[stuff99]

Metro Vancouver's mayors are recommending two cents a litre of gas tax be added in the region to pay for TransLink's $400 million share of the $1.4 billion Evergreen Line rapid transit project.

The extra tax, which Transportation Minister Blair Lekstrom has promised to introduce to the legislature in the fall for implementation in the spring, will raise about $40 million annually.

That will be enough to pay debt servicing and operational costs to begin construction on the 11-kilometre SkyTrain extension to Coquitlam from Lougheed Town Centre.

But the mayors really need $70 million for their 'Moving Forward' plan of transit expansion.

The rest of the cash would come from a graduated vehicle levy — not the flat fee that TransLink previously tried to impose on the Lower Mainland, but which met huge opposition from drivers.

That new graduated levy could go to the legislature as soon as the spring, but everything will be subject to public consultation that begins next week.

Mayors recommend gas levy to pay for Evergreen Line (http://www.theprovince.com/story_print.html?id=5059844&sponsor=)

[punkwax]

I already went from an IS to a Honda Fit... they keep on doing this and I'll be forced to ride a Vespa 40km/h the 80KM I commute each day to work...

:failed:

[tool001]

http://cmt1355.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/fuck_u_.jpg?w=403

[Mr.HappySilp]

LOL sure they lower the HST to 10% but raise other tax by 2x as much Typical gov.......

[CP.AR]

The Canadian answer:
"Let's tax it!"

[Greenstoner]

expecting it already, not a news

[badgerx3]

:fuckthatshit:

[Roach]

Hmm, how about we get the people who are actually going to ride the skytrain to pay for the cost of creating it? Novel idea.

I'm so sick and tired of Translink mismanaging our transit system and then dipping their hands into motorist pockets to cover their expenditures.

Skytrain Turnstiles? Where the hell are those? Announced in 2009 and still nothing in sight. Is it really that hard to implement? Perhaps all the lost revenue from fare evasion would have helped pay for their lovely new Evergreen line.

About the only thing the Translink board can implement correctly are salary increases.

Fuck them.

Kev

[mercyboy]

:IDL there needs....what aboout the people

[TheNewGirl]

Hmm, how about we get the people who are actually going to ride the skytrain to pay for the cost of creating it? Novel idea.

I'm so sick and tired of Translink mismanaging our transit system and then dipping their hands into motorist pockets to cover their expenditures.

Skytrain Turnstiles? Where the hell are those? Announced in 2009 and still nothing in sight. Is it really that hard to implement? Perhaps all the lost revenue from fare evasion would have helped pay for their lovely new Evergreen line.

About the only thing the Translink board can implement correctly are salary increases.

Fuck them.

Kev

They HAVE started putting the turnstiles in at Burrard (I think, I know it's one of the DT stations). And I DO think the Evergreen line will get a lot more commuters from this side of the city onto transit and is much needed.

BUT I want to know if the translink bosses got raises again this year to the tune of a few million, and what they're doing to keep down their costs to try and pay for this themselves before they gauge us all.

[melloman]

FUCK Translink. Gas levy... really??

Carbon tax was just raised Friday night at midnight by $0.02/L. We weren't informed by that and the government is just trying to fuck us all over once again.
I agree with Kev 100%, motorists should not be paying for transit riders upgrades. Motorists pay for road upgrades. This is ridiculous.

[murd0c]

The sick part is when they raise the taxes and then you see the board members getting millions of dollars of bonuses every year. A complete joke and the worst part is we can't even do anything about it!!

[91civicZC]

Once again, nothing will change unless voters and citizens start taking our elected officials to task. Write the mayors office in your area if you are affected. I know i will be.

Being forced to pay for a service I make a conscious decision to avoid (I have used a translink services 1 time in the last two years) because of mismanagement and lack of transparency is not something I will be very happy about. Any elected official in my area is going to hear about it.

Its all you can do, so do it!

EDIT: thanks for posting this artical

[hotjoint]

I agree with Kev 100%, motorists should not be paying for transit riders upgrades. Motorists pay for road upgrades. This is ridiculous.

Exactly, raise fairs or find a way to make the transit users pay for it. I don't understand why motorists have to fit the bill when we aren't the ones using it.


The sick part is when they raise the taxes and then you see the board members getting millions of dollars of bonuses every year. A complete joke and the worst part is we can't even do anything about it!!

Uh huh. These fuckers saying they don't have the money but at the end of the year you hear about their big ass bonus', complete bullshit.

[Culverin]

Well, I think motorist should pay for it. They are the ones causing congestion, and this is the way to alleviate it. It's just like how we have free health care here. I'd gladly pay a bit more so your grandma doesn't die without insurance (like in the states) or that your smoking dad can go get lung cancer treatments later. I've not traveled much in the world, but from where I have gone to, almost everyplace is a reminder how much vancouver is nicer for 3 simple things:
1. clean air
2. clean water
3. moderate climate
We can't control #3, but if we've can even remotely affect #1 and 2, then we should be throwing our weight behind it.

However, I think that motorist have paid enough for it. I don't think translink should be going and raising taxes on anything until they get their own internal crap sorted out. I want bus shelters that SHELTER me from the rain and cold. I want electronic passes like other transit systems had have for the last 15 years. I want the translink execs to have their wages frozen.

Is that really so hard to ask?

[Mr.HappySilp]

^^ I will be happy if the skytrain can run a week without issue.

Just this Monday during morning rush hour 9I think it started around 6am or so) and skytrain came to a haul for SEVERAL HOURS. My Co-worker usually can get to work by skytrain in about 20mins took him well over 1hour and 30mins.

Fix the issue at hand first before expanding your services.

[!Yaminashi]

Aaaaand the anal rape continues

[gars]

It's one of those circle arguments. You can't expand the services without money. You can't get money unless you charge more. You can't charge more without improving services.

And I've heard tons of people here say, that they would take transit more if the service was better (ie, larger coverage, more frequent buses/trains) BUT, they are unwilling to pay for it.

That said, both federal and provincial governments has budgets for transportation. Those budgets go towards maintaining municipal, provincial and federal highways, which all drivers drive on, AND, everybody who pays taxes pays towards (whether it be directly or indirectly, through income tax, sales tax, property tax). If taxes from cars/gas are the only ones that pay to maintain our roads, then yes, you can say then that people who take transit should be the only ones to pay for it - but unfortunately, that's not how our system works.

And really, I have to say, our Skytrain is pretty reliable. How many times do you really the trains down? Monday was the exception, rather than the rule.

[!Yaminashi]

^I would be willing to pay a bit more IF the service in my area was actually better and it still was easier on my bank account than a car. Also to my knowledge the schedule hasnt changed at all.

Back before I had a car, on numerous occasions the bus didnt even show up!
It would take me 40 mins to get to work taking the bus, but if I drove, less than 10

[TomBox_N]

The previous company I worked for was a consulting firm and we had been doing work for them nonstop for the past few years. The reason is that after the orignallly decided to go through with it, they had us do some testing. Then later they decide not to go thru with it, the report became garbage. Then later they decided to go thru with it again, so the same testings had the be done again. This happened quite a few times so they had been paying for the same consulting work many many time. Imagine that multiply by many different consultants they hired. No wonder the bill becomes outrageous. Guess who's gonna end up footing that bill.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[xilley]

what..the FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Great68]

Once it goes up, it will never come down...

The Evergreen line is necessary there's too much growth in the Tri-Cities to ignore it anymore, but it's not fair to only hit motorists for funding.

[Hehe]

I say fuck this.

Yes, motorists are the one who cause congestion, but Vancouver officials have to realize something, Skytrain, as our economy and population is not an economically viable plan. Very few percentage of population live close to the stations. Our public transportation has fundamental problems, self-sustainability.

I don't even bother to google what's the amount of ppl translink serves in a year. But I will be you NYC can do that in a month.

Lower mainland officials should spend the money to promote urban development. Develop "downtowns" outside of current centers. So people don't need to commute that far for their jobs.

And I have said many times, make our "park and ride" program better. There is not a single riders designated parking anywhere along our skytrain system that I know of. People drive for a reason... our public transportation SUCKS and don't get us anywhere except 2 or 3 transfers at least.

[TheKingdom2000]

so is this tax only to raise the $70 million?
so after two years they will get rid of it?

[q0192837465]

so is this tax only to raise the $70 million?
so after two years they will get rid of it?

I'm sure they will. :troll:

[Culverin]

Well, as gars mentioned, much of the money from transportation comes from elsewhere. So it doesn't have to be self-sustainable. I don't think anybody will argue with me that our public transit system isn't mature yet. If it got your everywhere quickly and cheap, then I think we can start expecting it to be self sustainable. But as of right now, it's still growing.

I lived on victoria drive for a while. I was 10 steps from the #20 bus. In morning rush hour, that bus comes about every 5 minutes, 10 tops. 10 minute ride to the skytrain station, then another 15 to work. I'm back in burnaby now, I'd gladly pay out the ass to have that kind of frequency of service.

Much of the "building downtowns" out side downtown isn't going to work easily. The only way we can throw together a downtown quickly is to feed it with mass transit. It's the only way you're going to encourage urban density and vertical growth is get the people to their office cubicles without having to drive to work. Then you pack the place with a retail center. That way, you maximize the space for a day-night cycle. You try to minimize the parkades for the office workers.

That said. Every skytrain station should have a park and ride. Not just at major hubs like brentwood mall and lougheed. But at all the smaller ones too. That'll help people get to the skytrain easier and quicker.

[Vansterdam]

BULLSHIT

[1exotic]

fuck translink mang

and fuck public transit in general mang

[tonyzoomzoom]

It's funny how they rationalize that property tax shouldn't increase to fund the project as property owners aren't able to shoulder any more taxation. But then they turn around and suggest that drivers seem have a bottomless pit of $$.

Fuck you, translink. User pay system is where it should be at.

[JesseBlue]

I say tax the f'n rich who can afford it! No seriously they should find alternatives like subcontracting it to china to save billions
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[q0192837465]

I say tax the f'n rich who can afford it! No seriously they should find alternatives like subcontracting it to china to save billions
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

People will then complain that China is stealing all our jobs.

[The_AK]

i propose this -> how about mister mayor juggles my balls with his mouth

[StylinRed]

Raise prices on transit fares

Cut Mayoral pay

Cut Translink pay (year-end bonuses)

Raise taxes in the municipalities that will be getting these services

[Redlines_Daily]

..two cents a litre of gas tax be added in the region to pay for TransLink's $400 million share of the $1.4 billion Evergreen Line rapid transit project.


How about Translink pays for their own share of the project.

[shenmecar]

I say we find the arson who burnt down the apartment on Cambie in Richmond and contract him to a "special job" when the evergreen line is 50% built.

[CorneringArtist]

Carbon Tax, HST, tearing down the old Port Mann and tolling the new one, and now this? I'm getting tired of the provincial government and TransLink reaching into my wallet every time they need to fill a budget gap. How about mayors and TransLink board members stop giving themselves fat pay raises and astronomical "travel expenses" when they really just laid into the mini-bar?

[PiuYi]

the arguments and rebuttals in this thread fail nearly as bad as translink....

:failed:

[MindBomber]

How about Translink pays for their own share of the project.

Translink pays for a significantly higher percentage of their development projects than hospitals or universities, give a reason better than "I don't take the bus" for why they shouldn't recieve funding.

The reality is that transit is an essential service that needs to expand to improve our great city, not only by alleviating traffic congestion and to offer more commuting options, but to maintain air quality and promote growth. With those needs being a reality, as resident of Vancouver, I'm happy to pay an extra $50 a year for fuel to see a service expansion and economic boost this major. Afterall, I easily spend $10k a year on my car between insurance, fuel, repairs and mods so I'll hardly be driven to poverty with this new tax.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Volvo-brickster]

i propose this -> how about mister mayor juggles my balls with his mouth

Do you like engaging in homosexual acts ?

[tiger_handheld]

2 interesting links

Gas Tax: MyHusky.ca | B.C. Fuel Tax Rates (http://www.myhusky.ca/fuel/for_you/bc_fuel_tax_rates.html)
2010 translink annual report : http://www.translink.ca/~/media/documents/about_translink/corporate_overview/annual_reports/2010.ashx

geeky accountant note-- how often does a business make 45% of sales from "Other Income"?? -- check out Translink's Tax Revenue and revenue from services provided. I think they are in the wrong business...

[optiblue]

Lol, I'm looking into buying myself an EV when they're out. Screw this anti car city!
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Volvo-brickster]

Lol, I'm looking into buying myself an EV when they're out. Screw this anti car city!
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

don't forget hydro is trying to up rates by 10% for the next 3 years

[cressydrift]

2 interesting links

Gas Tax: MyHusky.ca | B.C. Fuel Tax Rates (http://www.myhusky.ca/fuel/for_you/bc_fuel_tax_rates.html)
2010 translink annual report : http://www.translink.ca/~/media/documents/about_translink/corporate_overview/annual_reports/2010.ashx

geeky accountant note-- how often does a business make 45% of sales from "Other Income"?? -- check out Translink's Tax Revenue and revenue from services provided. I think they are in the wrong business...


The translink report was interesting, but I couldn't find that part where it says 45% of sales comes from 'other'. I saw that they listed advertising income in 'other'.

inb4 every one switches to hybrids

[PhilosophyMajor]

don't worry. once everyone goes electric, i'm sure translink can start taxing our electricity too.

[tiger_handheld]

The translink report was interesting, but I couldn't find that part where it says 45% of sales comes from 'other'. I saw that they listed advertising income in 'other'.

inb4 every one switches to hybrids

The pie chart shows :

Revenue from services -- 32%
Tax Revenue = 45% (Prop Tax 22.5 , Gas Tax 22.5)

Usually, a business generates most of their sales from their service - not something on the side/secondary.

[hk20000]

Translink should whore itself out to more advertising opportunities. Run it like Facebook so you think you are getting free service but you are just bombarded with commercial goodies.

In Asia all stations and train bodies and anywhere that eyes can see are plastered with advertisement. THAT's where you can get big bucks without putting your damn hands into the average joe's pocket.

[Mercy]

Go back to pst gst it's cheaper than losing 2% of hst
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Gt-R R34]

What they need to change is the Translink Constitution.

It states that it must be Neutral Income. Can't have a profit. Which is stupid.

Learn from MTR/NY Subway. make a god damn dollar.

[DiiCii]

we drive cars for a reason: to not take public transit. they should raise prices on tickets, not the gas that we put in our cars:facepalm:

we need octopus cards.:fullofwin:

[Culverin]

Where is this translink constitution located?
I'd be happy to let the mayors and translink board get raised based on bonuses which are rated on an independant 3rd party's audit.

I wonder if that's even possible with a crown corporation.

[gars]

Translink should whore itself out to more advertising opportunities. Run it like Facebook so you think you are getting free service but you are just bombarded with commercial goodies.

In Asia all stations and train bodies and anywhere that eyes can see are plastered with advertisement. THAT's where you can get big bucks without putting your damn hands into the average joe's pocket.

hahaha, the buses that are completely covered with an advertisement isn't enough for you?

i do agree that they could probably sell more advertising in the stations.

[Eff-1]

Translink should whore itself out to more advertising opportunities. Run it like Facebook so you think you are getting free service but you are just bombarded with commercial goodies.

In Asia all stations and train bodies and anywhere that eyes can see are plastered with advertisement. THAT's where you can get big bucks without putting your damn hands into the average joe's pocket.

no you can't. increasing supply means nothing when there is no increased demand to meet it.

it's so stupid when people here always compare vancouver to massive asian cities with massive populations (or even any other north american city like toronto or NYC)

[Eff-1]

It's not reasonable to raise transit fares any higher than what they are. For low income people, it's expensive enough, and it's on par with other N American cities.

To be honest, I don't have a problem of paying 2 cents per litre if I know it's going specifically to the Evergreen Line. We need it. Gas will probobaly go up 2 cents tomorrow just on its own and that hurts more because that money goes to the oil company profits. And we're not all suddenly going to be homeless because of it.

It's been well established Translink barely has the money to keep the existing transit system running. Everyone always says "install turnstyles blah blah blah" but don't be stupid and think that is the solution to everything.

BUT what makes me angry though is the fact that we're ALREADY paying for a carbox tax and THAT should be going to the evergreen line. We don't need to be paying ANOTHER tax. That's the retarded part.

[Mr.C]

Yeah, so, where's my Skytrain to Langley and better bus service in Surrey?

[goo3]

2 interesting links

Gas Tax: MyHusky.ca | B.C. Fuel Tax Rates (http://www.myhusky.ca/fuel/for_you/bc_fuel_tax_rates.html)
2010 translink annual report : http://www.translink.ca/~/media/documents/about_translink/corporate_overview/annual_reports/2010.ashx

geeky accountant note-- how often does a business make 45% of sales from "Other Income"?? -- check out Translink's Tax Revenue and revenue from services provided. I think they are in the wrong business...

Public transit is a money losing venture, not a business. The only places where it makes money is where it's too expensive to park your car.

Yeah, so, where's my Skytrain to Langley and better bus service in Surrey?

Buy a car.

[minoru_tanaka]

Yeah, so, where's my Skytrain to Langley and better bus service in Surrey?

They should build a bullet train to Langley

[mr_chin]

Umm, put a tax on transit fares... increase it or something... don't take it out on people who don't take public transit.

[hotjoint]

BUT what makes me angry though is the fact that we're ALREADY paying for a carbox tax and THAT should be going to the evergreen line. We don't need to be paying ANOTHER tax. That's the retarded part.

This is what one of the ndp critics was saying yesterday on the news. If they did this then they would have way more money to put towards the evergreen line.

[Tapioca]

Another thread on public transit and another bunch of misinformed posts.

Users should pay! Fuck Translink! Fuck the hippies! Fuck this, fuck that.

I have two cars and one sucks gas like there's no tomorrow. But you know what? I'm willing to pay more in gas taxes to fund this expansion. Driving and owning a car is a privilege, not a right. And you should pay for that privilege. I think many of you need some perspective. Public transit is good for the movement of goods and people. It's good for the economy. It's a sound investment that pays dividends for generations. Where would we be without the Expo Line? Hell, even the Canada Line (despite the shitty technology) is full most of the day. Build it and people will ride it.

I'm one of the lucky ones who works downtown and lives within a 5 minute walk of the Millenium Line, so Skytrain is absolutely wonderful for me and my needs. To those people who think Skytrain breaks down all of the time: you're idiots. It doesn't break down all of the time - it's fast and very reliable. I use it 10 times a week for 50 weeks a year. I maybe face 1 or 2 delays every couple of months and usually, they're resolved within minutes.

[gdoh]

i would like to know the bonuses and salaries of these fuckers and the annual raises

[CP.AR]

Coming back from HK just 3 days ago. I think I'm going to go back to ride some actually effective mass transit yo.

[minoru_tanaka]

I say fuck this.

Yes, motorists are the one who cause congestion, but Vancouver officials have to realize something, Skytrain, as our economy and population is not an economically viable plan. Very few percentage of population live close to the stations. Our public transportation has fundamental problems, self-sustainability.

I don't even bother to google what's the amount of ppl translink serves in a year. But I will be you NYC can do that in a month.

Lower mainland officials should spend the money to promote urban development. Develop "downtowns" outside of current centers. So people don't need to commute that far for their jobs.

And I have said many times, make our "park and ride" program better. There is not a single riders designated parking anywhere along our skytrain system that I know of. People drive for a reason... our public transportation SUCKS and don't get us anywhere except 2 or 3 transfers at least.

I agree, fuck it.

Compare Toronto, 5.5 million people vs our 2 million. We both have approx 70km of track except ours go out to the boons.
Toronto has 18 stops in downtown but we only have 6.
I'm not as familiar with Montreal but it's 3.6 million people and looking at the map most of the stations are on the island.
Not familiar with NYC either but doesn't look like their subway extends past Queens into Long Island.
I have coworkers in Chicago and the guys that live in the city don't have cars. Some of the guys don't have licenses.

Anyways mass transit works best to serve the most congested areas. If downtown is the densest area and where all the business is happening then that's where all the train service should be. If I live in Coal Harbour or the West End and want to go near the stadiums then there's possibly a 20 minute walk to the closest skytrain station. Does it make sense that someone in Surrey can just hop on a train and be at GM Place in 20mins?

If I choose to live 30 km away from downtown and want to work downtown then I should expect to have to drive. Does it make sense to spend billions of dollars shipping a few people from the suburbs while the train is useless to most people who live in the city? Want to get cars off the road? Make it so people who live in the city don't need to drive to move around the city.

No more lines going out to the suburbs and if they still want to build more lines keep them in the city.

[gdoh]

Another thread on public transit and another bunch of misinformed posts.

Users should pay! Fuck Translink! Fuck the hippies! Fuck this, fuck that.

I have two cars and one sucks gas like there's no tomorrow. But you know what? I'm willing to pay more in gas taxes to fund this expansion. Driving and owning a car is a privilege, not a right. And you should pay for that privilege. I think many of you need some perspective. Public transit is good for the movement of goods and people. It's good for the economy. It's a sound investment that pays dividends for generations. Where would we be without the Expo Line? Hell, even the Canada Line (despite the shitty technology) is full most of the day. Build it and people will ride it.

I'm one of the lucky ones who works downtown and lives within a 5 minute walk of the Millenium Line, so Skytrain is absolutely wonderful for me and my needs. To those people who think Skytrain breaks down all of the time: you're idiots. It doesn't break down all of the time - it's fast and very reliable. I use it 10 times a week for 50 weeks a year. I maybe face 1 or 2 delays every couple of months and usually, they're resolved within minutes.

its more like....we need this new thing lets see where we can put in a new tax and leave it there permanently instead of looking where the owners can put up some of their millions made each year for their own company

[Tapioca]

Coming back from HK just 3 days ago. I think I'm going to go back to ride some actually effective mass transit yo.

Gawd, I feel like banging my head against the wall when people compare apples to oranges.

You know why the MTR is such an awesome system? Because everyone in HK lives in dinky apartments. The MTR is also in the real estate business. Translink owns very little real estate. Even if Translink did, the NIMBYs would cry foul if Translink, an evil Crown and faceless entity, started developing land around their stations to fund expansions.

In North America, everyone wants to live in 3000 square foot homes. Everyone is lazy and everyone wants a car. Gas is cheap and so is insurance. People want rapid transit in very low density neighbourhoods. Does that make any sense financially?

[Tapioca]

its more like....we need this new thing lets see where we can put in a new tax and leave it there permanently instead of looking where the owners can put up some of their millions made each year for their own company

So, you're saying that because a few fat cats at Translink are making big bucks (it's all relative when you're making 30K a year), they should just forego their salaries for 10 years (honestly, they don't make much - maybe low 6 figures to manage essentially a large company) in order to pay for their pet project that no one will use?

[Mr.HappySilp]

As a regular business you don't keep invensting into something that WILL LOSE MONEY. What should be done is see what they can do to the current business and figure out how to turn it into a profit.

Keep expanding isn't the key. Transit needs to figure out why they are losing money and go from there to turn a profit. Cut wages is a good start.

[wingies]

word, i think last time i saw on a newsclip tht the top 3 people at translink had a 100% increase, 80 sth % increase, and a 70 sth% increase in wages over a year or sth. And the news is from 08, I wonder what their salaries are at now.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2008/02/08/bc-translink.html

theyre getting paid $1200 per meeting, Behind closed doors and without issuing a press release, the TransLink board approved a wage scale that pays six times more than what the previous board was being paid to do similar work.

This is the clip im talking about

http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20081114/BC_translink_pay_081114?hub=BritishColumbiaHome

[minoru_tanaka]

In North America, everyone wants to live in 3000 square foot homes. Everyone is lazy and everyone wants a car. Gas is cheap and so is insurance. People want rapid transit in very low density neighbourhoods. Does that make any sense financially?

So are you saying we shouldn't do it then?

[Oleophobic]

Another thread on public transit and another bunch of misinformed posts.

Users should pay! Fuck Translink! Fuck the hippies! Fuck this, fuck that.

I have two cars and one sucks gas like there's no tomorrow. But you know what? I'm willing to pay more in gas taxes to fund this expansion. Driving and owning a car is a privilege, not a right. And you should pay for that privilege. I think many of you need some perspective. Public transit is good for the movement of goods and people. It's good for the economy. It's a sound investment that pays dividends for generations. Where would we be without the Expo Line? Hell, even the Canada Line (despite the shitty technology) is full most of the day. Build it and people will ride it.

I'm one of the lucky ones who works downtown and lives within a 5 minute walk of the Millenium Line, so Skytrain is absolutely wonderful for me and my needs. To those people who think Skytrain breaks down all of the time: you're idiots. It doesn't break down all of the time - it's fast and very reliable. I use it 10 times a week for 50 weeks a year. I maybe face 1 or 2 delays every couple of months and usually, they're resolved within minutes.

QFT

I take the SkyTrain every working day too and Monday was definitely an exception. People who say the SkyTrain breaks down all the time are idiots.

[!Yaminashi]

BUT what makes me angry though is the fact that we're ALREADY paying for a carbox tax and THAT should be going to the evergreen line. We don't need to be paying ANOTHER tax. That's the retarded part.

What? You dont like paying a tax on the tax thats taxing the first tax?
Negro please...


:okay:

[CP.AR]

YO DOG, I HERD YOU LIKE TAXES SO I PUT A TAX ON YOUR TAX SO YOU CAN PAY WHILE YOU PAY

[jackmeister]

Translink should be a for-profit corporation.

Welcome to the real world.

[Solo_D33A]

The very last time I tried to trust the bus was when I waited for 20 mins in bus stop then walked 3 km+ down the route until I saw the bus, but I've already walked to my destination.

[1990TSI]

They should over-tax transit users to pay for our roads.

makes more sense that way

[Tapioca]

As a regular business you don't keep invensting into something that WILL LOSE MONEY. What should be done is see what they can do to the current business and figure out how to turn it into a profit.

Keep expanding isn't the key. Transit needs to figure out why they are losing money and go from there to turn a profit. Cut wages is a good start.

You do realize that so-called high paid executives form a very small part of Translink's overall salary budget? The bulk of the workforce comprises of bus drivers, service personnel, and Skytrain attendants who maybe make 60K/year. There are a few professional types involved in planning etc. who make probably 60-80K a year which is not all that unreasonable. Where would you make cuts? Would you hire some schmuck with a BA who thinks they can write 2 sentences to do planning for the region for 40K just to shave a few dollars? Would you pay a bus driver $14/hour? Moreover, would you want to drive a bus for $14/hour when I couuld make that in a liquor store as a clerk?

The population of Metro Vancouver is slowly increasing each year. No matter how you look at it, there will be a need for increased transit services. The form of those services is certainly debatable. Is your solution more cars?

Translink should be a for-profit corporation.

Welcome to the real world.

If Translink were to become a for-profit corporation, then entire municipalities in the GVRD would have no transit. It might be fine for you because you choose to drive, but others wouldn't be so lucky.

So are you saying we shouldn't do it then?

Well, what I'm saying is that you can't have your cake and eat it too.

[hk20000]

no you can't. increasing supply means nothing when there is no increased demand to meet it.

it's so stupid when people here always compare vancouver to massive asian cities with massive populations (or even any other north american city like toronto or NYC)

I mean we are going to bombard you in the face even in places where non transit users are forced to see ads, and then supplement the running cost on it.

If this was ran with Asian mentality I'm sure those pillars that run along Lansdowne Mall will be rented out for ads and those ugly faces (which the city has TO PAY TO KEEP will be removed)

The under rail belly that overlaps Lougheed will be rented out to BMW and Audi for their billboard ads.

Buses will be loaded with TVs that run ads and infomercials 24/7

The dark underground section of canada line that isn't already filled with ad will be filled with those "running ads" popular in China metro right now.
YouTube - ‪Beijing Metro‬‏

there are way to many missed opportunities out there if Translink is to whore itself out.

[minoru_tanaka]

If Translink were to become a for-profit corporation, then entire municipalities in the GVRD would have no transit. It might be fine for you because you choose to drive, but others wouldn't be so lucky.


The TTC has a history of running without government subsidies
Toronto Transit Commission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ttc#Finances)
Right now they're just subsidized by the city. But it is public transit so translink by definition it will need to be subsidized. I think people are just saying translink has taken it too far. Even the people that live there are unwilling to pay for it.

Well, what I'm saying is that you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Sorry I'm not reading into any of the posts here, that are in opposition to the tax hike, that they want the Evergreen Line. So who was that comment directed at?

[kayceeee]

Some want Evergreen Line funded by gambling revenue - News1130 (http://www.news1130.com/news/local/article/250823--some-want-evergreen-line-funded-by-gambling-revenue)


VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) - The decision to use a gas tax to fund the Evergreen Line is already so unpopular, some are suggesting gambling revenue be used to fund transit expansion instead.

The BC government already gets a big chunk of revenue from casinos, and lottery money goes to help charity and amateur sports. Some say that money could fund projects like the Evergreen Line, without hurting the taxpayer.

Douglas tells News1130 says it makes sense, especially because most drivers don't use public transit. "I think it's a very logical suggestion, I do."

BCAA agrees this latest gas tax is not a great idea, because British Columbians already pay the highest tax on gas in all of Canada.

The regional increase pf two cents per litre is expected to take effect next April

[dachinesedude]

i think the advertisment thing works

many Asian cities have ads plastered all over the train stations; the walls, beside the escalators, right across the platform, everywhere!

hard not to compare to HK or sth, cuz their system is like perfect...its friggin awesome

its not sure much that the tax is paying for the line, its more like they wanna make driving more expensive so that more people will take transit, its aint gonna happen tho!

[Mr.HappySilp]

^^ well that works in Hk becasue 95% of the population takes the bus so having ads in those places work. However I doubt it will work.

[drunkrussian]

they need to stop adding to gss prices and just tax me using another medium. i dunno why they cant just leave gas alone already >:-(
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Eff-1]

I mean we are going to bombard you in the face even in places where non transit users are forced to see ads, and then supplement the running cost on it.

If this was ran with Asian mentality I'm sure those pillars that run along Lansdowne Mall will be rented out for ads and those ugly faces (which the city has TO PAY TO KEEP will be removed)

The under rail belly that overlaps Lougheed will be rented out to BMW and Audi for their billboard ads.

Buses will be loaded with TVs that run ads and infomercials 24/7

The dark underground section of canada line that isn't already filled with ad will be filled with those "running ads" popular in China metro right now.
YouTube - ‪Beijing Metro‬‏ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yX21yHZ0hKc)

there are way to many missed opportunities out there if Translink is to whore itself out.

vancouver doesn't have the network of advertisers to support your unrealistic plan.

[spideyv2]

Another thread on public transit and another bunch of misinformed posts.

Users should pay! Fuck Translink! Fuck the hippies! Fuck this, fuck that.

I have two cars and one sucks gas like there's no tomorrow. But you know what? I'm willing to pay more in gas taxes to fund this expansion. Driving and owning a car is a privilege, not a right. And you should pay for that privilege. I think many of you need some perspective. Public transit is good for the movement of goods and people. It's good for the economy. It's a sound investment that pays dividends for generations. Where would we be without the Expo Line? Hell, even the Canada Line (despite the shitty technology) is full most of the day. Build it and people will ride it.

I'm one of the lucky ones who works downtown and lives within a 5 minute walk of the Millenium Line, so Skytrain is absolutely wonderful for me and my needs. To those people who think Skytrain breaks down all of the time: you're idiots. It doesn't break down all of the time - it's fast and very reliable. I use it 10 times a week for 50 weeks a year. I maybe face 1 or 2 delays every couple of months and usually, they're resolved within minutes.

Why do you own 2 cars when you live 5 minutes away from a skytrain station..yet alone work in downtown? Judging by your post, you make a good amount of money.

What about broke students who own a car? I know driving is a privilege and all that shit but what the fuck? It still doesn't make sense to me how people who drive cars have to help fund public transit. That's like raising bus fair in order to lower insurance or gas prices, fucking stupid.

[RFlush]

I bet the people here that are complaining about having to pay for public transport when they drive are the same people who complain tuition fees should be lowered and subsidized through taxes.

oh the irony lol

[Tapioca]

Why do you own 2 cars when you live 5 minutes away from a skytrain station..yet alone work in downtown? Judging by your post, you make a good amount of money.

What about broke students who own a car? I know driving is a privilege and all that shit but what the fuck? It still doesn't make sense to me how people who drive cars have to help fund public transit. That's like raising bus fair in order to lower insurance or gas prices, fucking stupid.

I don't make a lot of money; I consider my income very average for someone with my age, experience, and education (in fact, I work 2 jobs just to have spending money.) When you step out into the real world, I wouldn't be surprised if you made more than me once you hit my age and experience. :)

If you're a broke student, you shouldn't have a car. You should be taking transit to school. I know I did when I was a "starving" university student.

Sorry I'm not reading into any of the posts here, that are in opposition to the tax hike, that they want the Evergreen Line. So who was that comment directed at?

My comment was directed to people who claim that they don't use transit because the service sucks. To me, it's inferred that if transit was better (e.g. the Skytrain never broke down, trains out to Langley, the tri-Cities, etc.), then they could support giving Translink more money. There's a lot Translink could do to improve service and appease the public, but as I've expressed in many other threads on RS about public transit, it's frustrating to hear the same unwarranted and uninformed criticisms.

[spideyv2]

I don't make a lot of money; I consider my income very average for someone with my age, experience, and education (in fact, I work 2 jobs just to have spending money.) When you step out into the real world, I wouldn't be surprised if you made more than me once you hit my age and experience. :)

If you're a broke student, you shouldn't have a car. You should be taking transit to school. I know I did when I was a "starving" university student.



My comment was directed to people who claim that they don't use transit because the service sucks. To me, it's inferred that if transit was better (e.g. the Skytrain never broke down, trains out to Langley, the tri-Cities, etc.), then they could support giving Translink more money. There's a lot Translink could do to improve service and appease the public, but as I've expressed in many other threads on RS about public transit, it's frustrating to hear the same unwarranted and uninformed criticisms.

Btw, it's not just me that complain about the unnecessary inflation of gas prices. My dad and a lot of older people I know also don't agree with it either.

[Lamboda]

I used to think like that too "translink is bad they take so much of our money to pay for buses and skytrains and I don't see the result". However, I recently had someone inform me that translink not only maintains those, but our roads here too. When I heard about this I became more understanding. It does cost a lot of money to build a road here in vancity. Wages are high and materials are expensive. I know our roads are not in the best condition but hey, we have roads.

That said, I do dislike the fact that they are adding a tax to our gasoline but I understand that it is necessary to upkeep and invest in future projects. It's what creates jobs. My extra 'payment' of the tax helps pay for another brother or sister's transit time or their wage. Hey, it's the little things in life that matter right?

As I do dislike translink's directors taking some of the profit but who would be there to run translink? Not everyone could fill that role not everyone could lead.

For those eco-friendly guys who hate on motorists, stop eating meat. Cows emit more carbon dioxide gas than cars do. But I'm gonna enjoy it while it lasts I love driving and love eating meat.

[TypeRNammer]

Maintaining roads? What about Rupert and Kingsway?? :troll:

[goo3]

The TTC has a history of running without government subsidies
Toronto Transit Commission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ttc#Finances)
Right now they're just subsidized by the city. But it is public transit so translink by definition it will need to be subsidized. I think people are just saying translink has taken it too far. Even the people that live there are unwilling to pay for it.



Historically, the TTC recovered its operating costs from the fare box. This was especially true during the Great Depression and The Second World War, when it accumulated the considerable wealth which allowed it to expand widely after the war. It was not until the late 1950s that the newly formed Metro government was forced to provide operational subsidies, required primarily due to the TTC being required to provide bus service to the low-density suburbs in Metro Toronto.[citation needed]


That's the reason public transit loses money. Selling ads, adding gates, or cutting salaries aren't gonna make a dent. Does HK have low-density suburbs? Does Manhattan? Hell, I wouldn't call DT Vancouver high density. There is your problem.

[minoru_tanaka]

That's the reason public transit loses money. Selling ads, adding gates, or cutting salaries aren't gonna make a dent. Does HK have low-density suburbs? Does Manhattan? Hell, I wouldn't call DT Vancouver high density. There is your problem.

They do have low density areas. But you know what? They don't build subways to there. It's not a problem the Translink loses money but how work they put into trying to lose money.

If I want to go to PNE, UBC, all those offices in richmond before Westminster hwy, there's no skytrain. From downtown I think I can get to Surrey and back before I can get to UBC. Well soon I can do the same for Coquitlam. Our densest neighborhood is the West End, well there's no skytrain there. Not only do we not have service to our densest, closest area but we build skytrain to far away sparsely populated areas.

Doesn't it make sense that if you want to live far away, well it'll take you a long time to get downtown? It's ridiculous that the ppl who moved far away from the city expect ppl in the city to pay for their transportation back into the city.

In downtown Seattle the bus is free. People who commute in pay for that. We've gotta be the only city that does this backwards.

[Mananetwork]

Why can't companies like Translink using their own fucking money! They aren't a charity, they make a lot of money! 85% of it going to the board of course :troll:

[melloman]

However, I recently had someone inform me that translink not only maintains those, but our roads here too.

Mind telling me where Translink has put money into roads??

The only reason I think it's absurd that Translink is trying to put on a gas levy for funding is they already tax us enough. They have that plan still in mind of doing away with insurance, and insurance will be charged on how much you drive. (Again a stupid fucking idea to get more money in their pockets)

Tapioca: You do a lot of research on Translink or something? The "fat cats" there get bonuses and raises every year. No matter if Translink has an annual profit or not. They still make more money. And you say there's a small amount of them, sure. 20-30 people all making 6 figures+ is small, but giving them all bonuses for doing the same shit each year isn't very fair to the taxpayer.
Just wondering where your getting all your information from.. Mind clueing us in?

[Tapioca]

Tapioca: You do a lot of research on Translink or something? The "fat cats" there get bonuses and raises every year. No matter if Translink has an annual profit or not. They still make more money. And you say there's a small amount of them, sure. 20-30 people all making 6 figures+ is small, but giving them all bonuses for doing the same shit each year isn't very fair to the taxpayer.
Just wondering where your getting all your information from.. Mind clueing us in?

I don't do any research into Translink specifically, but I'm a public sector employee myself so I think I know a little bit about how public organizations work.

I'm not management myself and I don't agree with the Translink board giving themselves bonuses for their lack of performance. But, what frustrates me is that people keep looking at their salaries and become fixated on them when really, they're a small portion of overall salaries. I have an idea of what management at public sector organizations make and it's not a half-million dollars per year (with the exception of that guy at BC Ferries.) If you're a head of a department, you make at most, 200K a year. Say you have 20 of these guys (which is probably overkill at an organization like Translink) - that amounts to $4 million a year? $4 million sounds like a lot of money to you, but it's really a small amount when you look at an overall budget.

I'm an average mid-level schmuck in my organization and from my previous posts, you should have an idea of what I make. This is what I imagine the average schmuck within the Translink bureaucracy makes. The salaries I posted about bus drivers have been disclosed by the Vancouver Sun/Province, etc. multiple times over the past decade.

I'm sure people will dismiss me because I'm part of the system, but I think my perspective on the public sector holds more weight than what has been offered in this thread so far.

[melloman]

Fair enough. I'm not here to hate on people specifically, just Translinks organization in general. If turn-styles were brought in 10 years ago. I figure the Portmann Bridge could've been 100% paid for by Translink. With the millions in lost revenue from people riding Skytrains for free, it's ridiculous.

It is nice to see them finally getting to putting turn-styles into the old expo and millenium lines, yet why didn't they just start up the Canada Line with turn-styles? I understand the aspect of it being uilt last-minute and for the Olympics but still.. Bad organization.

It's jsut fustrating that motorists are being attacked the most, where most taxes should go to people using the services. Just my 0.02 cents.

[tool001]

translink employees get about 17 days off on top of vacation days -


if they are going to put a tax on gas, added property tax, to expand infra - then be it, but i dont want to be paying bounuses / paid 17 flex days/ perks???? .


just sayin.

[CP.AR]

Gawd, I feel like banging my head against the wall when people compare apples to oranges.

You know why the MTR is such an awesome system? Because everyone in HK lives in dinky apartments. The MTR is also in the real estate business. Translink owns very little real estate. Even if Translink did, the NIMBYs would cry foul if Translink, an evil Crown and faceless entity, started developing land around their stations to fund expansions.

In North America, everyone wants to live in 3000 square foot homes. Everyone is lazy and everyone wants a car. Gas is cheap and so is insurance. People want rapid transit in very low density neighbourhoods. Does that make any sense financially?

true, but it's also because they shoot for profit by minimizing their costs and managing their system effectively. Oh yeah, actually making sure people pay for their ride helps too.

What I'm trying to say is that though sure the population density is different, but it's the way that the corporation is run that makes the biggest difference. You mention real estate - yes it's a huge factor in MTR's books, and they develop around the stations to make sure people make use of the transit system (look at LOHAS Park, where MTR split the Tseung Kwun O line just to dedicate a station to them).

Remember the naming of "Aberdeen" station when they built the Canada Line? Oh god was it embarassing to see different malls call out to corruption and bribery.

Perhaps we should take Translink out of public hands and privatize it so they can stop reaching into our pockets whenever they run out of cash, and find some other investment opportunities to bring their books out of the deep.

[gars]

Perhaps we should take Translink out of public hands and privatize it so they can stop reaching into our pockets whenever they run out of cash, and find some other investment opportunities to bring their books out of the deep.

What happens if it fails? What happens if it goes bankrupt and folds? It would destroy the city. I'm not willing to take that risk.

[Tapioca]

Fair enough. I'm not here to hate on people specifically, just Translinks organization in general. If turn-styles were brought in 10 years ago. I figure the Portmann Bridge could've been 100% paid for by Translink. With the millions in lost revenue from people riding Skytrains for free, it's ridiculous.

It is nice to see them finally getting to putting turn-styles into the old expo and millenium lines, yet why didn't they just start up the Canada Line with turn-styles? I understand the aspect of it being uilt last-minute and for the Olympics but still.. Bad organization.

It's jsut fustrating that motorists are being attacked the most, where most taxes should go to people using the services. Just my 0.02 cents.

When Skytrain was built in the 80s, fare evasion was risk-managed. Turnstiles were and still are expensive and it was decided that the amount of fare evasion wouldn't be equal to the cost of installing turnstiles. People think that fare evasion is rampant, but no one actually knows. I understand that PriceWaterHouse did a study back in 2006 and they concluded that fare evasion amounts to less than 5% of overall riders. Here's some food for thought: it's going to cost over $40 million to install turnstiles.

An extra 2 cents per litre doesn't amount to much over a year - it's really an extra 1-2 bucks max per tank. If you fill up once a week, it's basically an extra 50-100 bucks. With any public program, you could argue that only users should cover the costs; to me, that's a shaky argument.

translink employees get about 17 days off on top of vacation days -


if they are going to put a tax on gas, added property tax, to expand infra - then be it, but i dont want to be paying bounuses / paid 17 flex days/ perks???? .

No public organization pays bonuses to the rank and file who form the large majority of employees. For the record, I get all of 2 flex days per year. And perks? The only perk I get is to accumulate Aeroplan points when I travel. Where are you getting this information from?



What I'm trying to say is that though sure the population density is different, but it's the way that the corporation is run that makes the biggest difference. You mention real estate - yes it's a huge factor in MTR's books, and they develop around the stations to make sure people make use of the transit system (look at LOHAS Park, where MTR split the Tseung Kwun O line just to dedicate a station to them).

Perhaps we should take Translink out of public hands and privatize it so they can stop reaching into our pockets whenever they run out of cash, and find some other investment opportunities to bring their books out of the deep.

The MTR ran deficits for years; it didn't become self-sufficient overnight. And I'm sure Hong Kong's laissez-faire attitude to zoning allows them to build without impunity.

If Translink were able to get into the real estate business, there would be much opposition. I'll cite a recent example: the City of Vancouver wanted to approve permits for a few high rises around the Marine Drive station, but opposition was in full force from residents in the area. Translink would need to build a lot of high rises in order to make itself fully self-sufficient and you can bet that NIMBYs would be out in full force.

A perfect example of what privatization would look like is the Canada Line. The project was put out for tender and look at the results: cut-and-cover construction which resulted in a class-action lawsuit, inferior rail technology, underbuilt stations, and a terrible service agreement which prevents Translink from asking the private operator to put more trains in service to meet temporary demands unless supplemental fees are paid.

[RFlush]

For fuck sakes, stop comparing the MTR to Translink.

Also, gas prices are MUCH higher in HK than it is in Vancouver, do you want to pay that price too? What about paying HK prices of parking in Vancouver?

The reason why Translink can't profit is due to low riders. People in Vancouver all enjoy driving and all want cars. I bet many of you who live within a 5 min walk from a skytrain station will STILL drive to their destination even if there is a skytrain station there as well. People feel entitled to drive and want to drive. No one wants to go on a date and use the skytrain, but people in HK do it all the time. The average person in HK can't afford a car, while in Vancouver practically everyone has one. No one in Vancouver is willing to give up driving even if Translink is free, people will still drive.

[Culverin]

Do you know how much we (the public) still owe for the millenium line and the canada line? I heard it was like close to $600 million?

[Gridlock]

There are some awesome points in this thread.

A few more that came to my mind.

Skytrain is fucking expensive technology. Think about it...you are building a 70km long bridge through the city.

On translink:

The main problem I have with crown corps like this is the lack of a bottom line. Let's say a business wants to get into the business of mass transit. They need to find a way to finance a project, and make it profitable to the shareholders. Here...shit boys..we overspent on everything else...please sir, can we have some more? Hell, we'll even give you suggestions on how to raise taxes on our behalf.

On speed:

Too fast! Milenium line in 2000, Canada line in 2010, now evergreen in 2015ish?

Need to let ridership buiild, and pay off some shit before you build more.

On unions:

I'll always add a bit how unions are sucking the life out of public ventures. The wages are so far out of comparison to private sector, you can't even compare anymore.

Fuck 'em.

[Hehe]

The reason why Translink can't profit is due to low riders. People in Vancouver all enjoy driving and all want cars. .

No, the reason we drive is because Translink system is badly planned. I live steps away from Skytrain and I take EVERY opportunity to ride the Canada line.

However, many don't have luxuries living close by. My friend who lives 5min driving away from me (Aberdeen vs. No4/Granville) but if he has to take the bus to get to skytrain, that's an extra hour commuting everyday (between walk to bus stop, wait for bus and transfer)

If he drives to skytrain, he has to add an extra $40 for parking near the station. And that would only cut 20min on daily commute (he works near the Burrad bridge, so he needs to take another bus after skytrain)

Now, if skytrain is better designed system-wise (more stations in downtown core + free park-ride parking) people would give up driving. At 1.35/L, driving isn't exactly cheap, but people have no choice.

[RFlush]

People in Vancouver don't drive to get from point A to point B, they drive because they enjoy it. This is a car forum for car enthusiast. People in Vancouver drive to UBC or SFU instead of using their Upass. People in Vancouver drive nice cars because they like it. You're only fooling yourself if you say people would give up driving if skytrain had 100 more stations. And like I said, no one is gonna go on a date and take the skytrain if they had access to a car in Vancouver.

No, the reason we drive is because Translink system is badly planned. I live steps away from Skytrain and I take EVERY opportunity to ride the Canada line.

However, many don't have luxuries living close by. My friend who lives 5min driving away from me (Aberdeen vs. No4/Granville) but if he has to take the bus to get to skytrain, that's an extra hour commuting everyday (between walk to bus stop, wait for bus and transfer)

If he drives to skytrain, he has to add an extra $40 for parking near the station. And that would only cut 20min on daily commute (he works near the Burrad bridge, so he needs to take another bus after skytrain)

Now, if skytrain is better designed system-wise (more stations in downtown core + free park-ride parking) people would give up driving. At 1.35/L, driving isn't exactly cheap, but people have no choice.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Roach]

Another thread on public transit and another bunch of misinformed posts.

Users should pay! Fuck Translink! Fuck the hippies! Fuck this, fuck that.

I think users paying for whatever they use is perfectly logical. Because I'm not a socialist, I'm misinformed?

I have two cars and one sucks gas like there's no tomorrow. But you know what? I'm willing to pay more in gas taxes to fund this expansion.

Of course you are. You don't have to commute daily in either of those vehicles. The number of vehicles you own has little to do with the amount of fuel you are consuming annually.

Driving and owning a car is a privilege, not a right. And you should pay for that privilege.

Public transit is a privilege, not a right. And you should pay for that privilege.

I think many of you need some perspective. Public transit is good for the movement of goods and people.

What kind of goods is public transit moving? I don't see any freight being transported on skytrain.

It's good for the economy.

How? Please quantify your claim.

It's a sound investment that pays dividends for generations. Where would we be without the Expo Line? Hell, even the Canada Line (despite the shitty technology) is full most of the day. Build it and people will ride it.

Hypothetical. Without Expo Line or Canada line we could have hypothetically had our road systems upgraded and more buses/HOV lanes/frequent routes on the road.

I'm one of the lucky ones who works downtown and lives within a 5 minute walk of the Millenium Line, so Skytrain is absolutely wonderful for me and my needs.

Weren't you just preaching to us about perspective? It appears yours is as skewed as ours.


In North America, everyone wants to live in 3000 square foot homes. Everyone is lazy and everyone wants a car. Gas is cheap and so is insurance. People want rapid transit in very low density neighbourhoods. Does that make any sense financially?

I don't get it. In your last post you say it's a sound investment, now you are questioning how this makes financial sense? You are contradicting yourself here.


The population of Metro Vancouver is slowly increasing each year. No matter how you look at it, there will be a need for increased transit services. The form of those services is certainly debatable. Is your solution more cars?

Better roadways? More frequent bus service? More bus-stops? Why do we automatically have to resort to a multi-hundred-million dollar train that we can't afford?

If Translink were to become a for-profit corporation, then entire municipalities in the GVRD would have no transit. It might be fine for you because you choose to drive, but others wouldn't be so lucky.

Can you quantify your claim? IMO, transit would still exist. It would be more expensive. Just as owning a vehicle has become more expensive. It's up to the user to determine whether they want to save a few bucks and go transit or not.


If you're a broke student, you shouldn't have a car. You should be taking transit to school. I know I did when I was a "starving" university student.

This isn't just a starving student situation. This is a starving family situation. In the burbs, you can't take your kids to soccer practice on the skytrain. Or as a contractor, take your ladder and tools on a bus. Some people genuinely need their vehicles and the increased taxes are eating into their budgets annually. Yet somehow they are being forced to subsidize a service they rarely, if ever use.


I'm not management myself and I don't agree with the Translink board giving themselves bonuses for their lack of performance. But, what frustrates me is that people keep looking at their salaries and become fixated on them when really, they're a small portion of overall salaries. I have an idea of what management at public sector organizations make and it's not a half-million dollars per year (with the exception of that guy at BC Ferries.) If you're a head of a department, you make at most, 200K a year. Say you have 20 of these guys (which is probably overkill at an organization like Translink) - that amounts to $4 million a year? $4 million sounds like a lot of money to you, but it's really a small amount when you look at an overall budget.


It's not about the dollar value, it's about the principle. The Translink system has been drowning for many years now with expenditures that far outpace their revenues. Yet the executive team see fit to grant raises to themselves for underperforming? They have a lot of nerve mismanaging the transit system but then celebrating with significant annual bonuses and salary increases.

When Skytrain was built in the 80s, fare evasion was risk-managed. Turnstiles were and still are expensive and it was decided that the amount of fare evasion wouldn't be equal to the cost of installing turnstiles. People think that fare evasion is rampant, but no one actually knows. I understand that PriceWaterHouse did a study back in 2006 and they concluded that fare evasion amounts to less than 5% of overall riders. Here's some food for thought: it's going to cost over $40 million to install turnstiles.

$40 million is a lot less then the hundreds of millions that the Evergreen line will cost. Here's a thought, maximize your revenue before pursuing taxation and large capital expenditures.

An extra 2 cents per litre doesn't amount to much over a year - it's really an extra 1-2 bucks max per tank. If you fill up once a week, it's basically an extra 50-100 bucks.

This is the mentality that the government wants the average citizen to buy into.

1 cent here. 2 cents there. Not a big deal right?

Just keep in mind that lower mainlanders are already paying 15c/L in local excise taxes, by far the highest in the country (most cities have ZERO). So what's 15c/L? Based on a an average vehicle doing 24,000kms a year and 10L/100km average consumption, we are talking 2400L of fuel consumed a year. 15c/L = $360/year in additional taxes. So yeah, what's 2c more a litre? Just another $50 bucks to put the average citizen at over $400 of additional tax per year over someone from the fraser valley. Not such a little deal anymore, is it?

I don't mean to come off harsh. It's good to have an alternate viewpoint so we can learn from one another and make informed votes and decisions regarding these issues. Just saw your strings of posts and I have to take some contention with them.

Kev

[goo3]

If turn-styles were brought in 10 years ago. I figure the Portmann Bridge could've been 100% paid for by Translink. With the millions in lost revenue from people riding Skytrains for free, it's ridiculous.


The sad truth is, it would have taken 10 years to pay for the turnstiles themselves. PWC estimates lost revenue to be between $5-10M per year.

http://www.translink.ca/~/media/documents/about_translink/media/2008/jul23/fareevasionpwcsept07.ashx

There's no magic bullet, so stop dreaming. This is why Translink pays for management instead of installing chumps who pull numbers from thin air. Even though you're not happy with them, we would be worse off with chumps.

[quasi]

The sad truth is, it would have taken 10 years to pay for the turnstiles themselves. PWC estimates lost revenue to be between $5-10M per year.

http://www.translink.ca/~/media/documents/about_translink/media/2008/jul23/fareevasionpwcsept07.ashx

There's no magic bullet, so stop dreaming. This is why Translink pays for management instead of installing chumps who pull numbers from thin air. Even though you're not happy with them, we would be worse off with chumps.

I don't think it would be the end all be all for money coming in but that 5-10m figure of uncollected fairs is a pipe dream. It's way higher then that they just don't want to admit it like everybody who has to answer to the public before them.

[jack3d]

i know for some people if the time it took to skytrain was as fast as driving, they would take it but theres others like me who would still drive either way.. oh well. make a system thats even faster than a car and i would take it no sweat

[JD¹³]

One word for Translink: Octopus. I don't care what the system costs to incorporate, the end result would be worth it and streamline their entire pathetic operation.

[Death2Theft]

More time would help people adjust to the idea of transit. Do we really have that much more time before gas is at 2$/L?
My neighbors are still trying to get people to attend cityhall meetings, against high density near canadaline stations. WTF?
The only way to get more transit usership is to build higher density and have netherlands style bike parking at the stations.
They should be glad some contractors are going to want to pay more for their lots to build on, take that money and f off to kelowna or something.


There are some awesome points in this thread.

A few more that came to my mind.

Skytrain is fucking expensive technology. Think about it...you are building a 70km long bridge through the city.

On translink:

The main problem I have with crown corps like this is the lack of a bottom line. Let's say a business wants to get into the business of mass transit. They need to find a way to finance a project, and make it profitable to the shareholders. Here...shit boys..we overspent on everything else...please sir, can we have some more? Hell, we'll even give you suggestions on how to raise taxes on our behalf.

On speed:

Too fast! Milenium line in 2000, Canada line in 2010, now evergreen in 2015ish?

Need to let ridership buiild, and pay off some shit before you build more.

On unions:

I'll always add a bit how unions are sucking the life out of public ventures. The wages are so far out of comparison to private sector, you can't even compare anymore.

Fuck 'em.

[drunkrussian]

they should just increase the fees in the gas stations in areas where the skytrain would serve, such as PoCo. That way, the citizens would go broke from paying for gas and would be forced to use the skytrain line when it's completed :-D

[gars]

The sad truth is, it would have taken 10 years to pay for the turnstiles themselves. PWC estimates lost revenue to be between $5-10M per year.

http://www.translink.ca/~/media/documents/about_translink/media/2008/jul23/fareevasionpwcsept07.ashx

There's no magic bullet, so stop dreaming. This is why Translink pays for management instead of installing chumps who pull numbers from thin air. Even though you're not happy with them, we would be worse off with chumps.

the $5-10 includes lost revenue on all forms of transit - including the bus. Having turnstiles doesn't automatically mean you're going to regain all that lost revenue. I lived in London for 2 years - and they have a state of the art system - yet you still see tons of people jumping the turnstiles, or fitting in more than one person through at a time. Douchebags are going to try to rip the system regardless.

Anyways, translink is moving towards a NFC system - but it takes years to plan and put into place. You can't just say, we'll install turnstiles and all our problems will be solved - because you'll have to streamline the system with our buses as well - which is the big issue there. I think the projected year is 2013 for the system to come into place.

Hindsight is always 20/20. Of course it's easy to look back and bitch and say why didn't we have this system put in place years ago.

Personally - I think that we should do what a lot of countries in Europe do. If you get caught evading fare - the fine must be paid on the spot - the officer is willing to walk to the ATM with you. If you don't pay, you get thrown in jail. Honestly, our fine system here sucks balls - most of the tickets don't get paid, and it's not economically feasible to go after each person. ICBC has it easy - because they can just stop you from renewing your licence.

[Tapioca]

Public transit is a privilege, not a right. And you should pay for that privilege.

We do pay for the privilege through fares. Public transit is far more efficient at moving people than 20 lane highways and single occupancy vehicles. Driving a car is far more of a privilege than taking public transit. My point is that you should pay more for that privilege.


What kind of goods is public transit moving? I don't see any freight being transported on skytrain.

When you take people off the roads, there's more room on our limited freeway infrastructure for trucks, freight and for people like you who need their cars for business purposes. And this has a positive impact on our economy because goods and people like you don't have to spend time in traffic with other commuters who don't need to be in cars.


Hypothetical. Without Expo Line or Canada line we could have hypothetically had our road systems upgraded and more buses/HOV lanes/frequent routes on the road.

Skytrain is expensive no doubt, but your solution is to build more highways? With anything, if you build it, they will come. If you build more highways, more people will drive and you'll have the same issues with traffic 20 years into the future. Think LA and every other city in North America that has built more highways to alleviate congestion.


Better roadways? More frequent bus service? More bus-stops? Why do we automatically have to resort to a multi-hundred-million dollar train that we can't afford?

Buses take up valuable space on existing roads. Unless you build a dedicated system of bus highways (like Ottawa), you eventually get a situation that exists on Broadway with bumper-to-bumper buses. Skytrain is expensive, but in my opinion, it's a more worthwhile investment because it has a dedicated track, no drivers (less wages to pay), it's extremely reliable (trips are on-time over 95% of the time), you can add capacity fairly quickly, and people like riding trains more than buses which generates more ridership and revenue.


This isn't just a starving student situation. This is a starving family situation. In the burbs, you can't take your kids to soccer practice on the skytrain. Or as a contractor, take your ladder and tools on a bus. Some people genuinely need their vehicles and the increased taxes are eating into their budgets annually. Yet somehow they are being forced to subsidize a service they rarely, if ever use.

It can be tough for families to take transit, I know. My perspective is skewed because I don't live in the Valley. I see families on buses and on Skytrains on this side of the Fraser. I started riding buses with my mom and sister at a very young age, so it is possible for families to make adjustments. It's a different reality in the Valley I guess because you have larger lots and longer blocks.


I don't mean to come off harsh. It's good to have an alternate viewpoint so we can learn from one another and make informed votes and decisions regarding these issues. Just saw your strings of posts and I have to take some contention with them.


No worries here.

[carisear]

I haven't been reading this whole thread, (nor any of the other 824824 brought up in the past 10 years of RS existance) but me and my buddy have talked about this subject for many, many, many years. I always was in the camp that said it should be self-sufficient; if it was run well enough, it should not need any public money at all. If i don't use it, i shouldn't need to pay for it. My friend, on the other hand, made me think completely differently when he proposed that public transit should be 100% funded through taxation, and NO money should be charged on a per-use base.

At first i laughed at him and called him a commie, but after thinking about it, it makes ALOT of sense. busses/trains should be integrated as infrastructure, such as roads.

yes, the overall cost will be higher, however the benefits will be great imo. i have no stats to back me up, but i think it's safe to say that ridership would go up, so congestion should go down. Safety would be a by-product of this as well i believe -- more people would be inclined to take public transit instead of drive when they go out to party. the easier you make things for people to use, the less excuses they have to NOT use them.

[bing]

^What qualifications, education, and credibility do you have to say that if it was run well enough, it wouldn't need ANY public money. Transit is considered an essential public/social service for people who have no other way of getting around, so it would need to be provided even at a loss. Do you know how many transit systems in the world actually run profitably? And of the few that are (I think Tokyo and Osaka, that's my assumption), most likely it is due to population density, something we DON'T have. As well, others in this thread have mentioned other transit companies (MTR) are allowed to develop properties and etc to generate cash flow for their operations, something translink might not be allowed to do.

In the end, your idea all comes down to feasibility. If we take it out of taxes, where would the funds come from? Does each person in the province, territory, region pay one fixed amount? Is the amount different for teenagers, adults, or seniors? Or per household? What about people that don't have homes (homeless)? Low income households? What about regions where transit is too inefficient to take or does not reach? Once again, this essentially becomes a tax that only certain people are going to end up paying, if the amount is "equitably distributed", most of whom would still continue driving their cars and thus were back to square 1, people frustrated they may be forced to pay a tax for a service they won't use.

With more ridership, we need more buses, drivers, and support staff. Guess we have to raise taxes, all for the benefit of less congestion. How do you calculate ridership levels at certain times so it does not turn into a logistics nightmare? How much does less congestion help our economy? Do the benefits outweigh the costs? I think we need stats.

[J____]

People in Vancouver don't drive to get from point A to point B, they drive because they enjoy it. This is a car forum for car enthusiast. People in Vancouver drive to UBC or SFU instead of using their Upass. People in Vancouver drive nice cars because they like it. You're only fooling yourself if you say people would give up driving if skytrain had 100 more stations. And like I said, no one is gonna go on a date and take the skytrain if they had access to a car in Vancouver. If I go on a date of course I drive, but you don't go on dates everyday.


Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

false. I would totally again to work if there's a station near my work. I took transit for a month and it would take me 1 hour from my door to work including walk, train, bus. Now I just drive because it only takes me 25 mins AND it's cheaper than taking transit.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[iEatClams]

I haven't been reading this whole thread, (nor any of the other 824824 brought up in the past 10 years of RS existance) but me and my buddy have talked about this subject for many, many, many years. I always was in the camp that said it should be self-sufficient; if it was run well enough, it should not need any public money at all. If i don't use it, i shouldn't need to pay for it. My friend, on the other hand, made me think completely differently when he proposed that public transit should be 100% funded through taxation, and NO money should be charged on a per-use base.

At first i laughed at him and called him a commie, but after thinking about it, it makes ALOT of sense. busses/trains should be integrated as infrastructure, such as roads.

yes, the overall cost will be higher, however the benefits will be great imo. i have no stats to back me up, but i think it's safe to say that ridership would go up, so congestion should go down. Safety would be a by-product of this as well i believe -- more people would be inclined to take public transit instead of drive when they go out to party. the easier you make things for people to use, the less excuses they have to NOT use them.

I actually went to some seminars on community planning and was also lucky enough to go to conferences on metro transportation systems. When I was younger, I thought that transit was stupid and that it should be user pay. As I get older, I found that there's a lot of shiet that the average person doesn't know and just assume.

There are tonnes of factors that go into public transit planning, but one things for sure, you have to look at the future.

It is not REASONABLE to assume that the majority of households are going to have 2 cars and be able to drive from A to B all the time. Congestion is going to increase dramatically and your average commute will increase.

I asked most of the people that I know that have to cross bridges or commute on Hwy 1 etc. most of them said they would gladly pay more to be able to use the HOV lane or have some sort of mechanism that reduces there commute time in half. Ask yourself? How much more are you willing to pay to cut your commute time in half to work. $1 a day? $ 2 a day? If the answer is yes, then that's $200 - $500 more a year. The 2 cents in tax that we pay per liter assuming 50 litres a week accounts to $52 bucks a year. A small price to pay for reduced congestion.

The Metro Vancouver population is rapidly growing, people have to get to places. Over the next 15-25 years, another 500K to 1 million people will be moving into this area.

This is a car forum, consisting of young car owners. More public transit will benefit drivers in the long run as it removes cars from the road and decrease congestion.

[iEatClams]

We do pay for the privilege through fares. Public transit is far more efficient at moving people than 20 lane highways and single occupancy vehicles. Driving a car is far more of a privilege than taking public transit. My point is that you should pay more for that privilege.



When you take people off the roads, there's more room on our limited freeway infrastructure for trucks, freight and for people like you who need their cars for business purposes. And this has a positive impact on our economy because goods and people like you don't have to spend time in traffic with other commuters who don't need to be in cars.



Skytrain is expensive no doubt, but your solution is to build more highways? With anything, if you build it, they will come. If you build more highways, more people will drive and you'll have the same issues with traffic 20 years into the future. Think LA and every other city in North America that has built more highways to alleviate congestion.



Buses take up valuable space on existing roads. Unless you build a dedicated system of bus highways (like Ottawa), you eventually get a situation that exists on Broadway with bumper-to-bumper buses. Skytrain is expensive, but in my opinion, it's a more worthwhile investment because it has a dedicated track, no drivers (less wages to pay), it's extremely reliable (trips are on-time over 95% of the time), you can add capacity fairly quickly, and people like riding trains more than buses which generates more ridership and revenue.



It can be tough for families to take transit, I know. My perspective is skewed because I don't live in the Valley. I see families on buses and on Skytrains on this side of the Fraser. I started riding buses with my mom and sister at a very young age, so it is possible for families to make adjustments. It's a different reality in the Valley I guess because you have larger lots and longer blocks.



No worries here.

+ 1 for quality post.

[JesseBlue]

false. I would totally again to work if there's a station near my work. I took transit for a month and it would take me 1 hour from my door to work including walk, train, bus. Now I just drive because it only takes me 25 mins AND it's cheaper than taking transit.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)
Sadly I agree with this...I have a station close to where I live but my work does not...takes me one hour one way versus thirty minutes taking my car...plus the fact that transit prices continue to go up as well makes my decision easier...
Also try going to the grocery with your kids using the bus and see how hard it is...

[RFlush]

I think users paying for whatever they use is perfectly logical. Because I'm not a socialist, I'm misinformed?


I am sure if you really want users to pay what they use, the price of driving would increase 1000x and not many people would be happy with that.

[Anjew]

the 2c gas tax hits 2 birds at once.

1. 2c itself as pure cash
2. more ridership from the people that are already on edge from such a high price to drive.

translink is hella evil. meter parking increase also makes more money AND discourages driving and more ridership again...... and they STILL need more money......

[goo3]

I don't think it would be the end all be all for money coming in but that 5-10m figure of uncollected fairs is a pipe dream. It's way higher then that they just don't want to admit it like everybody who has to answer to the public before them.

What do you base that off of, though? I wondering if you clicked the link. It's an audit by PwC, a big 4 accounting firm with a reputation to uphold...

Still, when you see them do fare checks on a skytrain car, they will usually catch 2 ppl out of ~40. The percentage is in the ball park in my observations. Has anyone witnessed anything substantially higher than that on average? 20% evasion with 8 ppl pulled out? 50% with 20 ppl pulled out? If not, I don't see any valid reason to doubt that report in any significant manner.

[goo3]

the $5-10 includes lost revenue on all forms of transit - including the bus. Having turnstiles doesn't automatically mean you're going to regain all that lost revenue. I lived in London for 2 years - and they have a state of the art system - yet you still see tons of people jumping the turnstiles, or fitting in more than one person through at a time. Douchebags are going to try to rip the system regardless.


Oh yeah.. it's actually just $3-5M for just SkyTrain. Annual SkyTrain revenue is $40M.

And each line cost in the billions? That's public transit.. expensive and will lose money under most circumstances.

[iEatClams]

What do you base that off of, though? I wondering if you clicked the link. It's an audit by PwC, a big 4 accounting firm with a reputation to uphold...

Still, when you see them do fare checks on a skytrain car, they will usually catch 2 ppl out of ~40. The percentage is in the ball park in my observations. Has anyone witnessed anything substantially higher than that on average? 20% evasion with 8 ppl pulled out? 50% with 20 ppl pulled out? If not, I don't see any valid reason to doubt that report in any significant manner.

After reading the report. .it boggles my mind how low the % is. LESS than 1% of evaders get tickets.

The likelihood of being caught by transit police is less than 1% for fair evaders. . . . fuck. . . I always thought it was higher.

To make it worst. Less than 10% of transit tickets issued are being paid.


They recommend to tie the penalty to other benefits/government organizations. . . . ie. ICBC/Property Tax, or something or other non-monetary inconveniences. ie. Immediate removal from property and/or A temporary ban which delays them from getting to where they want to go.

If you're a student/kid or poor and don't drive you don't give a shiet about not paying for transit.

[Tapioca]

In the end, your idea all comes down to feasibility. If we take it out of taxes, where would the funds come from? Does each person in the province, territory, region pay one fixed amount? Is the amount different for teenagers, adults, or seniors? Or per household? What about people that don't have homes (homeless)? Low income households? What about regions where transit is too inefficient to take or does not reach? Once again, this essentially becomes a tax that only certain people are going to end up paying, if the amount is "equitably distributed", most of whom would still continue driving their cars and thus were back to square 1, people frustrated they may be forced to pay a tax for a service they won't use.

Translink collects a portion of the property tax and now mayors are proposing to give them the ability to collect a portion of gas taxes. It's not perfect, but at least everyone will pay a share. Some people own property, but no cars and vice versa. Others get hit twice.

Transit expansion has an indirect positive impact on your commute. You may not be able to use it, but others will which will keep them off the roads to make it easier for you to get where you want to go.


With more ridership, we need more buses, drivers, and support staff. Guess we have to raise taxes, all for the benefit of less congestion. How do you calculate ridership levels at certain times so it does not turn into a logistics nightmare? How much does less congestion help our economy? Do the benefits outweigh the costs? I think we need stats.

That's why a driverless system like Skytrain is better over the long haul. Sure, you need a few more support staff on the ground, but it's all computer controlled and it costs less to maintain over the long term than a fleet of buses.

Translink is implementing Compass which is a smart card like Octopus, Oyster, etc. Once it's implemented, it will be able to track transit patterns in real-time so it can make better decisions with respect to planning, bus routes, etc.

[Mr.HappySilp]

Transit should also know that their hours of opertation sucks.

On weekends or Holidays the last train stops at like. 12:30am. Come on now people stays out till at least 2am clubbing lol. The night bus sucks as it comes maybe every 30mins and it covers such a small area.

Their so call zone system sucks. Pretty right now Vancouver is divded into 3 zones where u pay more if you want to use the system in all 3 zones. So say I live in between the border of the zone. Metrotown to Joyce(that's a total of 3 skystrain station) I have to pay a 2 zone ticket while if I say get on the skytrain at Production and go to Metrotown (that's like maybe 10 stations) I only have to pay 1zone.

The system is dumb and stupid. The amount each riders pay should be determine on how many stations you ride (like in HK).

BTW: I took the skytrain this morning and at boardway station they were checking for tickets lol. At least 4 ppl were caught =D

[melloman]

The sad truth is, it would have taken 10 years to pay for the turnstiles themselves. PWC estimates lost revenue to be between $5-10M per year.

http://www.translink.ca/~/media/documents/about_translink/media/2008/jul23/fareevasionpwcsept07.ashx

There's no magic bullet, so stop dreaming. This is why Translink pays for management instead of installing chumps who pull numbers from thin air. Even though you're not happy with them, we would be worse off with chumps.

So your saying we should just bend over to take the $3.4M in lost revenue each year. Accept the +$0.02/L in gas levy. Correct?

If turnstiles were installed, and it cost $40M for the turnstiles, what would our assumed lost revenue be annually? That's the real question. If made sufficient enough, and each station had 2 skytrain personalle (which they do now IIRC) then those 2 people could watch to make sure there wasn't fare evasion. Ofcourse, there willl always be fare evasion (just like car theifs) but were just trying to deter them.

[GG]

Transit should also know that their hours of opertation sucks.

On weekends or Holidays the last train stops at like. 12:30am. Come on now people stays out till at least 2am clubbing lol. The night bus sucks as it comes maybe every 30mins and it covers such a small area.

Their so call zone system sucks. Pretty right now Vancouver is divded into 3 zones where u pay more if you want to use the system in all 3 zones. So say I live in between the border of the zone. Metrotown to Joyce(that's a total of 3 skystrain station) I have to pay a 2 zone ticket while if I say get on the skytrain at Production and go to Metrotown (that's like maybe 10 stations) I only have to pay 1zone.

The system is dumb and stupid. The amount each riders pay should be determine on how many stations you ride (like in HK).

BTW: I took the skytrain this morning and at boardway station they were checking for tickets lol. At least 4 ppl were caught =D



yup its fucking retarded, in asia they charge how many stations you are traveling than you pay a x amount.


Here it can be 6 stations or 1 station, u pay the same price. WTF


Say you are traveling from metrotown to royal oak, who the fuck pays $2.50 for 1km?

SKytrains are inconsistant too, they give the newest blue ones with bigger seats, and AC included. THan there is the white one, or the ones from 20 years ago. Get rid of those 20 years junk plz

[hotjoint]

Transit should also know that their hours of opertation sucks.

On weekends or Holidays the last train stops at like. 12:30am. Come on now people stays out till at least 2am clubbing lol. The night bus sucks as it comes maybe every 30mins and it covers such a small area.

Their so call zone system sucks. Pretty right now Vancouver is divded into 3 zones where u pay more if you want to use the system in all 3 zones. So say I live in between the border of the zone. Metrotown to Joyce(that's a total of 3 skystrain station) I have to pay a 2 zone ticket while if I say get on the skytrain at Production and go to Metrotown (that's like maybe 10 stations) I only have to pay 1zone.

The system is dumb and stupid. The amount each riders pay should be determine on how many stations you ride (like in HK).


Totally agree with this.

When I was in the philippines with my gf, I was surprised how nice their skytrain was. It's a small line but you pay for the destination that you're going to, not one damn flat rate like it is here. They also have turnstyles.

[Mr.HappySilp]

yup its fucking retarded, in asia they charge how many stations you are traveling than you pay a x amount.


Here it can be 6 stations or 1 station, u pay the same price. WTF


Say you are traveling from metrotown to royal oak, who the fuck pays $2.50 for 1km?

SKytrains are inconsistant too, they give the newest blue ones with bigger seats, and AC included. THan there is the white one, or the ones from 20 years ago. Get rid of those 20 years junk plz

Lol don't post here if you know nothing.
http://www.translink.ca/~/media/images/content/fares/fare_zone_map/ctlhz_metro_vancouver_fare_zone_map.ashx

See that's how the zone are place so if you want to cross between more than 1 zone you pay for 2 or 3 zone fares. If you live at the border of one zone and needs to cross to the border of another zone, it sitll counts as a 2 zone fare (example Patterson to Joyce that's less than 3mins ride but still consider 2 zone). See how stupid and dumb the system is.

http://www.translink.ca/en/Fares-and-Passes/Fare-Zone-Map.aspx

[Volvo-brickster]

SKytrains are inconsistant too, they give the newest blue ones with bigger seats, and AC included. THan there is the white one, or the ones from 20 years ago. Get rid of those 20 years junk plz

Those old trains are a GODSEND on a hot summer day. At least you can open the windows.

I don't ride the Canada line, but on the Expo / Millenium, the new trains have A/C but it is like having someone blow hot air on you all the time.

[Tapioca]

Once Translink moves to distance-based pricing, there will be winners and losers as there are under the current zone system. People who have to commute long distances (e.g. Surrey to downtown) will likely pay more under such a system. Or I can imagine people who travel from one end of Vancouver to the end may pay more than they're currently paying. Ultimately, I think most regular users will pay more and casual users who travel short distances will end up paying less.

The original trains may seem crappy with no A/C, but they've held up really well over the past 25 years. The brand new trains have A/C, but it doesn't work all of the time and the doors seem of really poor quality (they were assembled in Mexico after all.) Just because something is new doesn't mean it's built to last. I think about how cars were manufactured in the 80s (think German or Japanese) compared to the crap that's being produced now. Things were built to last in the past, but not now.

[goo3]

So your saying we should just bend over to take the $3.4M in lost revenue each year. Accept the +$0.02/L in gas levy. Correct?


You could ask me instead of assuming. I'm just bringing you back to reality. You were in dreamland looking for an easy solution and someone to blame as illustrated here:

Fair enough. I'm not here to hate on people specifically, just Translinks organization in general. If turn-styles were brought in 10 years ago. I figure the Portmann Bridge could've been 100% paid for by Translink. With the millions in lost revenue from people riding Skytrains for free, it's ridiculous.

It is nice to see them finally getting to putting turn-styles into the old expo and millenium lines, yet why didn't they just start up the Canada Line with turn-styles? I understand the aspect of it being uilt last-minute and for the Olympics but still.. Bad organization.

It's jsut fustrating that motorists are being attacked the most, where most taxes should go to people using the services. Just my 0.02 cents.

What do I think? This is what I think:

Oh yeah.. it's actually just $3-5M for just SkyTrain. Annual SkyTrain revenue is $40M.

And each line cost in the billions? That's public transit.. expensive and will lose money under most circumstances.


================================================== =======



If turnstiles were installed, and it cost $40M for the turnstiles, what would our assumed lost revenue be annually? That's the real question. If made sufficient enough, and each station had 2 skytrain personalle (which they do now IIRC) then those 2 people could watch to make sure there wasn't fare evasion. Ofcourse, there willl always be fare evasion (just like car theifs) but were just trying to deter them.

In reality, turnstiles will cost closer to $100M for install to save, say, $40M over ten years. Not to say they aren't worth the money for tracking and being able to implement different pricing schemes, but negative $60M won't pay for a new Port Mann bridge. What it will pay for, though, is peace of mind and the perception that Translink is doing something right.

What else do I believe? I believe we get the politicians we deserve. And the only way to get better politicians to demand more of ourselves when we criticize or reward them. Another topic, but somewhat related to this thread.