that it’s difficult to draw conclusions about people who are voting “no”.

“I mean, I bet if you ask most people who are voting ‘no’, most of them will not say, ‘No, we don’t think transit should be funded,’ ” Somerville said.

Real-estate agent Paul Toffoli finds the “politics of the exercise a little mind-boggling”.

“That being said, we need the infrastructure,” Toffoli told the Straight by phone. “It’s gotta get paid for. Let’s just move forward.”

Although houses aren’t going to get cheaper soon in Vancouver, Toffoli said that better transit will allow families to buy less expensive homes in outlying areas like the Fraser Valley while the breadwinner works downtown. “It’s easier for them to live out in the suburbs with better transit options,” Toffoli said.

In Vancouver, the civic party OneCity is urging voters to “hold their noses” and vote “yes”. The group believes that the region’s mayors failed to provide an appropriate transportation plan.

“Instead, they propose an expensive subway that’s more about developers’ plans for West Broadway than the desperate need for affordable and efficient public transit across the whole city,” OneCity declared in a statement.

“Not all development is bad,” OneCity’s Rafael “R J” Aquino told the Straight by phone.

According to the former council candidate, social housing and affordable homes are good, and residents will need access to transit. However, Aquino also said: “I can’t imagine that all those things would only be built along Broadway.”