Where should mass transit be?

[yray]

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

[minoru_tanaka]

Originally Posted by Lomac

Not everyone chooses to live somewhere. Most people move to where they have the best balance of house prices and travel distance. Companies relocate, people get fired/laid off/quit and have to apply for a job that's in a different city. Many people travel to different cities every day for their job. If I buy a house in White Rock, expecting I'll be at my job for the next 25 years which is also in White Rock, but then one day get laid off... Well, I'm not going to sell my house and relocate my entire family to a tiny condo in Vancouver because the "transit is better."

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

Originally Posted by Lomac

I'm lucky in that I currently only have a 5 minute drive to work and back, though that wasn't always the case. I grew up in South Langley, in an area that's right on the knife's edge between suburbs and farmland. My first real job was working in an office on Venables, right down the street from the old Ferrari dealership. To drive to work via 99, it took me over an hours. Yes, it took much much longer to take transit - 2.5 hours, to be exact - but at least I could catch up on some sleep or do homework while I waited. It was also much, much cheaper to take transit, especially as a new driver.



As already mentioned, it doesn't take 30 minutes to walk from West End to the stadium. During rush hour when all the lights are changing every ten seconds, maybe, but at 6:30 at night it doesn't. And while I do prefer to drive to Vancouver whenever I go to a Canucks game, it's because I don't particularly want to leave my car parked at the King George skytrain station, regardless of if it's in a transition stage or not. From my house in Langley to Vancouver, it still takes me an hour to get to the stadium. Keeping in mind that for every kilometre of fuel that I burn, I'm spending that much more on taxes than someone who can walk to the stadium and back.



As stated, I think I pay more in taxes to drive from Langley to Vancouver (and back) than someone living and travelling there.

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.

Originally Posted by Lomac

I feel like I'm starting to lose the focus of my original point but I'll try to say it here.

While I agree that a strong transit is one of the backbones of a well oiled city, it's not practical to assume that it's the only location where one should focus transit. If I had the ability to hop onto a bus headed to Langley Central where I could then hop onto the Skytrain, I would absolutely not hesitate to do it. Not only does this mean one less car on the road, it means I have less time to stress while driving in rush hour, and it's less stress on my car. Ultimately I'm saving money, which is always a good thing.

A good point was brought up about the current trains being overloaded by the time they hit Vancouver. That's the problem Translink will eventually face, especially with expansion further East. What they really need is a parallel route that mimics the current setup, but runs a few miles away. This way while you're still essentially capturing the same group of people that are already taking the train, you're (at least, temporarily) having less people per car, allowing more passengers from the various offshots (ie: Evergreen) to get on.

The current system is not perfect by any means. It's a good start for a system that was introduced relatively late in the game, especially when compared to a city like Montreal or New York, but I don't believe that there are any true solutions to the problem we have. The introduction of Light Rail would be a great start, especially if it's expanded to the outlaying areas of Vancouver, not just the core, but that's really it.

I'm tired from work, so if this post doesn't make sense... meh.

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

Originally Posted by Great68

For Fuck's Sake. METRO VANCOUVER includes:

Anmore
Belcarra
Bowen Island
Burnaby
Coquitlam
Delta
Langley
Lions Bay
Maple Ridge
New West
North Vancouver
Pitt Meadows
Port Coquitlam
Port Moody
Richmond
Surrey
Vancouver
West Vancouver
White Rock

Improving transit anywhere in these areas IS IMPROVING TRANSIT IN THE CITY.

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

[minoru_tanaka]

Originally Posted by yray

Vancouver's density is not high enough to warrant a mass transit system within dense areas. Check out the regional plan, Translink is trying to heavily densify areas around skytrain lines, which is ideal for those that work in the commercial core.

If Vancouver;s density isnt high enough than neither is coquitlam's.

Originally Posted by yray

But for the lower mainland where its industrial zone is being forced to the butt fuck of no where, its a very bad system of growth.

Where do you propose these industrial zones should be then? Next to where people live so they can walk to work?

[yray]

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

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

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 on it.

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

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 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.

[yray]

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

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?

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.

[minoru_tanaka]

Originally Posted by yray

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 on it.

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? on that a moment[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by yray

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.

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

[Lomac]

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

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

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.

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

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.

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!

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

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

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 )

[yray]

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

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? on that a moment

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.

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

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

because there's go transit?

[minoru_tanaka]

Originally Posted by Lomac

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.

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.

Originally Posted by Lomac

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!

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.

Originally Posted by Lomac

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.

That's kinda my point, toronto's a much bigger place and isnt building a subway to those suburbs.

Originally Posted by Lomac

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 )

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?

[minoru_tanaka]

Originally Posted by yray

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

And there were no people who didnt want the evergreen line in their neighborhood?

Originally Posted by yray

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.

There's buildings starting at the Knight St bridge. You think that's only 100 people? go check it out

Originally Posted by yray

because there's go transit?

So why dont we do something like that instead then?

[minoru_tanaka]

Originally Posted by bobbinka

you just proved my point. You dont live downtown. you dont live along a convenient transit path (and when i say convenient, i mean having a station outside your front door). Hence, you drive into the city. just like every other person who does not have convenient access to transit, regardless of how far they are.

your idea that adding more transit locations closer to downtown would get a greater number of people out of their cars is flawed. you are assuming that there are a greater number of people that need to head downtown from (let's say) your area, because you are closer, than compared to coquitlam. if this was truly the case, the ever green line would not be considered. there is a very large demand for transit from that side and the west coast express is not enough to meet that demand.

instead of someone from coquitlam driving 30 minutes+, they can just take transit now. that's someone else's 30 minutes of time and gas VS your 7 minutes.

your wait time for transit is irrelevant. anyone else who needs to take transit also have to account for wait time, regardless of how far they're travelling.

taking transit vs driving is about weighing your pros and cons, which depend on what you value. Time vs Cost. driving will be the most expensive, but take the least time. transit will take the most time, but cost the least. You desire the best of both worlds.

Time to learn to compromise and wait the 15 minutes for your bus or walk to the skytrain station.

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.

[yray]

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

And there were no people who didnt want the evergreen line in their neighborhood?

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

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

There's buildings starting at the Knight St bridge. You think that's only 100 people? go check it out

100 bus 22nd stn to marine dr stn

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

So why dont we do something like that instead then?

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

[minoru_tanaka]

Originally Posted by yray

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

I replied to you

Originally Posted by yray

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

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

Originally Posted by yray

100 bus 22nd stn to marine dr stn

Originally Posted by yray

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.

makes even less sense to me if you were talking about a bus route

Originally Posted by yray

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

So obvious easiest solution is to build a more complex system?

[falcon]

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

\We shouldn't be spending billions so that someone who chose to live 40 mins away can get to downtown in 30 mins.

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.

[minoru_tanaka]

Originally Posted by falcon

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.

[Ehlun]

Originally Posted by Mr.HappySilp

What I fear is that with the ever green line, our currently skytrain system will be overload.

Even now taking the skytrain during rush hour you have to wait 3 trains or more. Think aobut when all these ppl from the ever green line? Is going to add so much stree to the current system.

Having more skytrains running will not solve this issue simply becasue ppl near the end station (Surrey centeral, Coq center, lougheed mall) will just get on and by the time it reaches some of the stations in BBY, Vancouver the trains will be full and ppl won't be able to get on.

I am against this ever green line project till they figure out to move ppl smoothly again having more skytrains will not solve this issue.

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.

[Everymans]

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.

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by falcon

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.

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.

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.

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.

[minoru_tanaka]

Originally Posted by Tapioca

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.

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?

[yray]

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

So obvious easiest solution is to build a more complex system?

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

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.

[minoru_tanaka]

Originally Posted by yray

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

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.

[falcon]

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

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.

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.

[falcon]

Originally Posted by Everymans

ALL THE POOR PEOPLE LIVE IN THE BURBS.

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

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.

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by falcon

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.

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.

[MindBomber]

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

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?

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.