^ I wrote a paper on adding jitneys into Van's Transit system :troll: ; quite ideal if regulated properly for industrial areas but imagine asians driving it :lawl:

Living far from where you work = having to travel farther. Most of the time if you live farther from the city there are less people and so less people would be using whatever transit you build for that area
Those taxes would be less tho if it were in a denser area as more people would be taking the train or bus and thus paying for it. Which should mean less tax to subsidize it.

I don't see anything that doesn't make sense in what you said. But Surrey's train service is almost as much as Queens which has over 2 million people
I never said it wasnt an improvement but not the best choice. Anyways look at the populations of the places you've listed. Look at how many suburbs Toronto's subway covers
http://walloper.com/files/imagecache...subway-map.jpg

If Vancouver;s density isnt high enough than neither is coquitlam's.
Where do you propose these industrial zones should be then? Next to where people live so they can walk to work?

so you let them use their cars, but offer transit to city center through PnR connection to LRT. So people can use their cars to visit friends, do errands locally etc in their cities or when they feel like driving but they also have the option train to dtwn. Most important part of transit is to give options which Translink is :derp: on it.


Toronto covers alot because the main line was built in the 70s, of which looks sorta like Vancouver today. Now they just built everything over it, another benefit is they kept their streetcar system which carries more people with less fuck ups than a bus. Look at Van's trolley system, it was suppose to be streetcars but they moved to buses and its so much slower now and less capacity.

The goal of Mass transit is to drag people into one funnel and flush them into other parts. Imagine transit like sewer pipes, it goes from the shitter to the main pipe infront of your house , and to the super huge pipe. If you don't have a super huge pipe, then shit would get clogged like surrey.

If you built the zone, you gotta built access options too. Like I said, jitneys/smaller buses would benefit in these areas.

Doesn't seem like you understand my point. You don't tihnk that instead of a train going to Coquitlam is more expensive and will be less used than a train that went thru southeast Van or the westside where there's more people? :derp: on that a moment[/QUOTE]



Toronto's subway doesn't go to Vaugh, or Markham etc, it goes to only the bordering suburbs

Once that was true, yes. But as housing prices rose in Vancouver, more and more people moved out to outlaying areas, be it Surrey, Langley, Aldergrove, etc. More and more people working in the Downtown Core and the surrounding area are living out this way. The West Coast Express is jammed pack for every trip. The Skytrain cars are almost just as full right from King George station onward. I will guarantee that if you build the Skytrain out to Langley/Aldergrove, you will increase ridership to the nth degree. Right now, especially for people in Aldergrove/Abbotsford and most parts of Langley, it doesn't make sense to use the Skytrain as it's typically out of most people's way. The old adage, "If you build it, they will come," is most definitely true, especially in this case.

In a perfect world, yes. However, Translink also oversees the maintenance of bridges and roads. If my paying for a Skytrain ticket means that money goes solely to maintaining that particular system, where then does the money come from for maintaining a bridge? If I opt out of one service and only pay to use the other one, the former suffers. As a result, Translink will need to subsidize and offset that loss somehow. And guess what that will be? More taxes!


Oh, I know that subway/skytrain services rarely extend outside of a major core area, but in Toronto's case, they're currently in the middle of building a 120km LRT route designed specifically for Toronto's outer suburbs. No, it's not a Skytrain, but it certain helps in the absence of one.

And it's kinda funny you brought up Queens. My dad was born and raised in Queens and I used to spend a lot of time there visiting family. On the one block alone that my grandpa and uncle live on, there are four (yes, four!) bus stops on that one stretch of street. Bus service is far better in and around Queens than most parts of Surrey. (Sorry, I know what you were trying to get at, but I think you picked the wrong part of New York to base your argument on :p)

LOL do you think westside residents want skytrain? Property prices? NIMBYS?

SE van is mostly single homes and is likely to stay that way unless you're talking about the massive buildup at marine/boundary which may beome a problem for 100. Coquitlam on the other hand has been built up and Translink will built it up. The biggest problem is surrey, not Van; trolley buses are holding up at 5min intervals.

because there's go transit?

Does it make sense to build infrastructure for people to use when they arent even there? China's ghost cities are an example of how that saying doesnt work. Try Abbotsford and Aldergrove. Spend the hundreds of millions build them a train. It's not going to be a ghost town but it's not that easy for people from the city to just move to aldergrove[/QUOTE]

Also I've been working downtown for 15 yrs. Not met too many from Langely or Aldergrove(cant think of any). Those from Surrey all drive, as do the majority who are from West and North Van. Even people I grew up with who did move to Surrey and work in the city still rather drive and it seems even you'd rather drive too.


If more people are using public transportation then less tax on gas would be required to subsidize it. It shoudn't but I agree with your cynicism that that;s actually the case.

That's kinda my point, toronto's a much bigger place and isnt building a subway to those suburbs.
I dont see anything wrong with picking Queens. It almost has as much people as the whole GVRD, it should have better bus service than Surrey. Should Surrey have better train service?

And there were no people who didnt want the evergreen line in their neighborhood?
There's buildings starting at the Knight St bridge. You think that's only 100 people? go check it out


So why dont we do something like that instead then?

I tihnk you missed the part that there's no public transportation when I work. This doesn't affect me. Even if there were a train outside my door, it wouldn't be on. I spend less than $500 on gas a year commuting to work, my insurance is 1200ish and I don't pay for parking. A bus pass is $900 a year. You dont need to include my circumstances.

I don't know how much of your time work occupies but a lot of people who work downtown don't have an extra 30 mins a day to wait for a bus. They're busy professionals with families (not me, I have time to argue on the internet) so they drive and it';s worth it for them to pay $20 a day for parking. Make it more convenient for them. They'll still pay ICBC(we know they'll still keep that jag) so that revenue is not lost.

don't know if you're talking about west end or west side now, west side has the most political power in the province, west end is where do you built the line

:suspicious: 100 bus 22nd stn to marine dr stn

because not a straight line, have you seen the rail route from langley to dtwn waterfront? :fullofwin:

I replied to you

So what do you think? Which one are we talking about?


makes even less sense to me if you were talking about a bus route
So obvious easiest solution is to build a more complex system?

Have you EVER been to Japan/Europe/Australia? No? Thought so.

The coolest thing I found in Germany was leaving Munich Main Station at 6PM on a Thursday headed back to my town 2 hours away by train. Train was PACKED. As in standing room only (note* this is an actual train, not a skytrain type system). Slowly over the next 45mins. it thinned out to almost nothing. 45mins on a train moving at the pace it was is easily an hour driving. And all these people are able to efficiently get to Munich from their little hill town in Germany in under an hour, while not using a car and able to do work while on the train.

You really think this is a stupid idea? Have you seen how packed the Westcoast Express is every day? If we had even a simple version of this type of system all the way out to Hope Eastbound an Pemberton Westbound (even to the sunshine coast with a transfer in Squamish) Vancouver and the lower mainland would become much more livable and in turn would likely help our economy grow like never before.

The main downside to this type of plan, is staffing and maintaining the tracks. However, looking at how much money Translink hemorrhages every year, it would be quite feasible if someone with brains took the helm.

No never been to those three places.
We cant just put more trains on the Westcoast Exp instead of building a whole new track and buying more trains to run on the new tracks? I'm not an engineer but skytrains not more expensive than regular trains? I'm ok with a train going to Squamish, I just don;t think we need to spend 100 million so they can be downtown in 20 mins, every 15 mins, at least not yet.

There are plans to run the Mark I trains in six car configurations and to add middle car to the Mark II trains so the entire length of the platform will be used.

You fools don't know how good you got it with the skytrain. Trying to live in any other major city in this country besides toronto or montreal is a pain in the ass when it comes to mass transit. Shit, i lived in edmonton for 2 years, if you didn't own a car then you're royally screwed. Unless you live by that one line train station that goes to the stadium and back. This city is trying to progress with transit... If you live or work near a station, then give it a try. You might save a buck or two and thus you will stop whining about high living costs. And bringing the skytrain out to the burbs is the best thing to do because ALL THE POOR PEOPLE LIVE IN THE BURBS.

I imagine that CN and/or CP Rail would be very reluctant to lease, rent, or sell outright their railways. Even if they were interested in selling their tracks, I bet the rights-of-way would cost billions of dollars. Or we could always build new tracks which would require years of consultations, thousands of expropriations, and would probably end up costing billions of dollars to build in today's economy.

There are no poor people living in Edmonton and everyone can afford multiple cars, so it's not like there's a huge demand for public transit.

The problem in Vancouver is that salaries are low and housing is ridiculously expensive (unless of course, you're willing to compromise space which no one wants to do because we live in North America and we're entitled.) Not only that, but Vancouver is full of NIMBYs which means nothing gets built (everything gets stuck in endless rounds of consultations) unless you have a major international event which emboldens politicians with balls such as the Zalm and Gordo to build systems come hell or high water.

There must be poor people out there but I assuming they also work out there. I hope when he says poor people that he's not talking about people who are too poor to buy a big property in the city and were forced to buy a couple acres out in Langley or Abbotsford. We must make a high speed rail for these unfortunate folk. There's nothing wrong with renting in the city if you need to work in the city and you cant afford to own a house there. I'm not talking about you buying a place next to a station. You didnt ask for a station to be built next to your condo.

edit: Mindbomber do you have something to say or do you just go around failing posts?

read a book or two about transportation, you need atleast a demand of 15000ppl/hr before even a train system is viable. Take the Amtrak and see the huge ass circle before you get to white rock/cloverdale. so by adding a complex system you're telling me that you want to plunk a standard gauge track right through Vancouver? With DMU running them :troll:

LRT is the best solution for as it is 8-10kppl/hr capacity; there is a need for mass transit in suburban areas but where are they gonna find the funding? From you? Are you willing to pay $1000 / year transit tax ontop of current fares? A complex system is expensive and useless when there isn't anyone using it. That's why we only have WCE running one way on weekdays and none on weekends.

Have no idea what you're arguing with me about anymore. I'm against putting in a complex system for the suburbs and it seems like you are too.

If a complex system is to be built though, I think there are still many parts in the city that still need it and have more people that would need it.

Yeah we could. And also utilize the hundreds of KM of existing tracks all over the lower mainland. In some of the smaller towns in Germany, the stations consisted of a platform with a small cover and two or three ticket machines. You don't need big extravagant stations for this to work.

And... another thing. IMO it's not all about time. For me it's all about convenience. I could drive to Munich faster than taking the train, however I preferred to take the train because it was comfortable and easy. Also cheap. A "Bayern Ticket" was only $21 for the DAY. And Bayern is HUGE. The size of the Lower Mainland, all the way to Merritt/Kamloops. Imagine going to visit relatives for the day in Kamloops, having it take only two hours and only cost $20.

Taking the Train from Oberstdorf to Kempten was almost an hour of that total time yet only 30kms away. It was slow because it was all inner town tracks which have speed limits. However, again... only $7 for an "Allgau" ticket (which covered this area) and the fact that I didn't need a car was great. Sure it took a bit longer but the convenience factor was huge.

People here in N/A only care about time which is why it will never work. It was a bit of a pain to get from Oberstdorf to Stuttgart (three transfers and 5 hours) yet driving would only take 3ish on the Autobahn. But agian... coming back to the fact you can sit in a comfy chair with a BIG window, Wifi and food for minimal cost was what made it a win in my book.

Incorrect.. all the smart and wealthy people live in the burbs. :ilied:

I really have no reason to go downtown ever. My job is in the valley, my friends are and I live here. Rent is cheaper, living cost is less.

My dad commutes to N/Van every day from Surrey. He has co-workers that have a shorter travel time than he does that come from Mission VIA Westcoast Express.

All of those tracks, depsite their lack of use, are privately owned by CP Rail, CN, or other rail companies. It would literally cost billions to buy them outright (which is the preferred way) or we could lease the tracks and end up with shitty service hours like we have with the West Coast Express.

I don't generally see a point in responding to certain types of posts, since you asked though...

People are not forced to purchase property in Langley, Maple Ridge, Mission, Abbotsford and et cetera, because they are too poor to afford one in Vancouver. I have never met a person who lives east of the Fraser because they are unable to afford purchasing a home in Vancouver and are unwilling to rent. With very few exceptions, people live in east of the Fraser because they prefer the lifestyle here. 95% of the properties in the cities you've mentioned are also not a "couple acres," they are ordinary sub-divisions of varying degrees of affluence just like Burnaby, Richmond, and North Vancouver. A high speed rail network would interconnect the various cities within the Lower Mainland to a high degree of benefit for everyone, and with a much higher ridership than your clearly poorly informed ideas of "the boonies" lead you to believe.

Your ideas about transit are off on a very strange tangent. I've not seen a single person who agrees with you in the entire thread, only many rebuttals against your proposition followed by weak retorts. You should strengthen the foundation of the position you're talking if you expect anyone to take it seriously.