[ilvtofu]

Link (http://www.translink.ca/en/About-Us/Media/2012/January/TransLink-looks-ahead-to-2012.aspx)

Sort of old news but some nice changes

As 2012 progresses, the gates themselves, with the readers to enable the Compass card, will emerge across the SkyTrain system, with preliminary testing on the card expected to begin in late fall.

In addition to providing a convenient means for customers to pre-pay their transit fares, Compass cards – which activate the faregates and card readers – will provide firm data so that planners can plan for even greater efficiency and effectiveness; they will also provide necessary information for a fare review in the longer term.


Buses – an additional 40,000 service hours will be added in April, and by year’s end, 180,000 new service hours will be in place;
More than half of these new hours will be allocated in the South of Fraser Area, including a new local service, the #531, connecting South Surrey/White Rock and Langley via 24th Avenue.

Later in the year a new B-Line service will be introduced on King George Boulevard/104th Avenue connecting Guildford, Surrey Central, Newton and White Rock Centre.

The Frequent Transit Network – in which buses run no more than 15 minutes apart, from early morning until mid-evening, seven days a week – will expand. New additions to the Frequent Transit Network include the #19 Stanley Park/Metrotown, Lonsdale Avenue in North Vancouver, the 97 B-Line and the #145 SFU/Production Station.

The 99 B-Line will see a significant increase in service in off-peak periods and on weekends.

Two of the more heavily used NightBus routes – the N19 Surrey Central and N24 Upper Lonsdale – will be expanded.
Planning is underway for additional services to address overcrowding.


A campaign to raise awareness of the Golden Ears Bridge and the real savings motorists in the area can realize in time fuel and money, even after paying a toll to cross.
Consultation on a replacement for the Pattullo Bridge.
Completion of the North Shore Area Transit Plan.


Anyone's commute seeing any upgrades?

[hypediss]

"Buses – an additional 40,000 service hours will be added in April, and by year’s end, the #531, connecting South Surrey/White Rock and Langley via 24th Avenue."

that means i dont need to walk 20 minutes to a bus stop YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

i live right at morgan crossing, once i miss the shuttle bus i would either have to wait another 30-40 minutes to get to white rock center or walk 20 minutes to the nearest BUS STOP



:sweetjesus::sweetjesus:

[Amuse]

They are looking ahead to fare increases as well.

[hypediss]

honestly i dont mind a modest increase in fare hikes instead of the bs increase in gas/property/etc tax they've been doing in the past

just doesnt make sense when u have everyone subsidizing your frivolous spending for the past years

[see.lai]

I wish this affected more. I never really discovered the 19 and I would have to taxi home from downtown back then; the 19 also leads me to 1 block away from my house. :facepalm:

[Vansterdam]

for ipod/iphone users you guys should download the itransitvan app from the app store

gives you bus routes and bus times even without wifi/internet

preety useful

[Bahhbeehhaaaa]

the more service they provide / we consume, the more we have to pay.

[Cillu]

Awesome! I frequently ride the #19 and it definitely is one of the more used buses with not enough of them on the road. Glad they found out and trying to address the issue.

[Gridlock]

A campaign to raise awareness of the Golden Ears Bridge and the real savings motorists in the area can realize in time fuel and money, even after paying a toll to cross.

If I start seeing ads saying, "drive Goldenears today!" I quit this province.

[StylinRed]

^^ hardly anyone takes it, im not surprised though $4.10 each way.... -_-

but advertising it? lol its not like ppl dont know about the bridge

[CP.AR]

Bring back the original 480 route
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Graeme S]

the more service they provide / we consume, the more we have to pay.
With the compass they'll be able to more easily track the people who use zone passes. At the moment when it comes to solid statistics the only thing they can rely on is transfers purchased/used on various busses and the reporting of drivers who pass stops while the bus is full.

Personally, I can't wait for the upgrade--more information when properly used will result in a MUCHLY improved transit system. They'd be able to track each and every person taking the bus, how often and through which hubs! With this kind of information we'd be looking at a potential complete system overhaul within 2 years!

Exciting nerdy times ahead.

[TheKingdom2000]

Why the fcuk don't they extend skytrain service on friday and saturday night from 1am to 3am?

[Firmware]

what is public transit?

[twitchyzero]

the more service they provide / we consume, the more we have to pay.

better than cutting down on service...

most of these changes gets thumbs up from me

but i agree extending skytrain by an extra 2 hours on friday and saturday night would be nice.

[MaximalLazy]

This page has been constantly updating at a good pace, check it out of you're use public transit often :)

Translink (http://m.translink.ca/)

[Majestic12]

the more service they provide / we consume, the more we have to pay.

The more service they provide, the more ridership there will be, and revenues will increase, lowering the per-rider cost of a train/bus trip....HOPEFULLY resulting in static fares.

[falcon]

Vancouver is cheap as shit for transit compared to ALL of Europe. If they install turn stiles, they also need to make ones to exit, just like the Tube in London. It's not a big hassle (I found anyways) and it keeps track of who is using what. It also then allows pay by distance usage. IE:, you only go one stop it's $1.00 vs. $3.50 etc.

When I come back to Vancouver, I am going to be taking a lot more transit. Living in Europe has made me appreciate it a lot more.

[hotjoint]

It also then allows pay by distance usage. IE:, you only go one stop it's $1.00 vs. $3.50 etc.

It was like that in the philippines as well. I don't think we'll ever have that option here sadly :okay:

[falcon]

It would defeat the purpose of turnstiles then. Because Translink will say that with turnstiles they don't need to police for tickets anymore, and people will just buy the cheapest one. It was not just London but also Rome, Barcelona, Paris and others that were like this. It's the best way to do things. IMO.

[hotjoint]

It would defeat the purpose of turnstiles then. Because Translink will say that with turnstiles they don't need to police for tickets anymore, and people will just buy the cheapest one. It was not just London but also Rome, Barcelona, Paris and others that were like this. It's the best way to do things. IMO.

the philippines system worked great. There were turnstiles that validated your ticket to get in and out of the skytrain stations. If you paid for only 1 stop and you went further, when you went to validate to get out of the skytrain station, it wouldn't let you through. Your only choice is to go back to the original station that you came from.

[s2upid]

i just recently visited bangkok and singapore and god damn their LRT systems kick our asses. i was extremely emberassed especially in bangkok, their system is easy and fair and eco-friendly.

they also use the same turnstile system to validate your ticket allowing you to enter and exit the skytrain station.

[flameboy54]

the philippines system worked great. There were turnstiles that validated your ticket to get in and out of the skytrain stations. If you paid for only 1 stop and you went further, when you went to validate to get out of the skytrain station, it wouldn't let you through. Your only choice is to go back to the original station that you came from.

Same thing in Japan - fares based on per stop basis. I have to agree that Vancouver has cheap transit though. Not the most advanced but fairly priced.

[Soundy]

^^ hardly anyone takes it, im not surprised though $4.10 each way.... -_-
So go on the website and register your plate - doesn't cost anything, and the toll becomes $3.45. If you're paying too much, it's your own stupid fault.

[PiuYi]

Bring back the original 480 route
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

scumbag translink: see's 480 filled up by second stop in richmond. changes first stop to somewhere halfway to vancouver.

[StylinRed]

So go on the website and register your plate - doesn't cost anything, and the toll becomes $3.45. If you're paying too much, it's your own stupid fault.

yeah thats a major difference.....

you seem to be missing the point that people find it too expensive... be it 3.45 each way or 4.10 each way or the transponder @ a $1 rental + toll (that's why translink is wanting to advertise it...)

[gars]

yeah thats a major difference.....

you seem to be missing the point that people find it too expensive... be it 3.45 each way or 4.10 each way or the transponder @ a $1 rental + toll (that's why translink is wanting to advertise it...)

How much do you want to pay then? would $2.50 be more reasonable?

I think $3.45 is completely reasonable.

[hotjoint]

I remember when it was 75 cents to take the bus......

[CRS]

If translink doesn't turn its skytrain network a distanced based system, it will be all for nothing.

The idea of zones were so arbitrary to begin with and the ONLY reason it existed was because we did not have turnstiles/faregates to check in where the person is travelling to. With the smartcard and faregates, this solves all those issues and being progressive, we should go to distance based rates vs. random zone patterns.

The more you use something, the more it should cost you. It isn't a new idea and now that we have the solution, we should use it.

[DsZ24]

I remember when it was 75 cents to take the bus......

high school concession fare ftw:)

[GG]

If translink doesn't turn its skytrain network a distanced based system, it will be all for nothing.

The idea of zones were so arbitrary to begin with and the ONLY reason it existed was because we did not have turnstiles/faregates to check in where the person is travelling to. With the smartcard and faregates, this solves all those issues and being progressive, we should go to distance based rates vs. random zone patterns.

The more you use something, the more it should cost you. It isn't a new idea and now that we have the solution, we should use it.

as a results riders decides to fuck the system not to pay, and guess what i dont blame them. THe random distance is completely bullshit.

Metro to royal oak station costs one zone? LMAO gtfo

[LIKEABOSS]

If translink doesn't turn its skytrain network a distanced based system, it will be all for nothing.

The idea of zones were so arbitrary to begin with and the ONLY reason it existed was because we did not have turnstiles/faregates to check in where the person is travelling to. With the smartcard and faregates, this solves all those issues and being progressive, we should go to distance based rates vs. random zone patterns.

The more you use something, the more it should cost you. It isn't a new idea and now that we have the solution, we should use it.

How do other systems track the distance travelled by users? Do they have to swipe their card once when they get on the train and then swipe again when they get to their destination?

The current system where approx 1 city = 1 zone seems pretty fair to me (and I have to pay 2 zone to get from Joyce to Metro lol [w/ only 1 stop in between]) :P

[Graeme S]

How do other systems track the distance travelled by users? Do they have to swipe their card once when they get on the train and then swipe again when they get to their destination?

The current system where approx 1 city = 1 zone seems pretty fair to me.
Bingo. And when done right, it's not a tough system.

[Ch28]

How do other systems track the distance travelled by users? Do they have to swipe their card once when they get on the train and then swipe again when they get to their destination?

The current system where approx 1 city = 1 zone seems pretty fair to me (and I have to pay 2 zone to get from Joyce to Metro lol [w/ only 1 stop in between]) :P

You pre-load your card with whatever amount of money you want on it.

You swipe your card at the turnstile before you enter the actual skytrain portion and it'll log your card as entering that station. Once you get off at your destination, you swipe it again as you leave the station and the system will subtract that amount off your card. If you have insufficient funds then the turnstiles don't open for you and you'll have to go to the nearest machine to refill the card.

If you choose to pay by cash instead of using the smart card then you go to the machine and pay a certain dollar amount. Each destination (from the current station you're at) is priced at a different amount. The closer the station, the cheaper it is.

You look up which station you want to go to and you pay that dollar amount. Once you've paid, the machine will spit out a plastic coin with a chip in it. You scan the coin at the turnstile to enter and hop onto the train. Once you get off at the station, you head to the exit and drop your plastic coin into the slot and the turnstiles will open allowing you to leave.

i.e.
metrotown -> joyce = $0.75
metrotown -> burrard = $2.25
king george -> waterfront = $5

[Firmware]

Trashlink

[falcon]

Yeah and if you have a smart card it's cheaper than pay as you go.

Zones only make sense in big cities where there are MANY lines to choose from like London or Paris. And even there, they still have a distance based system for smart card users. I was only in London for two weeks in November and I "rented" a smart card. Ended up saving a ton on the tube/bus over those two weeks VS. pay as you go.

I'm going to hate going back to Vancouver transit after this trip. They need to update the machines too to European style where you can type in the desination or search by stop and pay to that stop etc.

If you've never been to Europe/Asia it's hard to understand how this all works but trust me, it would be AMAZING if we had this system in Vancouver.

[LuHua]

Evergreen construction finally starting, wonder how that's going to affect prices.

[gars]

no one in London uses Pay as you go except for tourists. So honestly - you're technically not saving anything.

London also has a system where Zone 1 (Central London) is a lot more expensive than all the other zones. If you stay outside central london during your journey - it's very cheap, but anybody that has to go through or to central pays a lot.

You can get a monthly pass for zone 1/2 and you'll be paying £112 a month. But if you work in zone 2 and live in zone 5 - you can pay £111 a month for a zone 2/5 pass - even though you can be traveling a waaaay longer distance but because you're not going through zone 1, you're saving a lot.

I'd be happy to have people going downtown pay a premium - but I don't think other people would be very happy with that.

[Not really racist!]

Problem is.. where would we find places to replenish our cards? I mean in HK there are convenience stores right in the metro station, but for our stations only some of them have that kind of accessibility..

But I guess this is a step in the right direction

[teekaywok]

^

711, london drugs, pretty much places that they already sell bus passes. heck, they can even build a small kiosk in the station.

[Not really racist!]

^ replenishing the cards is more of an "on the go" thing

i don't think people in a rush would wanna deal with walking a distance afar.
turnstiles are supposed to make things faster, more efficient, and safe.

and if you wanna bring up the "oh keep track of the $ on ur card" argument then, well, it happens
i only see small kisosk as the only solution.

[teekaywok]

make a fare machine to refill cards? hong kong has many. They need to make another machine for checking the balance in the cards. Problem solved :D

[Not really racist!]

^ dam, i must have not been to hk in a while

correct me if im wrong, don't it show ur balance too when you hop on the bus / metro and beep your card? lol
at the end of the day i still think we're gonna be miles and miles behind HK and other places around the world

[Anjew]

its the 21st century, i'm sure you can replenish your cards online.......

even parking has paybyphone app....

[teekaywok]

^ dam, i must have not been to hk in a while

correct me if im wrong, don't it show ur balance too when you hop on the bus / metro and beep your card? lol
at the end of the day i still think we're gonna be miles and miles behind HK and other places around the world

yes it does, there is also an indicator on it, green, yellow and red, ofc green being a lot of funds, yellow is when you should refill and red as no more funds. i havent been to hk but i still keep my octopus in my walet :fullofwin:

i just wish it was Japan where my phone can open my door...

[melloman]

New transit passes usher speedy trips
By TYLER ORTON, 24 HOURS

Counting exact change or jamming a crumpled bus ticket into a card reader — banes of the busy bus passenger’s life — are set to become faded memories this spring when the new electronic fare card system launches.

Instead, it will take less than a second for riders to validate Compass cards after tapping them against card readers set to roll out the same time as SkyTrain fare gates, according to the project’s implementation manager Norm Fraser.

But the purportedly swift-acting Compass card system has at least one sluggish drawback — passengers must also swipe the card to get off the bus.

“Initially, there will be growing pains,” Fraser admitted while previewing the new technology for 24 hours.

Mobile validator devices will automatically deduct a three-zone fare from the stored-value cards when passengers get on the bus. Riders must then line up behind other departing passengers to swipe when exiting to receive money back if they travel fewer than three zones.

This means validators subtract $5 from the cards when single-zone riders get on the bus, but will reimburse them $2.50 when they get off. If someone exits without swiping, they pay the full three-zone fare.


But Fraser said validators can handle 30 to 35 swipes a minute, which should keep congestion to a minimum as people leave.

Despite the cards’ Big Brother undertone — they come complete with microchips and antennae so they can be reloaded with money and track passengers’ movements through the system — Fraser said passengers and taxpayers will benefit greatly.

TransLink will be able to determine when and where people are getting on and off buses as they swipe, allowing the transit authority to adjust services.

Fraser, a former bus driver himself, said drivers still have the final say about who gets on the bus.

“Nothing from this project takes discretion away from our drivers. They’re still the captains of their ship.”

24 Hours Vancouver (http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/News/local/2012/09/10/20185856.html)

Heard about this(bolded section) last week on the radio and thought, wow that's definitely going to piss some people off. Another one of Translinks "Trial & Error" options coming out of the dark I figure.

Any other opinions?

[ae101]

i have a octopus card & another one for guanzhou, its very simple but why does vancouver make it so hard

[tiger_handheld]

as a results riders decides to fuck the system not to pay, and guess what i dont blame them. THe random distance is completely bullshit.

Metro to royal oak station costs one zone? LMAO gtfo


You mean Metro to Patterson? Bish I can walk that in 7mins!

[tiger_handheld]

Heard about this(bolded section) last week on the radio and thought, wow that's definitely going to piss some people off. Another one of Translinks "Trial & Error" options coming out of the dark I figure.

Any other opinions?


Who was the genius that decided we need to "swipe to get off"?

If I was designing the system, I'd have users "swipe in" to get on the bus - no issues with that. BUT use RFID/NFC to auto deduct when they get off the bus!

Imagine trying to get off the bus at broadway or metrotown or any other major loop. Next thing you know, buses are going to be late even more cuz 70 people offloaded at broadway and commercial! Also think about the elderly that now need to do more shit to get off the bus with their walkers.

[yray]

^ just board, swipe when you walk by the door and sit :troll:

[ilovebacon]

3.45 is expensive! That's like using 7$ each day. Go get to work and back from work..
Posted via RS Mobile

[inv4zn]

I may be the minority here, but "swiping off" isn't as big an inconvenience as you all are making it to be. It is an ADDED inconvenience, but not a great one.

I'm not sure if it's implemented here, but in Korea it's required to "swipe off" when exiting a bus because the system knows that you've just gotten off a bus, and when you're transferring to another bus/subway, you have a 30 minute window so you don't get charged again.

For example:
10:00 get on bus
10:45 get off bus (no swipe).
11:00 get on second bus. The system sees that your last "swipe" was an hour ago, and you pay again for the second bus. But if you do swipe when you get off, it sees you were just transferring and you don't have to pay again.

[twitchyzero]

in a related article i read yesterday, i raged when i read this

TransLink blames its budget crunch on lower-than-expected gasoline tax revenues and a lack of a long-term funding source for transportation projects. Besides forcing cuts to existing services, it means TransLink can-not afford additional buses or other services in the next three years.

The transportation authority had been hoping to raise another $30 million annually through a two-year temporary property tax increase for 2013-14, but it was vetoed by the TransLink mayors' council at the last minute. A proposed fare increase was also rejected.


:rukidding: :seriously:
Carbon tax not good enough for you? worst financial mgmt for a crown corporation is an understatement

Security guards assigned to control frustrated bus riders (http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Security+guards+assigned+control+frustrated+riders/7247947/story.html)

Cole notes: some buse routes have crazy-pass ups especially at night and the last bus of the evening

instead of adding service they want to have a security guard on board to deal with 'unruly passengers' with another guard tails the bus in a car behind.

I would like to know how much more it would cost to run extra buses over paying 2 guards and their patrol vehicle

So glad I don't take transit regularly any more

[ilovebacon]

Its not a bad idea to have a bodyguard on the bus, some ppl that I saw were incredibly rude on the bus or if not you have ppl hopping on the bus without money.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Gridlock]

Global BC | Translink releases new three-year transportation plan, stalls expansion projects (http://www.globaltvbc.com/translink+releases+new+three-year+transportation+plan+stalls+expansion+projects/6442716836/story.html)

VANCOUVER – Curbing some expansion plans and aggressive cost cutting are in the future for Translink after a considerable revenue shortfall not foreseen by previous plans.

Translink says it is still committed to the Evergreen Line project scheduled for completion in 2016.

It also promises to provide 109,000 new hours of transit service.

Translink officials say there will still be room for rapid bus service on Highway 1 over the Port Mann Bridge from Langley to New Westminster, and B-line service between Newton and Guildford.

Translink is also not buckling on the upgrades envisioned for seven stations on the aging Expo Line.

But Executive Vice President of Translink Robert Paddon warns they are facing a number of fiscal challenges that are forcing them to rethink plans going forward, and reduce some of the services.

For one, Translink’s 2011 plan included additional 306,000 hours of bus service that the transit authority says it simply can’t afford.

Other victims of lower revenues include expanded SeaBus service on Sundays and holidays, Lonsdale Quay upgrade, funding for cycling programs, full Highway 1 Rapid Bus project and King George Blvd B-Line to White Rock.

“From here on in, Translink is going to be working within its means,” said Paddon. “This is going to have an impact on our customers. I don’t want to underplay that significance. A lot of people rely on our service…this will impact them, but at this point in time, we can still provide coverage, the bus will be there. We are not cutting bus services…we hope we don’t have to go there.”

He says the cuts will also affect Translink’s employees, including recovery time for bus drivers and getting rid of spare buses, which may mean delays during break-downs.

Paddon says there are a number of factors that are affecting their bottom line of $472 million in total revenue deficit.

The toll revenue from the Golden Ears Bridge is projected to be off by $38 million.

The total fare revenue is expected to be down by $108 million. Part of it comes from the decision of Translink commissioner to reject a proposed 12.5 per cent fare increase for 2013. Another portion comes from the expanded service not being put in place.

But the biggest hit comes from the loss of fuel tax revenue, which Translink predicts will be in the realm of 144 million dollars.

It says Metro Vancouver’s total fuel consumption fell considerably in recent years due to increasing gas prices and a growing number of people driving across the boarder to fill up.

On top of that, the transit authority is still missing an alternative for the $30 million revenue it was expected to get from the property tax hike, which got vetoed down by Metro Vancouver mayors earlier this year.

Translink Board Chair Nancy Olewiler says they are still in negotiations with the mayors despite their decision, at the time of which she says neither the mayors nor Translink were aware of the real extent of the fuel revenue shortfall.

“There’s new information that has come forward since then, and the mayors have that information now. We will wait and see what they wish to do. The world has evolved…, so we will see what unfolds” says Olewiler.

TransLink will be consulting with stakeholders and the public to discuss the draft plan before it is finalized by November 1 and submitted to the Transportation Commissioner for review.


Read it on Global News: Global BC | Translink releases new three-year transportation plan, stalls expansion projects

So, they are 1/2 billion in the hole. Shocker!

But they itemize the items:

Paddon says there are a number of factors that are affecting their bottom line of $472 million in total revenue deficit.

1. The toll revenue from the Golden Ears Bridge is projected to be off by $38 million.

2. The total fare revenue is expected to be down by $108 million. Part of it comes from the decision of Translink commissioner to reject a proposed 12.5 per cent fare increase for 2013. Another portion comes from the expanded service not being put in place.

3. But the biggest hit comes from the loss of fuel tax revenue, which Translink predicts will be in the realm of 144 million dollars.

4. $30 million revenue it was expected to get from the property tax hike

I personally don't think the bridges were done right. I know, I know, there is going to be a lot of people from ridge/meadows and Langley saying "but the bridge is soo convenient" yes, that's true, and its true that usage will increase once Port Mann is tolled, but I don't think the demand is there *yet* for that bridge. If you had done the Port Mann first, thus alleviating some of the bottleneck for the shorter term, THEN you could have put in the Goldenears to go forward...but thats just me.

I guess I'm saying that I believe it totally makes sense that they aren't making the expected revenue from the Goldenears. It was predicted by others.

2. Fare revenue is down, and in part blamed on the lack of a 12.5% increase. NO man...its already expensive! It used to be that a car was WAY more than a bus pass...now, not so much. Sure, driving is still expensive, and gas is more, but for those that can, you get your own car, that will take you to exactly where you want to go, without the problems associated with mass transit(ie. douchebags/bums) So a lot of people are going to choose cars over busses.

3. Fuel...you brought on yourself. Why is gas SO much more cheaper in the states? Less tax. The oil itself is a global commodity. YOU go too far, and that drive to the states becomes more worthwhile. So what do you do? Add another 2 cents in tax to compensate, making it more expensive, thus increasing the amount of people that buy elsewhere. It's a vicious circle and it doesn't work. Stop.

4. Another tax hike as the answer to the problems. Wrong. Finally, the mayors got it right on this one.

The problem with Translink is, Translink doesn't know what the problem is. That's obvious. in true fashion, a bloated, organization with too much under their control thinks money is the solution, and lack of money is the problem. Pour more in to fill the hole..stop when its full.

Operating under that philosophy is what is going to have them never meet a budget. They are used to always operating in deficit, which is obvious as transit is never even going to be a break-even operation. So it gets topped up with tax dollars. Fine.

But they've been in a building spree mode, and you can't even let one project generate a little revenue before you are off building something else. You can always find a new project that is going to always make sense and help all these people and be great for a community-but leadership is having a good plan, a responsible plan and for sticking to it. Saying no, holding off a little bit when you need to.

And I can't always blame Translink, because they are a political tool like any other. They get handed a politicians plan for "we want a bridge...here" and have to go with it at that point.

I'd like to see them have a reasonable budget, do what they can to cut costs where possible and move forward on high impact projects for the region, not community specific.

Yes. I'm hating on the Evergreen line. Again.

[Tapioca]

in a related article i read yesterday, i raged when i read this



:rukidding: :seriously:
Carbon tax not good enough for you? worst financial mgmt for a crown corporation is an understatement

Security guards assigned to control frustrated bus riders (http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Security+guards+assigned+control+frustrated+riders/7247947/story.html)

Cole notes: some buse routes have crazy-pass ups especially at night and the last bus of the evening

instead of adding service they want to have a security guard on board to deal with 'unruly passengers' with another guard tails the bus in a car behind.

I would like to know how much more it would cost to run extra buses over paying 2 guards and their patrol vehicle

So glad I don't take transit regularly any more

The carbon tax doesn't go to Translink - it goes into general revenue for the province. The cities have lobbying the province to have those revenues directed back to cities for initiatives like public transit, but the Liberals won't budge.

Transit security gets paid about $30/hour. It may cost more to run a bus considering the driver, diesel, and wear and tear.

Transit is definitely an issue that gets people riled up. In my experience, transit is quite good - I take Skytrain and my commute is about a half-hour each way. One thing that upsets me as a supporter of public transit is that there's so much mis-information and ignorance about the issue. To be fair, Translink is definitely not the most well-run organization, but to compare it against more established and more well-funded systems in the world is simply ludicrous.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Gridlock]

Technically, the carbon tax is supposed to go back to the people of the province.

[Vansterdam]

lol translink.

they get all that extra $ from all those taxes yet they still say they are under a deficit

i read the union wants more $ and are striking soon

also heard they are cutting 50,000 hours total on all bus routes cause they cant afford it

+ they have to hire security for late night buses since they are getting jammed packed full of people and have to skip some stops.. seriously? they cant just add more buses? WTF

what a joke lol

on top of that they are continuing on with the evergreen line.


transit was preety reliable at times but in 2013 it will prob be better to drive in most circumstances

[Tapioca]

lol translink.

they get all that extra $ from all those taxes yet they still say they are under a deficit



Such as? Translink is funded by small fees from property taxes, your Hydro bill, some investments and fares. That's it. The only option Translink really has is to sell some of its land and the merits of that are highly debatable.


+ they have to hire security for late night buses since they are getting jammed packed full of people and have to skip some stops.. seriously? they cant just add more buses? WTF

Rumour has it that a bus costs about $100/hour to operate. A transit security guard makes $60K/year. Do the math.


on top of that they are continuing on with the evergreen line.

The Evergreen Line has been in regional transit plans for over 20 years. It's about time the Tri-Cities got something.


transit was preety reliable at times but in 2013 it will prob be better to drive in most circumstances

If you live in the Valley, driving is of course better. But, you can easily get around Vancouver and Burnaby using transit.

[JesseBlue]

here's a thought...maybe start charging 50-75 cents per crossing on the golden ears bridge...collect it when renewing insurance or licence...at least it will be used...lol..

[zonda_s]

Imagine trying to get off the bus at broadway or metrotown or any other major loop. Next thing you know, buses are going to be late even more cuz 70 people offloaded at broadway and commercial! Also think about the elderly that now need to do more shit to get off the bus with their walkers.

i could see "swipe in" and "swipe off" working. but you do bring up a valid point in regards to major loops. most (if not all) major loops are terminus stations for buses. in that case, it's possible to make it so that you don't have to "swipe off" at the terminus station. the system would automatically "swipe off" for you.

[Vansterdam]

i agree transit is good if you live in vancouver/burnaby but it sucks during peak-hours such morning/rushhour/evenings or when people really need it.

alot of times buses are often late or so packed that they tend to skip certain stops

sometimes you show up 5-10 minutes early for a stop and there will be no bus and then 20-30 minutes later there would be 2 showing up at the same time

which fucks alot of people over.

i stay away from the 49 bus that shit is so bad.

the old electric trolley line system sucks and they need to have more 99-bline style buses if possible on certain routes but that would require new bus lanes.


wait until winter time to see how fucked up the system will get lol

in 2013 i will only take transit if i ever need to go downtown or plan on partying/drinking for the night. otherwise it would save me alot of time and bs by just driving

forgot to mention anyone in the vancouver area who takes transit regularly should look into getting a CAR2GO.. http://www.car2go.com/vancouver/en/

[tiger_handheld]

Transit vs Driving

Start: Guilford, Surrey
End: Nelson @ Hamilton - downtown

Driving:
Leave home at 8:15
Arrive at destination by 9:30
Duration: 1hr 15mins
Distance: 33km
Parking: 10.75/all day
Fuel Economy: 10L/100km
Fuel Cost: $3.30

Transit:
Walk to bus stop, take bus, get on train, transfer at granville to canada line, walk to work - Total duration 1hr:10mins
Buss fare: $10 (3 zone)


I value my comfort more than $3.30 :)

[Eff-1]

Such as? Translink is funded by small fees from property taxes, your Hydro bill, some investments and fares. That's it.


Property taxes aren't exactly "small fees" for Translink, it is one of their leading revenue sources.

There is also fuel tax, parking tax, plus contributions from the provincial and federal government (which let's face it, comes indirectly from other taxes).

In addition to those taxes, there is fare revenue, toll revenues, interest income, and AirCare revenues.

[Santofu]

I wonder if Translink did an experiment doing this before purchasing the god damn fucking ticket machines.

I'm kinda confused at this point when people are required to swipe when leaving the bus.

[Eff-1]

Swiping on exiting the bus is not a big deal. Many places around the world already do this.

Having experienced a similar system myself, I found the convenience of having an exact fare deducted from a cash card much outweighs the minor inconvenience of swiping a card on the way out.

I would bet this is just a poorly written article. Why would one "tap" to get on but then have to "swipe" to get off. I would assuming they are RFID cards and that you tap to get on and tap to get off. Removing the card from your wallet or purse may not even be necessary.

Yes it will take a small amount of time for people to get used to it but there are so many other transit-related things to complain about besides this.

[urrh]

whats the point of swiping off? to charge based on distance traveled? if that's the case, whats to stop people from swiping early...

[Lomac]

While I'm not a fan of transit, some of you are adding up the total costs of a day's worth of transit travelling by adding in multiple three-zone passes. Unless you're seriously dumb enough to constantly pay $5 passes for every time, at least two times a day, then you start need to looking at the other fare options Translink offers. Y'know, day passes ($9 for an entire day), fare savers ($4.20/3 zone trip) or a monthly pass ($151 for unlimited trips).

And even if you're forced to pay for two separate $5 tickets, a round trip costs less than what someone on minimum wage makes in an hour. I'm pretty confident most of us can easily afford that on a daily basis, should the need arise.

[Mr.HappySilp]

lol when the ever green line is done expect huge line ups at Lougheed station, brentwood station, Rupert and expect tons and tons of wait time at Boardway station during rush hour.

Is already bad enough as it is (sometimes if you are unlucky you have to wait a few skytrains at Boardway). Now cope with an 30% increase passenger and BAM people will be waiting even longer. Not to mention if something goes wrong expect at least 40mins delays.

The ever green line is needed for sure but I bet you translink will fuck it up and cause major issue.

[Great68]

If translink doesn't turn its skytrain network a distanced based system, it will be all for nothing.

The idea of zones were so arbitrary to begin with and the ONLY reason it existed was because we did not have turnstiles/faregates to check in where the person is travelling to. With the smartcard and faregates, this solves all those issues and being progressive, we should go to distance based rates vs. random zone patterns.

The more you use something, the more it should cost you. It isn't a new idea and now that we have the solution, we should use it.

I agree, the zone system is crap. Here in Victoria the ENTIRE Greater Victoria region is a single zone. It's kind of ridiculous that someone can ride from Sooke to Sidney (57kms) for the same price that it takes my wife and I to bus downtown from our house (3km).

A cab ride is only $10 for us to downtown, the bus is $5. I consider it more cost effective to cab, getting a quicker, direct ride without needing to be amongst with all the smelly weirdos or drunks is worth that extra $5.

[ae101]

Who was the genius that decided we need to "swipe to get off"?

If I was designing the system, I'd have users "swipe in" to get on the bus - no issues with that. BUT use RFID/NFC to auto deduct when they get off the bus!

Imagine trying to get off the bus at broadway or metrotown or any other major loop. Next thing you know, buses are going to be late even more cuz 70 people offloaded at broadway and commercial! Also think about the elderly that now need to do more shit to get off the bus with their walkers.

its funny how in HK & china, they use the exact same system u just mentioned but i guess it too hard for them to understand

[MindBomber]

Who was the genius that decided we need to "swipe to get off"?

If I was designing the system, I'd have users "swipe in" to get on the bus - no issues with that. BUT use RFID/NFC to auto deduct when they get off the bus!

Imagine trying to get off the bus at broadway or metrotown or any other major loop. Next thing you know, buses are going to be late even more cuz 70 people offloaded at broadway and commercial! Also think about the elderly that now need to do more shit to get off the bus with their walkers.

My initial impression upon reading that riders will need to swipe departing the vehicle was the same as yours, but as I mentally pictured the line of riders swiping cards and stepping off the bus it didn't seem quite so bad. Only one or two riders are slowly getting off at a time anyway, so I don't think this will slow things down to much; only time will tell I suppose.


TransLink to charge at all park-and-rides

Free parking will end at TransLink park-and-ride lots as the authority moves to pull in more cash.

Most lots already charged, but the shift to all pay parking will come as a shock to motorists who use the 10 free lots, such as the South Surrey park-and-ride.

Other free park-and-rides include lots in Ladner and Tsawwassen in Delta; Walnut Grove in Langley; Sexsmith in Richmond; Phibbs exchange, Park Royal mall, Westmount and Gleneagles on the North Shore.

It may also mean users of the new 650-space Carvolth park-and-ride in Langley will also have to shell out to park there to take the new Highway 1 Rapid Bus.

Provincial government officials said just last week there was no plan to charge motorists there but added it would be TransLink's decision after Victoria hands over the nearly finished park-and-ride.

A minimum of $2 a day will be charged, according to TransLink's new draft 2013 plan, which was unveiled Monday.

"Prices will vary depending on the local markets," TransLink vice-president Bob Paddon said Monday. "It will bring us much needed revenues."

TransLink projects it will raise $2.2 million by charging at the free lots and raising the prices at some of the pay lots.

The South Surrey park-and-ride is already heavily overcrowded, which led TransLink this year to start towing incorrectly parked vehicles.

Paddon said imposing pay parking should give motorists much better odds of finding a space at crowded lots in the future.

The hope is that more drivers who use park and rides will simply leave their cars at home and catch feeder buses nearby to avoid the parking fees.

TransLink plans to develop more park and rides in the future, including ones to serve the Evergreen Line in Port Moody and Coquitlam.

About 3,500 of the 4,300 park-and-ride spaces TransLink controls are already pay parking.
Langley Times - TransLink to charge at all park-and-rides (http://www.langleytimes.com/news/170113976.html)

I'm not sure how I feel about charging at park-and-rides overall, but if 3,500 of the 4,300 spaces already have a small daily fee it makes sense to tighten things up.


TransLink suspends improvements to Langley communities

Metro Vancouver’s once-cohesive approach to transit funding is unravelling rapidly in the wake of TransLink’s announcement Tuesday that it is immediately suspending major transit improvements for the southern suburbs.

Mayors from the two Langley municipalities say their residents are getting shafted by the Translink decision after years of paying for transit in other parts of the region with property taxes and now a new gas-tax increase.

Political process makes for a slow commute
TransLink suspends improvements to Langley communities
Mayors, TransLink grapple with $45-million transit question
“For years, the residents in the eastern part of the region have been supporting those in the west with their tax dollars,” said Township of Langley Mayor Jack Froese. “They feel all they do here is pay for the Evergreen Line with their gas taxes. To take away the funding now, it’s unacceptable. This is just playing politics. I’m extremely disappointed.”

The TransLink announcement follows a vote by the region’s 21 mayors – the two from Langley and Mayor Wayne Baldwin in White Rock opposed the move – to call for the cancellation of parts of the three-year plan. They’ve been unable to get the provincial government to agree on some form of alternative funding for the project. Last week’s vote, however, was considered informal and doesn’t legally cancel the plan.

Mr. Froese said families in Langley have bought housing near the park-and-ride lot being constructed to mesh with the planned new Highway 1 rapid bus, one of several pieces of TransLink’s three-year supplementary plan that is now being put on hold until the agency is certain is has the money to pay for them. Now those residents will be left in the lurch, he said.

The Highway 1 rapid bus was supposed to start when the new Port Mann bridge opened some time within the next year. The bridge in the $3.3-billion project includes special rapid-bus lanes, which the province’s website boasts will help get commuters from Langley to Burnaby in 25 minutes.

Other pieces of the plan that TransLink CEO Ian Jarvis said would be frozen include a rapid bus along King George Boulevard in Surrey, most of the additional 615,000 hours of service that was being planned, much of it for south of the Fraser River, extra SeaBus service on evenings and weekends, and planned upgrades to several stations.

“We don’t have [certainty]of revenue at this particular time,” said Mr. Jarvis. “We have put expansion and upgrade plans on hold.”

But Langley city Mayor Peter Fassbender also said he believes it’s unacceptable for Mr. Jarvis to make a unilateral decision to suspend the projects, without a formal vote by the mayors to revise the three-year plan.

The mayors had originally agreed to pay for the plan, which included the Evergreen Line, by approving a two-cent gas-tax increase for the Evergreen and a temporary property-tax increase for the other improvements. They did this in the hope the province would agree to replace that second tax with some other form of funding.

However, the mayors did not actually rescind that original plan, which is a legal document.

“My understanding of the legal opinion is that it has to come back for a legal vote to make a change. I’m going to ask my colleagues to put their names on the line and tell Langley residents that they’re against those projects moving ahead,” said Mr. Fassbender. “I put my name on the line for the two cents of gas tax for the Evergreen. “

He and Mr. Froese said that mayors who supported that plan originally voted for it knowing that they might not be able to work out an agreement with the province on an alternative funding source in time for 2013.

Now that that might be a reality, they’re not willing to stick to their positions, they said.

The TransLink announcement Wednesday is just the latest in a rolling series of setbacks and squabbles that have beset the organization since the start of 2012.

It hasn’t been able to get an agreement from the province about an alternative, like a regional carbon tax or vehicle levy, to pay for additional services. The province’s transportation commissioner last week denied TransLink’s application to raise fares more than the normally allowable amount to pay for the existing service level. And mayors are at odds with each other on a number of fronts.TransLink suspends improvements to Langley communities - The Globe and Mail (http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/bc-politics/translink-suspends-improvements-to-langley-communities/article2405229/?service=mobile)


I'm furious about the potential cancellation of the rapid-bus route.

If the rapid-bus goes into place, it will be a game changer for transit in the Valley. No longer will a long bus ride meandering through Surrey be necessary to access the Skytrain or cross the river by transit. A direct, fast, and very practical link would finally exist. Translink it strapped for cash though, so it might be canceled. My answer to that, cut a couple Vancouver routes to make room in the budget, because this will have a much more significant impact to an area that has been paying up and receiving little in exchange for decades.

Fuck. Why even spend $54 million dollars building the new park-and-ride if the rapid-bus route is cancelled.

[Graeme S]

I think for me the only issue with the 'swipe to get off' thing is charging for three zones automatically.

Let's say I get on the 99, which goes from broadway and commercial to UBC. That's all in one zone. So you're telling me that every bus no matter which zones it does or doesn't travel through will charge three zones? That seems off to me.

I mean, I get chargins "as many zones as the bus travels through", that just makes sense. I get on the 135 in Burnaby to go DT. I usually get off at Granville and Hastings. But then, so does about half the bus, generally. That means that as everyone gets off they'll be tapping to make sure they get that dollar refund despite the fact that the bus only goes through two zones.


...seems a bit odd.

[Tapioca]

Property taxes aren't exactly "small fees" for Translink, it is one of their leading revenue sources.

There is also fuel tax, parking tax, plus contributions from the provincial and federal government (which let's face it, comes indirectly from other taxes).

In addition to those taxes, there is fare revenue, toll revenues, interest income, and AirCare revenues.

The shares of revenue from parking and fuel taxes are declining - people are filling up south of the border or in Abbotsford and people are modifying their shopping/commuting habits in order to avoid parking fees.

I don't pay all that much on my property taxes for Translink. I could stomach an increase if it meant better services. The source of revenue that makes the most sense is a vehicle levy, but no one has the balls to implement one.

Posted via RS Mobile

[Lomac]

I think for me the only issue with the 'swipe to get off' thing is charging for three zones automatically.

Let's say I get on the 99, which goes from broadway and commercial to UBC. That's all in one zone. So you're telling me that every bus no matter which zones it does or doesn't travel through will charge three zones? That seems off to me.

I mean, I get chargins "as many zones as the bus travels through", that just makes sense. I get on the 135 in Burnaby to go DT. I usually get off at Granville and Hastings. But then, so does about half the bus, generally. That means that as everyone gets off they'll be tapping to make sure they get that dollar refund despite the fact that the bus only goes through two zones.


...seems a bit odd.


I'm not sure how the system works (or will work), but I imagine specific buses don't stay on one route throughout it's service life. Chances are it's probably easier to set up each bus the same way and charge accordingly than to reset the system in each bus every time it changes its service route.

[GLOW]

I wonder if Translink did an experiment doing this before purchasing the god damn fucking ticket machines.

I'm kinda confused at this point when people are required to swipe when leaving the bus.

i feel there is a strong relation with your avatar to this thread when i read this thread.

:pokerface:

[Tapioca]

Some people think Peter Ladner is a crock, but IMHO, his editorial from the latest edition of Business in Vancouver (what? a publication that companies and financiers subscribe to) does a good job of explaining what's wrong with transit in Metro Vancouver:


Politicians need to support transit tipping point“TransLink is politically unaccountable” really means “I don’t want to pay for someone else’s transit”

By Peter Ladner
Tue Sep 18, 2012 12:01am PST

When will we reach the tipping point where it will be considered safe for a political leader to authorize sustainable funding for public transit? Or will we ever reach that point again?

For now, many are convinced we’re not there, hence the mania for auditing TransLink, as though that will miraculously yield enough bus loaves and fishes to feed transit to the multitudes. It’s not going to happen. Neither the new three-year plan that will save $47 million a year and boost revenues by $60 million nor a miracle reversal of gas tax revenue declines will stop the slow strangulation our transit system is currently experiencing without new investment.

TransLink needs to be more efficient. It needs to be policed by people who aren’t double-dipping. It needs to regain trust with voters. But after all that, it’s still going to need new funding to properly maintain, service and upgrade transportation infrastructure in Metro Vancouver.

Much of the public chatter about TransLink reminds me of the joke about what men really mean when talking to women.

“What kind of work do you do?” really means “I want to go to bed with you.” “Do you like hiking?” really means “I want to go to bed with you.” “You look terrific” really means “I want to go to bed with you.”

According to Langley-based Jordan Bateman of the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation (what is that, anyway?), most people think transit is a good idea for their friends and neighbours but not for them, so they don’t want to pay for it.

That’s the message that caused Premier Christy Clark to kick aside, without any consultation or negotiation, a painfully crafted proposal to approve a vehicle levy to keep transit moving and improving.

Here’s what I think is really going on: “We need to wait and see TransLink run more efficiently” really means “I don’t want to pay for someone else’s transit.”

“TransLink is politically unaccountable” really means “I don’t want to pay for someone else’s transit.”

“We’re being taxed to death” really means “I don’t want to pay for someone else’s transit.”

“We have to wait until the economy recovers before investing in more rapid transit” really means “I don’t want to pay for someone else’s transit.”

So the question becomes: When does “someone else’s transit” become “my transit, my way of getting around,” or something that benefits me – not just my friends and neighbours? When will enough voters view transit as being in their interest?

The evidence shows that the time is coming soon. Metro Vancouver ridership has jumped from 130 million trips a year in 2000 to 233 million last year. Higher costs of fuel are pushing people to look for more affordable and convenient ways to get around. Developers are clamouring for transit to development sites because those units served by frequent transit are selling faster and at higher prices than car-dependent sites.

Gen X and Y adults are buying fewer cars than their parents. Car trips into the city of Vancouver have been declining for the past 10 years. Proof that car-dependent suburbs create fat sick kids is now indisputable. The productivity possibilities on wifi-connected buses and trains are now well-known. The pressure to make this region more affordable to employees who need frequent and late-night transit is mounting. Students who are waiting two hours to get on buses out of UBC are rightfully pissed.

At some point, the political winds are going to change direction. They may already have, but no provincial politician has the guts to test them. Until someone does, this region will slowly choke on congestion, pass-ups and lost economic opportunities as bus routes continue to be curtailed, buses sold and new projects frozen.

Politicians need to support transit tipping point | Peter Ladner | Business in Vancouver (http://www.biv.com/article/20120918/BIV0319/309189921/politicians-need-to-support-transit-tipping-point)

[tonyzoomzoom]

Transit users should pay for using the transit - not property owners, not BC Hydro customers, not car owners, etc.

[tiger_handheld]

Some people think Peter Ladner is a crock, but IMHO, his editorial from the latest edition of Business in Vancouver (what? a publication that companies and financiers subscribe to) does a good job of explaining what's wrong with transit in Metro Vancouver:


So he is saying we ALL share the cost of transit to build, maintain, and service the the system. great. how does he propose we do that? he seems to be in favor of a vehicle levy. ok great -add a couple hundred extra to my icbc insurance every year and let me pay it monthly - i wont feel so hard pressed.

what kind of guarantee will i get as a driver that after 18months, i can reduce the dependency on my car take the bus. translink has too much red tape and bs for it to have a clear plan and milestones that are SMART. until translink can give a solid value proposition to everyone it'll just be lipstick on a pig.

[MindBomber]

Transit users should pay for using the transit - not property owners, not BC Hydro customers, not car owners, etc.

A self-funding transit system is not sustainable in Greater Vancouver; Translink could be the most efficient transit authority on the planet and that fact would remain unchanged. Only in a few select cities with extremely high population densities is a self-funding transit system possible, and not a single Canadian city fits that profile. As a citizen of a first world country, you will inevitably always help fund services you don't necessarily use, this is just one example. Get used to it.

So he is saying we ALL share the cost of transit to build, maintain, and service the the system. great. how does he propose we do that? he seems to be in favor of a vehicle levy. ok great -add a couple hundred extra to my icbc insurance every year and let me pay it monthly - i wont feel so hard pressed.

what kind of guarantee will i get as a driver that after 18months, i can reduce the dependency on my car take the bus. translink has too much red tape and bs for it to have a clear plan and milestones that are SMART. until translink can give a solid value proposition to everyone it'll just be lipstick on a pig.

Your post exemplifies, why you, as a resident of Surrey who commutes to Vancouver, are in somewhat tough position with transit levies for system upgrades. You commute to the city with the most established transit network in the GVRD, via one of the most well established transit routes, from a city with a well established network. Even if a vehicle levy were to be attached to your annual insurance payment, you would personally experience borderline no improvement, because there's simply not that much room for it. However, if you lived in Richmond, you would have relatively recently had your city connected to the Canada line. If you lived in PoCo, PoMo, or Maple Ridge, you could look forward to Evergreen line and the substantial improvements it offers. I am looking forward to the Rapid-bus line (I have faith it will still happen) in the near future. Big picture, our transit system has grown and improved monumentally in recent years. It just usually doesn't improve our connection to it, even when we're the ones paying. I do get what you're saying, and where you're coming from though; it would be great for a more clear plan to exist, and there's definitely room for improvement at the upper tiers of Translink.

Transit vs Driving

Start: Guilford, Surrey
End: Nelson @ Hamilton - downtown

Driving:
Leave home at 8:15
Arrive at destination by 9:30
Duration: 1hr 15mins
Distance: 33km
Parking: 10.75/all day
Fuel Economy: 10L/100km
Fuel Cost: $3.30

Transit:
Walk to bus stop, take bus, get on train, transfer at granville to canada line, walk to work - Total duration 1hr:10mins
Buss fare: $10 (3 zone)


I value my comfort more than $3.30 :)

It's a bit more than $3.30, you're not factoring wear and tear on your vehicle ;)

I know you're deliberately not being overly specific though.

I would be stoked to have transit as an option with a slight time savings, and slight cost savings for my commute. The biggest benefit being that I would rather relax and zone out or read than drive in busy traffic, but we're all different.

[jing]

Property taxes aren't exactly "small fees" for Translink, it is one of their leading revenue sources.

There is also fuel tax, parking tax, plus contributions from the provincial and federal government (which let's face it, comes indirectly from other taxes).

In addition to those taxes, there is fare revenue, toll revenues, interest income, and AirCare revenues.

Aircare is a revenue neutral program. Translink doesn't see a dime of it.

[Tapioca]

Transit users should pay for using the transit - not property owners, not BC Hydro customers, not car owners, etc.

Did you not read the article?

Everyone benefits from increased public transit - whether it's because there's less cars on the road so you can get to work, or you decide to take it.

If I wasn't a car owner, then I would be inclined to say that my taxes shouldn't subsidize car owners (because they do.) Every bridge and highway into every municipality should be tolled.


what kind of guarantee will i get as a driver that after 18months, i can reduce the dependency on my car take the bus. translink has too much red tape and bs for it to have a clear plan and milestones that are SMART. until translink can give a solid value proposition to everyone it'll just be lipstick on a pig.

"Red tape" is a phrase that's thrown around an awful lot. Define red tape:
- Executive salaries - even if they were slashed 50% (say to $70-100K) per year, the savings would be a drop in the bucket
- The mayor's board - it's the only structure that we, the citizens, have to keep Translink somewhat accountable
- Transit police - I could definitely get on-board with this one
- Bus drivers - cut the unions, hire drivers back at half salaries and no benefits. Sure, but what types of people would you get driving a bus for $15/hour?
- Hand transit back to the Province, where it belongs - I would be on the fence about this one. Translink is an arms-length body and it is still the victim of politicking. Sure, you might save some on salaries (after all, BC public servants are among the lowest paid in the country), but you definitely won't get decisions that are less manipulated politically (unless, we have a future leader like the 'Zalm who rammed things down our throats for our own good - see the Expo Line.)
- Faregates (!) - they're coming, F-F-S
- Dismantle the system and let each municipality run its own system (to hell with that enviro-facist Gregor!) - :lol. Ever use different systems in Toronto?

[Soundy]

When they were first discussing a 2c/l gas tax to help fund the Evergreen Line, I remember hearing one woman phone in to the radio, saying she lived in Surrey and didn't want to have to pay for "people on that side of the river" to get transit that she "would never use anyway"...

And I thought, "people on THIS side of the river have been paying for YOUR SkyTrain line for 20+ years. So STFU."

[tiger_handheld]

"Red tape" is a phrase that's thrown around an awful lot. Define red tape:
- Executive salaries - even if they were slashed 50% (say to $70-100K) per year, the savings would be a drop in the bucket
- The mayor's board - it's the only structure that we, the citizens, have to keep Translink somewhat accountable
- Transit police - I could definitely get on-board with this one
- Bus drivers - cut the unions, hire drivers back at half salaries and no benefits. Sure, but what types of people would you get driving a bus for $15/hour?
- Hand transit back to the Province, where it belongs - I would be on the fence about this one. Translink is an arms-length body and it is still the victim of politicking. Sure, you might save some on salaries (after all, BC public servants are among the lowest paid in the country), but you definitely won't get decisions that are less manipulated politically (unless, we have a future leader like the 'Zalm who rammed things down our throats for our own good - see the Expo Line.)
- Faregates (!) - they're coming, F-F-S
- Dismantle the system and let each municipality run its own system (to hell with that enviro-facist Gregor!) - :lol. Ever use different systems in Toronto?

By "red tape" I meant all the "consulting" that goes back and forth and then plans are drawn up, then the project is put on hold because of funding and then it's restarted then plans are made again costing more money. There was a post by someone here, that their firm did some consulting for translink (iirc it was about evergreen line) and they did it twice.

Salaries / unions - I have no issues. Keep it reasonable. It's a tough job to be a bus driver but it's not a $35/hr job (maybe there needs to different wages for different shifts Costco/Longshorman style). I dont know much about the operational level hierarchy, but i'm sure like any crown funded by tax $ there is a lot of fat.

All the other crap - I agree. Anyone know when the fare gates will be working?

[Tapioca]

By "red tape" I meant all the "consulting" that goes back and forth and then plans are drawn up, then the project is put on hold because of funding and then it's restarted then plans are made again costing more money. There was a post by someone here, that their firm did some consulting for translink (iirc it was about evergreen line) and they did it twice.

Salaries / unions - I have no issues. Keep it reasonable. It's a tough job to be a bus driver but it's not a $35/hr job (maybe there needs to different wages for different shifts Costco/Longshorman style). I dont know much about the operational level hierarchy, but i'm sure like any crown funded by tax $ there is a lot of fat.

All the other crap - I agree. Anyone know when the fare gates will be working?

Consultations are part of my daily work and unfortunately, they are a necessary evil when it comes to public projects. You need buy-in from interested parties because if you don't, someone will complain. Public projects differ in that you can't just vote with your dollars and sell your stock or buy from another company - once a decision is made, you have to live with it for a long time.

There is definitely fat to trim, but trimming fat is not a panacea. The problems are larger: attitudes, political, city design, etc. Think about the most innovative and dynamic companies in the private sector - they don't get to the top because they only cut costs.
Posted via RS Mobile

[MindBomber]

Salaries / unions - I have no issues. Keep it reasonable. It's a tough job to be a bus driver but it's not a $35/hr job (maybe there needs to different wages for different shifts Costco/Longshorman style). I dont know much about the operational level hierarchy, but i'm sure like any crown funded by tax $ there is a lot of fat.

All the other crap - I agree. Anyone know when the fare gates will be working?

Realistically, $35/hr is not especially high.

A moderately experienced class 1 driver earns an average of $23-25/hr working in the city, and that is a much less strenuous, and less demanding position. $10/hr more for the added responsibility, stress and risk associated with dealing with disorderly passengers, more demanding driving, and so on, actually seems pretty fair.

If I were looking for that type of work and offered a position as a bus driver, I would turn it down without hesitation because of what it entails.

[inv4zn]

TransLink audit finds $41M in savings - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/10/16/bc-translink-audit.html)

:facepalm:

tl;dr
- Translink conducts its own audit, finds $98 MILLION in ineffeciencies it plans to address.
- Provincial govt' launches own surprise audit
- Finds an ADDITIONAL $41M in ineffeciencies, for a total of almost $140 million dollars in money it could have saved it smart decisions were made.

Anybody remember Translink proposing to the mayors to raise property taxes, so they can find $30 million for the Evergreen?

Fuck this company.

[yray]

^ Taj Mahal at metrotown needs renovating :troll:

[Glove]

increase the cost of fair, gst, gas, tolls, ect ect...

dont fucking increase the cost of my property tax or my hydro, things I cant avoid.

[MindBomber]

TransLink audit finds $41M in savings - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/10/16/bc-translink-audit.html)

:facepalm:

tl;dr
- Translink conducts its own audit, finds $98 MILLION in ineffeciencies it plans to address.
- Provincial govt' launches own surprise audit
- Finds an ADDITIONAL $41M in ineffeciencies, for a total of almost $140 million dollars in money it could have saved it smart decisions were made.

Anybody remember Translink proposing to the mayors to raise property taxes, so they can find $30 million for the Evergreen?

Fuck this company.

Are the details of the audit public, does anyone know where we could find them?

[Yodamaster]

Still not running Skytrains 24/7. :rukidding:

[Tapioca]

Are the details of the audit public, does anyone know where we could find them?

The audit is here: http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/publications/reports_and_studies/Review_of_Translink.pdf

The fact that Mary Polak downplayed the findings of the audit (I.e. Solving transit issues in Metro Vancouver is not just about cutting costs) says to me that this audit was primarily for political purposes.

The audit was particularly critical of the management of the bus system (routes and union salaries and absenteeism) and on Translink's risk-averse management of its budgeting and assets.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Tapioca]

Still not running Skytrains 24/7. :rukidding:

The audit was highly critical of Translink's responsiveness to demands for increased service even if they don't make economic sense. The audit suggested that Translink cut bus service on seldom used routes and cut off-peak service on Skytrain.

But hey, kids these days just have to whine and cry louder in order to get what they want, right?
Posted via RS Mobile

[twitchyzero]

TransLink audit finds $41M in savings - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/10/16/bc-translink-audit.html)

:facepalm:

tl;dr
- Translink conducts its own audit, finds $98 MILLION in ineffeciencies it plans to address.
- Provincial govt' launches own surprise audit
- Finds an ADDITIONAL $41M in ineffeciencies, for a total of almost $140 million dollars in money it could have saved it smart decisions were made.

Anybody remember Translink proposing to the mayors to raise property taxes, so they can find $30 million for the Evergreen?

Fuck this company.

:lawl:

[Lomac]

Still not running Skytrains 24/7. :rukidding:

Find me a city the size and population of Vancouver/Surrey that has a skytrain/subway system running 24/7 first...

[GLOW]

TransLink audit finds $41M in savings - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/10/16/bc-translink-audit.html)

:facepalm:

tl;dr
- Translink conducts its own audit, finds $98 MILLION in ineffeciencies it plans to address.
- Provincial govt' launches own surprise audit
- Finds an ADDITIONAL $41M in ineffeciencies, for a total of almost $140 million dollars in money it could have saved it smart decisions were made.

Anybody remember Translink proposing to the mayors to raise property taxes, so they can find $30 million for the Evergreen?

Fuck this company.

http://instntrply.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Pryz1.gif

[mikemhg]

And this is my friend is the exact reason when someone tells you "Well we need to pay these executives in Crown Companies big bucks or else we won't be able to attract them from the Private Sector", you tell them to go suck a fat cock.

[tonyzoomzoom]

they all had to do that to land that executive job ;)

I didn't read the audit or find out what the efficiencies are, but I'm willing to bet a bunch it is not even real $ - just depreciate the assets over a longer period of time. So just more accounting trickery.

[drunkrussian]

someone just fire everyone and start over for gods sakes
Posted via RS Mobile

[Graeme S]

I'm reading through the report and it's highly interesting. The executive summary is only four pages, and it gives an overview of what they found. I dislike the vagueness of things like "increase efficiency and effectiveness", which just sounds like bullshit, so I'm reading through the report.

Full report is 61 pages, but it's a very interesting read so far. And yes, it has pictures too, so y'all can see that.

[MindBomber]

Agreed, it's a very interesting read; not especially time consuming.

For those of you who want a very brief summary of the audit, I took screen caps of Appendix A and B.


http://s9.postimage.org/y9bfks233/Translink_1_12.png

http://s15.postimage.org/d0dv55017/Translink_13_17.png

http://s11.postimage.org/nsl60eyg3/Translink_18_27.png

http://s10.postimage.org/h0cdeql3t/Trankslink_Appendix.png

The report doesn't show tragically poor mismanagement:

Overtime hours decreased 29% overall between 2007-2011 (pg.47)

Executive team has decreased from 34 members in 2009 to 17 members currently, resulting in a 31% savings in compensation. (pg.44)

CMBC has maintained growth in the hourly cost of service at the rate of inflation.

Translink's real estate portfolio has a net book value of approximately $528 million but a much higher actual value. The management plan is becoming more sophisticated and strategic with a focus of maximizing revenue. Translink is rezoning surplus properties prior to sale to increase value. (pg.15)

Some interesting points:

Total operating expenditures were $1.36 Billion in 2011 (57% higher than 2007), however the report finds this spending reasonable in relation to service expansion.

Translink maintains a $500 million LOC, which it paid $400,000 to maintain in 2011 and $225,000 in 2012; it has never accessed these funds.

Translink manages an asset portfolio valued in excess of $10 billion.

Replacement of all 500 CMBC diesel buses with CNG would generate an annual savings of $12.7 million, BUT it would cost $70 million resulting in a 5-6 years payback period. (pg.26)

Definite inefficiencies:

HandyDart costs are 18% higher than the Canadian average. A restructuring of the service to include a greater utilization supplemental taxi services could save $1 million. (pg.27)

Since 2007 CMBC's fleet maintenance staffing level has increased by 30%, this is due to a significant hiring upswing to reflect increased service levels during the Olympics. Post-Olympics however, the staffing levels were never decreased to reflect the current needs. A 10% reduction in fleet maintenance would save $3.7 million. (pg.27)

Driver absenteeism costs $12.1 million per year; the average driver takes 14 sick days per year.

Better management of driver scheduling to increase split shifts could save up to $1 million per year.

8 of the 22 lowest performing routes are still operated using conventional buses, a conversion to community shuttles would save $500,000 per year without service reduction. (pg.22)

Reducing frequency of Skytrain service during non-peak hours could save $1.57 million. (pg.18)

[Graeme S]

So what the audit says a lot of is, "Translink and [insert group here] should work to find a better way to do [insert issue here]", while slapping numbers on potential changes.

One of the things that the report criticizes is Translink's method of putting busses on routes based on projected future ridership rather than current ridership. Given that translink really only adjusts busses once a year, this doesn't seem that weird to me. I mean, why would you want to add busses only when you're driving past people who want to get on the bus?

Another is Translink's fiscal conservancy. The report says that if Translink were a little less cautious, they could either save more money or "budget more accurately" (translink typically operates with a budget surplus annually because they are cautious with investments and whatnot). Personally, I think fiscal conservancy is a good thing. Unfortunately, people tend to think that it isn't...until shit goes south, at which point everyone gets angry that the organization wasn't more conservative.

Fiscally conservative and run surpluses? Wasteful. Embrace risk and get bitten? Wasteful.

Heads you lose, tails I win.

[Yodamaster]

Find me a city the size and population of Vancouver/Surrey that has a skytrain/subway system running 24/7 first...

The real question is why a city the size of Vancouver doesn't have a subway system running 24/7.

The fact that it's a tourist city (read: drunk people) multiplies the urgency of that question ten fold.

[Graeme S]

The real question is why a city the size of Vancouver doesn't have a subway system running 24/7.

The fact that it's a tourist city (read: drunk people) multiplies the urgency of that question ten fold.
Even New York doesn't run 24/7 on all their lines. Tell me why Vancouver should.

[CRS]

The real question is why a city the size of Vancouver doesn't have a subway system running 24/7.

The fact that it's a tourist city (read: drunk people) multiplies the urgency of that question ten fold.

It's simple. Our population density and demand doesn't justify the cost.

Like Graeme adds, if NY doesn't do it and their density is HUGE compared to ours, we have no real reason to either.

And as for a tourist city? What about the likes of Paris? They don't have a 24 hour metro either.

[twitchyzero]

Even New York doesn't run 24/7. Tell me why Vancouver should.

'cause cab fares here :fuckthatshit:

Let's have Manhattan/Vegas rates here :troll:

[Graeme S]

'cause cab fares here :fuckthatshit:

Can't disagree with you there. If it cost me less than $30ish to get home from DT (which it does now) then I might be tempted to cab home more often. As it stands...no.

[Yodamaster]

Even New York doesn't run 24/7. Tell me why Vancouver should.

I'm fairly sure that people asked the same question when prompted with the possibility of a space program.

While it is not the space program, the lack of service elsewhere does not make service here any less important or worthwhile.

You're forgetting that cabs are expensive, if transit ran throughout the night, a lot of people would resort to taking transit over cabs, offsetting the costs associated with running them all night due to the increased volume of riders.

Now, I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I do see a lot of people taking cabs after 1AM.

[inv4zn]

I'm fairly sure that people asked the same question when prompted with the possibility of a space program.

While it is not the space program, the lack of service elsewhere does not make service here any less important or worthwhile.

You're forgetting that cabs are expensive, if transit ran throughout the night, a lot of people would resort to taking transit over cabs, offsetting the costs associated with running them all night due to the increased volume of riders.

Now, I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I do see a lot of people taking cabs after 1AM.

:facepalm: at space analogy.

First of all, for the general population (yes, there are people who are not between 18 and 38), getting drunk people home safely after midnight isn't a high priority. If you want to get shitfaced with your friends, get a designated driver. Or use that program where they take you home in your own car.

Do you have any idea of the astronomical costs associated with running the entire skytrain system an extra hour? Two? So everyone should pay for the benefit of the small amount of people who can't go home "conveniently", even though they chose to put themselves in that position? :fuckthatshit:

[Graeme S]

I'm fairly sure that people asked the same question when prompted with the possibility of a space program.

While it is not the space program, the lack of service elsewhere does not make service here any less important or worthwhile.

You're forgetting that cabs are expensive, if transit ran throughout the night, a lot of people would resort to taking transit over cabs, offsetting the costs associated with running them all night due to the increased volume of riders.

Now, I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I do see a lot of people taking cabs after 1AM.
I'm not forgetting that at all if you'll look a single post up. But two things
A) The skytrain is not a fucking space program. It is not an ambitious multibillion (trillion?) dollar program designed to do something that has never been done before in the name of great scientific advances. It's a way to get from A to B. There are several alternatives, and if worst REALLY came to worst, I could walk home from downtown. Sure, it'd be about 16 kilometres...but that's the fucking seawall. People walk that for fun. And yes, I realize that not everybody lives "as close" to DT as I do...but if you're going drinking, make a fucking plan. It's not like all our options aren't out in front of us.

B) Expensive cab fares are a completely different problem from 24/7 transit. You think that making skytrain run 24/7 will make cabs cheaper? Or that there's really a shadowy secret Taxi Lobby keeping Translink from operating 24/7? No. The simple fact is that taxi drivers are charging the provincial maximum, and would rather take fares at that price rather than lower their prices.

Honestly, I think taxi services would face a great boon if they operated in the opposite of transit--cut fares during Translink peak time and raise them during off times. They'd most likely get more customers....but like I said. Taxi fares are a completely different beast than the skytrain. While it's good to look at "completely systemic transit infrastructure", we're talking Translink. And Translink doesn't control taxi fares.

-edit-
Also, just wanted to add. After the skytrain is done, there are plenty of Night busses that run parallel to the skytrain lines, or that run to the main stations: N9 Coquitlam station(3:09), N10 Richmond(4:09), N19 Surrey Central(3:30), N24 Upper Lonsdale(3:25). And the numbers in brackets are when they leave DT. Most transit resumes at 5AM or so (6ish on a Sunday), so really we're looking at about 2-3 hours of downtime tops.

[MindBomber]

I don't view a proposal for 24/7 Skytrain service being feasible.

What I suggest may be feasible is running a single train from downtown thirty minutes after last call Friday and Saturday night, or possibly Friday, Saturday, and after Canucks games. That gives bar goers enough time to drink until they would ideally like to leave and walk to a train without rushing, and possibly enough time for some bar staff to reach the train. I think my proposal would have at least a possibility of being financially feasible. Although, I also don't think the current night bus system is terrible; I used it when drinking till 3am was still my cup of tea, no issues.

[Yodamaster]

While it is not the space program, the lack of service elsewhere does not make service here any less important or worthwhile.



A) The skytrain is not a fucking space program.


Irritated me a bit.

People can take whatever stance they want, I don't even drink, I just feel that an intoxicated man/woman would rather spend $2.50 for a ride on the skytrain than a $30 cab fare, the other option right now is driving.

Do I want to pay for it running that long? Not really.

Do I want to pay for someone else's poor planning? Not really.

But if it's a way of preventing people from choosing cars over transit, it's a price I'm willing to pay. I believe in prevention, and the skytrain stopping at 1am makes me feel that extra bit uneasy.

[inv4zn]

^That train ride would most likely be very loud, full of puke and blood on the ground, and generally very unpleasant lol

[Graeme S]

Irritated me a bit.

People can take whatever stance they want, I don't even drink, I just feel that an intoxicated man/woman would rather spend $2.50 for a ride on the skytrain than a $30 cab fare, the other option right now is driving.

Do I want to pay for it running that long? Not really.

Do I want to pay for someone else's poor planning? Not really.

But if it's a way of preventing people from choosing cars over transit, it's a price I'm willing to pay. I believe in prevention, and the skytrain stopping at 1am makes me feel that extra bit uneasy.
And people focusing on the lack of skytrain service exclusively simply fail to realize the variety of options when it comes to getting home.

Nightbus
Taxi
DD
Walk the fuck home
Leave early

Yes, I agree, having drunk drivers on the road sucks. But Skytrain is not the be-all end-all of transportation. Just listen to all the RSers that bitch "The skytrain isn't anywhere near me why do I have to pay." and so on and so forth.



Also, while I was down in Seattle last week, I noticed that on their meters, they let you park until 10AM the next day friday/saturday night. Why? So you can get smashed, get home, then come back the next mornign when you're not drunk to pick up your car. Now THAT is smart.

[mikemhg]

Even New York doesn't run 24/7. Tell me why Vancouver should.

Okay, honestly this stupid arugment needs to stop here. I almost wonder if some posters here work for Translink.

Many of the NY Subway system trains run 24/7 or run late hours:

MTA/New York City Transit Subway Line Information (http://www.mta.info/nyct/service/nline.htm)

There is no reason why Translink cannot modifty the skytrain times to run later on Friday and Saturday evenings, and I don't even ride the damn thing.

[Lomac]

Okay, honestly this stupid arugment needs to stop here. I almost wonder if some posters here work for Translink.

Many of the NY Subway system trains run 24/7 or run late hours:

MTA/New York City Transit Subway Line Information (http://www.mta.info/nyct/service/nline.htm)

There is no reason why Translink cannot modifty the skytrain times to run later on Friday and Saturday evenings, and I don't even ride the damn thing.

I actually forgot that. Shows how much time I actually spend on the Subway when I'm over there... :lol

To be fair, though, the only reason why it works in New York is because they have so many lines and routes that they can shut down the majority of the rail lines to perform maintenance and not have it impact their night service as it's diverted to other tracks. Unfortunately that wont work here because we really only have one track service 99% of the areas.

[Graeme S]

Indeed, many thanks Mike. While I was touristing in New York (admittedly for less than two weeks), I noted that even on Fridays and Saturdays many of the subway stations near where I was or was staying were closing around 1 or 2. But like Lomac says...bit different.

[Soundy]

To be fair, though, the only reason why it works in New York is because they have so many lines and routes that they can shut down the majority of the rail lines to perform maintenance and not have it impact their night service as it's diverted to other tracks. Unfortunately that wont work here because we really only have one track service 99% of the areas.

And this is the folly of constantly comparing our transportation system here to other cities: few other cities are similar to Vancouver's geography. Seattle may be the closest to our layout of water bodies and mountains, but their LRT setup is almost non-existent compared to SkyTrain, and the Sounder Train just runs routes between major centers, similar to the Westcoast Express.

I've seen people point to Calgary's surface light rail system, for example - problem with that is, compared to here, Calgary is FLAT - light rail works a lot better. There are a couple relatively narrow rivers to cross, but nothing like bridging the Fraser, Burrard Inlet, etc.

This thread is comparing our system to New York's, but as noted, their routes have a lot of redundancy that allow sections to be closed for maintenance while keeping the system running.

[inv4zn]

Anybody remember when buses use to have those tear-away tickets?

Admittedly, I was way too young to know anything back then, but Translink wasn't in this big of a mess back then.

Just like everything else in this city, they did not plan for the future. This city's infrastructure and everything associated is filled to the brim, and we are now starting to see the results.

PACKED buses that can't take on any passengers during busy times. One of the worst congested roads in North America. Tax on a gas tax with some more gas tax, to pay along with your gas tax. 5 bloody bridges, in a city that can very well use 20.

Even the construction that's going on now, not just the Highway 1, but all the ongoing projects and lane widenings, should have been done 10 years ago. The work that's being done now will be sufficient for now, 5-10-20 years later? same story again.

It's so fucking simple. Create a long-term plan, and set realistic budgets. Collect the needed revenue in a reasonable manner, that isn't going to upset the entire province (re: HST). Use said money appropriately, and while doing so, plant a POSITIVE image in the voter's minds, so that we don't feel like the government is robbing from us and everything they do is wrong.

If politicians, and in turn, the population, got their heads out of their asses and worked collectively, we wouldn't have these messes. This also should have been done 10 years ago.

And in a related rant, to those who keep saying "this doesn't relate to me, I don't care", fuck you. You live in this city, and even though you may be too ignorant to realize it, everything is related. You're just as bad as the ones who don't vote because "it isn't going to matter."

/rant

[tgill]

Anybody remember when buses use to have those tear-away tickets?

Admittedly, I was way too young to know anything back then, but Translink wasn't in this big of a mess back then.

Just like everything else in this city, they did not plan for the future. This city's infrastructure and everything associated is filled to the brim, and we are now starting to see the results.

PACKED buses that can't take on any passengers during busy times. One of the worst congested roads in North America. Tax on a gas tax with some more gas tax, to pay along with your gas tax. 5 bloody bridges, in a city that can very well use 20.

Even the construction that's going on now, not just the Highway 1, but all the ongoing projects and lane widenings, should have been done 10 years ago. The work that's being done now will be sufficient for now, 5-10-20 years later? same story again.

It's so fucking simple. Create a long-term plan, and set realistic budgets. Collect the needed revenue in a reasonable manner, that isn't going to upset the entire province (re: HST). Use said money appropriately, and while doing so, plant a POSITIVE image in the voter's minds, so that we don't feel like the government is robbing from us and everything they do is wrong.

If politicians, and in turn, the population, got their heads out of their asses and worked collectively, we wouldn't have these messes. This also should have been done 10 years ago.

And in a related rant, to those who keep saying "this doesn't relate to me, I don't care", fuck you. You live in this city, and even though you may be too ignorant to realize it, everything is related. You're just as bad as the ones who don't vote because "it isn't going to matter."

/rant
I don't think its transportation planners that lacked foresight, like you said its the politicians with their heads up their asses.

Translink did not exist until 1998, around the time the tear tickets were replaced, when Translink was created by the province it took on much more responsibility than the organization it replaced (BC Transit).

Skytrain for the most part (Millennium and Expo) was designed for the future, see the length of the platform versus the length of trains (ignoring the poor design of station flow), the location of the stations, etc... Metrotown was nothing back then, Joyce was nothing, Brentwood, Renfrew Business park, Lougheed.

Now thats ignoring the serious lack of development around 29th, Nanaimo, Edmonds, Rupert, and many stations surrounded by single family homes, but in general nothing to do with Translink.

The concept of the Canada Line was the planned in the 80s, but killed with successive provincial governments.

The concept of the Evergreen and UBC Line were planned extensions of the existing Millennium Line, but again killed by successive provincial governments.

P3 development of Canada Line to minimum specs, politicians must love being able to say the Canada Line has exceeded ridership.

Its the same old shit with the Province's Highway 1 upgrades, other than the Port Mann and the Cape Horn interchange, the systems is being designed mickey-mouse. Look at the elimination of the Grandview Highway interchange from the plans, or the inadequate length of on-ramps.

[Matsuda]

Just read this, scumbag Translink

The city of Delta is in the middle of a fight with Translink over parking. The transport authority wants to start charging drivers to use the park-and-ride lots in Delta.

But the mayor says the plan is an insult on a couple of different levels.

First, the city is under-served by Translink, and secondly, the people of Delta actually donated the land the parking lots sit on.

Translink’s park-and-ride facility adjacent to the South Delta Rec Centre is free parking, as it is at the larger Ladner exchange, but Translink wants to charge at all its 13 park-and-ride lots across Metro Vancouver.

Translink faces a unique problem in Delta.

The city has no pay parking, no meters on the street, no pay parking at the hospital, no pay parking at all, anywhere.

In Delta, free parking is the law.

“We put a bylaw together that said we will not be charging for parking in Delta, we will not have any meters in Delta,” says city mayor Lois Jackson. “And it started because of the hospital.”

Keeping the hospital parking free was the start, and it's prevented this phenomenon from invading the south of the Fraser community, and while Translink says it may need the money, Delta says for them, free parking is a matter of principle.

“We have terrible bus service on this side of the river, and the further away you are, the more it costs,” says Jackson. “The answer is no, just no. And by the way, we would like to get more for our money, not less for our money. I am really hoping that sound reason will prevail in this one.”

Translink says they are aware of the bylaw here in Delta, and they intend to respect it.

[Gridlock]

Im gonna tell you, that driving the new higway to the bridge, that i dont think they solved a single problem for our 3 billion. The new highway has 2 lanes and an hov lane leading up to tne bridge, west bound. Bottleneck. Oh, there are plenty of lanes everywhere else, but with a designed bottleneck. So, we will be back at this again.

I don't think its transportation planners that lacked foresight, like you said its the politicians with their heads up their asses.

Translink did not exist until 1998, around the time the tear tickets were replaced, when Translink was created by the province it took on much more responsibility than the organization it replaced (BC Transit).

Skytrain for the most part (Millennium and Expo) was designed for the future, see the length of the platform versus the length of trains (ignoring the poor design of station flow), the location of the stations, etc... Metrotown was nothing back then, Joyce was nothing, Brentwood, Renfrew Business park, Lougheed.

Now thats ignoring the serious lack of development around 29th, Nanaimo, Edmonds, Rupert, and many stations surrounded by single family homes, but in general nothing to do with Translink.

The concept of the Canada Line was the planned in the 80s, but killed with successive provincial governments.

The concept of the Evergreen and UBC Line were planned extensions of the existing Millennium Line, but again killed by successive provincial governments.

P3 development of Canada Line to minimum specs, politicians must love being able to say the Canada Line has exceeded ridership.

Its the same old shit with the Province's Highway 1 upgrades, other than the Port Mann and the Cape Horn interchange, the systems is being designed mickey-mouse. Look at the elimination of the Grandview Highway interchange from the plans, or the inadequate length of on-ramps.

[MindBomber]

Just read this, scumbag Translink

The public scream, reduce the transit subsidy paid by drivers!

Translink responds, instituting pay parking at all it's park-and-ride facilities, making those using a service foot the bill.

The public scream, it's unfair that you're making people pay to use a service!

It seems an impasse has been reached.

The only way a criticism might be fair is if Translink did not agree to respect the Delta bylaw.

[Soundy]

Im gonna tell you, that driving the new higway to the bridge, that i dont think they solved a single problem for our 3 billion. The new highway has 2 lanes and an hov lane leading up to tne bridge, west bound. Bottleneck. Oh, there are plenty of lanes everywhere else, but with a designed bottleneck. So, we will be back at this again.
Two points:

One, it's not finished. You don't know how the lane structures will change by then. In fact, wasn't it you bitching in the bridge thread that there would only be seven or eight lanes total on the new bridge and why didn't they make it more? (There WILL be TEN, BTW).

Two: the bridge itself was always the bottleneck... well, not a bottleneck so much as a speed bump: I sat at the top oh Johnson Hill one evening, waiting for a photo, and watched it happen: red tail lights moving smoothly, if a bit slowly, westbound, until ONE pussy clown hit the bottom of the dip - you know, where you go onto the bridge, then you get the bottom of a dip AND a curve all in one, and people panic - jammed on his brakes... and literally a WAVE of bright red flowed up the hill as everyone behind braked as well... and it never recovered. I was there for almost a half hour after that, and it just remained a dead crawl for the rest of that time. It just took that ONE GUY.

So... IF you end up with three lanes feeding into a five-lane bridge, that's still a big improvement, because while it may be a slight bottleneck, at least you'll soon be able to empty that bottleneck a lot smoother.

Edit: in fact, the artist rendering indicates AT LEAST three lanes + HOV on the approach:

http://www.pmh1project.com/Project%20Renderings%20Gallery/20071001%20Artist%20Rendering%20-%20156%20Street%20Transit%20HOV%20Ramps.JPG

Edit2: in fact, here you go: there WILL be full five lanes leading onto the bridge: http://www.pmh1project.com/Design%20Drawings%2020120207/COMM%20-%20dwg%20-%20Detailed%20Design%20Drawing%20152%20Street%20In terchange%20-%2020120207.pdf

152 Street Interchange
• Two new lanes in each direction on Highway 1.
• New four‐lane overpass at 152 Street, providing access to Highway 1
westbound. From 152 Street northbound, traffic reaching the 152 Street
overpass will choose either the local-connection lanes across the Port
Mann Bridge that will connect Coquitlam and Surrey, or through-traffic
lanes that will provide access to Brunette Avenue and points west.

[Soundy]

The public scream, reduce the transit subsidy paid by drivers!

Translink responds, instituting pay parking at all it's park-and-ride facilities, making those using a service foot the bill.

The public scream, it's unfair that you're making people pay to use a service!

It seems an impasse has been reached.

The only way a criticism might be fair is if Translink did not agree to respect the Delta bylaw.

My thinking exactly. I mean, I'm all for free park-and-rides to encourage more transit use... but this statement just sounds silly: "we would like to get more for our money, not less for our money." Wait, you're just talking about NOT letting Translink collect any more money in your town... so you want more for less?

It's a chicken-and-egg scenario - you're glad to pay more, IF you have better service, but to GET better service, you have to pay more...

[melloman]

It's okay guys. Translink will just add another tax to our gas now. :rukidding:

[inv4zn]

They're increasing fares again.

http://buzzer.translink.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/fareincrease.jpg

Jesus, $170 for a 3-zone month pass. That's 2 grand if you need one for a year!!

[CRS]

Why are we still using zones when we have faregates installed and are set to go online?

*Edit:
Just read they will be operational in the fall of 2013.

[inv4zn]

They'll spend $20 million doing overseas studies and focus groups and computer simulations based on cities completely irrelevant to ours, and then change it 10 years later, all the while complaining about lack of money. /s

[Graeme S]

Why are we still using zones when we have faregates installed and are set to go online?

*Edit:
Just read they will be operational in the fall of 2013.
Because they're not online yet, and because it's going to take at least a year of use for Translink to get the appropriate data to figure out how much to charge and in what manner.

Are they going to charge a 'get on the bus/into the station' fee + stops? What if I take the #9 down Broadway instead of the 99--the 9 makes a million more stops than the 99, so does that mean it'll be more expensive? Or are they going to charge differently for express busses? From my place, I have three choices to get to metrotown:

>129 metrotown
>130 metrotown
>millenium line from Holdom to Metro

Will those three be charged equally as they are now? Or are they going to start charging distance, so people will take less-convenient busses that travel shorter routes? Will they charge more or less for the skytrain?


Until Translink has enough trip data to make sure they can
A) Adequately decide how to charge for routes
B) Ensure that they are treating people "fairly" (whatever that means)
C) Make sure that they don't lose money when they change the rates
C2) Make sure that they don't gouge people who need the system so that it's unaffordable and needs more subsidies.



When it comes down to it, Transit is not something that goes away. It's not something that will just magically become solved. If transit becomes too expensive for the people at the bottom who need it, they'll stop taking it and it'll start losing more money, requiring more subsidies. It's kind of a question of equilibrium, not even of turning a profit--more about ensuring a minimum of losses.

[Tapioca]

They'll spend $20 million doing overseas studies and focus groups and computer simulations based on cities completely irrelevant to ours, and then change it 10 years later, all the while complaining about lack of money. /s

So your solution is for Translink to be make decisions in a vacuum?

People complain that Crown corps and governments aren't responsive to their needs. You need money to run consultations - they don't just happen in someone's basement, nor are tools like SurveyMonkey going to fully reflect user needs.
Posted via RS Mobile

[JesseBlue]

translink should take cue from icbc and get rid of 258 people for 29 million in savings...lol...

[Graeme S]

translink should take cue from icbc and get rid of 258 people for 29 million in savings...lol...
Sadly(?), Translink isn't that inefficient :lawl:

[inv4zn]

So your solution is for Translink to be make decisions in a vacuum?

People complain that Crown corps and governments aren't responsive to their needs. You need money to run consultations - they don't just happen in someone's basement, nor are tools like SurveyMonkey going to fully reflect user needs.
Posted via RS Mobile

IMO, if Translink had made rational decisions and PROPERLY and EFFECTIVELY used their resources, we/they wouldn't be in this mess.

I fully understand they don't happen in someone's basement; but the majority of people seem to think they spend penthouse amounts of money, and still come up with decisions and plans that are no better than if they were made in someone's basement.

[Yodamaster]

$4.00 for two zones!?

Great car buying incentive, I'll never take transit again unless I absolutely need to.

[MindBomber]

IMO, if Translink had made rational decisions and PROPERLY and EFFECTIVELY used their resources, we/they wouldn't be in this mess.

I fully understand they don't happen in someone's basement; but the majority of people seem to think they spend penthouse amounts of money, and still come up with decisions and plans that are no better than if they were made in someone's basement.

Translink seems to use its resources pretty efficiently, and they've been consistently seeking out and eliminating inefficiencies for years.

They're increasing fares again.

Jesus, $170 for a 3-zone month pass. That's 2 grand if you need one for a year!!

Fares haven't been raised in five years, an adjustment is appropriate after that length of time.

$2000 is expensive, but still significantly less than one would pay to drive.

[Graeme S]

IMO, if Translink had made rational decisions and PROPERLY and EFFECTIVELY used their resources, we/they wouldn't be in this mess.

I fully understand they don't happen in someone's basement; but the majority of people seem to think they spend penthouse amounts of money, and still come up with decisions and plans that are no better than if they were made in someone's basement.
So how could they have properly and effectively used their resources?

The two most common arguments I hear are:
> I'd take transit more if busses didn't come every fucking <percieved unreasonable time>
> If they don't have fucking full busses, then don't send them so often? Why don't they just cut service!?


The GVRD is not like other cities. Metro Vancouver (which Translink is responsible for) is spread out over 2800 square kilometres, and yet only has 2.3 million people. Cars are great in areas where density is low. Public transportation is amazing where density is high. The GVRD is full of a shitload of shotgunning of areas; transportation hubs are where density is, and if you don't live in a dense area (read: where prices are low and things are usually not walking/bussing distance) then transit will suck because nobody fucking lives there.

The solution? Increase the population density. The city of vancouver has started more proposals to get density up, by identifying core transit lines and adding new zoning along them and within a couple blocks of those hubs. Burnaby has started rezoning huge swaths of main streets (Hastings all along the Burnaby Heights near where I live has been completely rezoned to the new-again-trendy retail main floor townhouses above, acknowledging the prices of housing and the necessity of these things.

For the next 20-30 years, it will probably suck to live across any bridges from Van/Burnaby/New West from a transit standpoint. As more people move across the bridges, there will be more need and demand for transit.

Transit, much like healthcare, is a necessary public service. Poor people need to get places too. I would love to see where you can pay for a car, insurance, gas, maintenance and sometimes parking, all for $1836 ( (12*170)*0.9). If you can do that, you would solve a fuckton of peoples' transportation needs. Until then, people who cannot afford cars will continue to take transit which will continue to be subsidized. And it will always be subsidized until and unless density increases along with ridership.


Also, TBH, I'd quite like it if they would separate the transit and the road repairs sections of Translink even though it would create another group of executives. I think it kind of muddies the water on how much public transit costs, since most people associate "translink" with busses and not roadworks.

[HondaGuy]

Just saw on the news last night that translink is not ready for the new $20 bill polymer , and the fare machine doesnt accept. So the translink guy was interviewed by global and says they knew the machine wouldnt accept and had to wait to contract out to another company to reprogram them. Think they said the cost would be $17,000 or so.

So now transit passengers are upset that they cant buy fares to ride so they ride for free, risking the chance of getting caught w/o tickets (getting caught by transit police) and also translink losing money again!! Global interviewed these passengers and say they dont have exact change sometimes and its hard to get exact amount sometimes especially when buses dont give out change.

Why cant translink do what Hong Kong does with octopus cards? Charge an initial deposit for the card itself (example: $50) then reload cash (whether new/old bills) to a cashier booth, operated by a human (translink official), and with those faregates installed and working, just scan or beep through and wherever your destination is, delete the necessary cost from the card (or implement our zone program). Also add more transit police, where the city can hire new police officers (rookies or not as experienced field officers) to stand by at each station. Example, 2 or 3 officers at joyce station and another 2 at nainamo station and once in a while, one officer can ride the train checking for fare invaders then stop at next station and another one rides back and switches job position. These officers can be present to make public aware and protect safety and if something happens like gunshot or crime, then they can still respond quicker and if worse emergencies arise, they can radio in the more experienced field officers (patrol cars etc.) Few ppl I've talk to say training to become officers are challenging and as to where they will be stationed with what dept is a long wait so why not have the newer ones work at transit stations to gain experience, and add one or two more experienced officers as leaders or superior.
In the future, when you dont need your card, return it back to any booth and receive your initial deposit back (providing card is in good condition.)

Even though I am a vancouverite, when travelling to HK, their system is really functional. Their designs from underground tunnels from/to shopping malls and outdoor entances/exit are amazingly easy.
Everyone uses the faregates (that I've seen) and theres always train station officials on standby in booths or just circulating the area.
Posted via RS Mobile

[optiblue]

Think these rates are bad? Wait till the fare gates open up! Someone who lives in Surrey and works Downtown will pay substantially, especially if they usually go richmond after work for fun! I remember when I was in hk, my $100 octopus card went down like mad! I was touring the city though, looks like Vancouver is about to get more expensive... Green lanes from Langley to Vancouver anyone? :troll:
Posted via RS Mobile

[Graeme S]

Just saw on the news last night that translink is not ready for the new $20 bill polymer , and the fare machine doesnt accept. So the translink guy was interviewed by global and says they knew the machine wouldnt accept and had to wait to contract out to another company to reprogram them. Think they said the cost would be $17,000 or so.
Yep. And the reprogramming is supposed to happen by the end of either this week or next week. Firmware update.

So now transit passengers are upset that they cant buy fares to ride so they ride for free, risking the chance of getting caught w/o tickets (getting caught by transit police) and also translink losing money again!! Global interviewed these passengers and say they dont have exact change sometimes and its hard to get exact amount sometimes especially when buses dont give out change.
Buses have never given out change, so anyone who's on the way to a bus stop complaining about that and saying they need to get a free ride because of it or they can't take the bus because of it is bullshitting. That having been said, NY uses a similar system for their transit system (their tickets seem to be identical), and they can give change. My guess? The change-giving boxes are more expensive and harder to maintain and translink *gasp* wants to try and save money.
Why cant translink do what Hong Kong does with octopus cards? Charge an initial deposit for the card itself (example: $50) then reload cash (whether new/old bills) to a cashier booth, operated by a human (translink official), and with those faregates installed and working, just scan or beep through and wherever your destination is, delete the necessary cost from the card (or implement our zone program). Also add more transit police, where the city can hire new police officers (rookies or not as experienced field officers) to stand by at each station. Example, 2 or 3 officers at joyce station and another 2 at nainamo station and once in a while, one officer can ride the train checking for fare invaders then stop at next station and another one rides back and switches job position. These officers can be present to make public aware and protect safety and if something happens like gunshot or crime, then they can still respond quicker and if worse emergencies arise, they can radio in the more experienced field officers (patrol cars etc.) Few ppl I've talk to say training to become officers are challenging and as to where they will be stationed with what dept is a long wait so why not have the newer ones work at transit stations to gain experience, and add one or two more experienced officers as leaders or superior.
In the future, when you dont need your card, return it back to any booth and receive your initial deposit back (providing card is in good condition.)
Posted via RS Mobile

The faregates are being put in place exactly so that you will soon be able to have a card (the contest was two years ago for naming it, how can you not be aware of it by now if not willfully?) called the Compass card where it will function exactly like the Octopus, or the Oyster or the Tpass, or the whateverthefuckyouwannacallyourgoddamnedtransponde rcard.

As far as having real people being cashiers? Cost of labour is way higher here than in HK (which seems to be where your experience is coming from); given that Translink is union you'd be looking at paying a person $17+/hr to sit and recharge cards at each station. Some stations which have more than one entrance (by your logic) would need more than one cashier. Commercial? That's...four cashiers IIRC. I'm pretty sure that paying $70/hr in labour for people to be cashiers is much more expensive than having that $17k upgrade. Actually, It is. I just did the math and it would take 30 days of 8 hour shifts to add up to 17k, just at commercial assuming 4 people. If we had people there from open to close, you're looking at less than two weeks to add up to $17k.

As far as transit police...there's a big problem with your logic. You say 'the city' should hire cops and also send them through transit. Well, if the cities wanted to have the skytrain stations patrolled or manned, they could. There's nothing stopping them now from doing it. But given the fact that for the most part police stations are so understaffed that they can only respond to calls, it's unlikely 'the city' will do so. Also remember, Metro Vancouver doesn't have a unified police force; RCMP, VPD, WVPD...am I missing any?

Now, if you're referring to translink cops and farechecking security, I think you're probably right--my guess is that each station will be manned to make sure people aren't just hopping over the waist-high faregates. But that having been said, it's not just the skytrains people skip fares on. Ever been on one of those double-busses? The 135, the 99, the 44, and probably some others I can't think of at the moment. When there's a fuckton of people getting on and the driver has to focus on giving everyone their transfers, a lot of people sneak on the back. Or they ask for one zone and go past the boundaries. So the cops/farecheckers will have to be on the busses too.



Some of what you suggest is not unreasonable, but a lot of it is ideas that are infeasable, unreasonable, logistically unsound, or impractical. And have been answered before in this thread or others.

[/rant]


Anyone noticed I'm just a wee bit pro-transit?

[4444]

Time to privatize this puppy, how many more years of ridiculous losses funded by taxpayers do we need?

It's not even a good system here, and those that say it is hasn't travelled

[tonyzoomzoom]

privatization doesn't guarantee better service or lower prices. Just look at bcferries. The only thing you can be sure of is that the execs will make sure that they are compensated at ridiculous levels.

What needs to happen is that the execs need to be held accountable for all their decisions and should be paid according to performance against real targets.

[RFlush]

Why does everyone compare Translink to the MTR? They are completely different. MTR Corp style is probably the last thing you guys want in Vancouver unless you want even more expensive real estate prices.

[Graeme S]

Why does everyone compare Translink to the MTR? They are completely different. MTR Corp style is probably the last thing you guys want in Vancouver unless you want even more expensive real estate prices.
People compare what they know. People also tend to base their comparisons on personal experience. Not a lot of people here on RS have to really worry about money. I mean, yeah, lots of people have "money problems", but the fact that this site is car-centric indicates a certain standard of living (generally speaking--obviously there are exceptions).

Most people who have the choice between car and transit would choose cars--fuck, I know I'd choose to drive everywhere. But I can't. Transit cuts costs for me. Sure, when I commute from my place in North Burnaby to West Van, it takes more than an hour. And it takes less than half an hour if I drive. But the costs of owning a car make it not worth it, generally speaking. And there are lots of other people out there who are in a similar situation.

What about single parents? Underemployed people? People who've just overspent on a house and are deciding what they can and can't live without? People who are working minimum wage jobs not because they want to but because they have to? The list goes on. Sure, the experience isn't perfect, but it works.


Oh, and for those of you who insist on comparing the GVRD to Hong Kong (which is a recurring thread): HK has population density eight times greater than Vancouver (6480/km^2 vs 802/km^2). New York, again a popular competitor, has thirteen times the density (10,518/km^2).

Vancouver is big. Vancouver is empty. Vancouver is a transit planner's nightmare. DESPITE ALL THOSE THINGS, Translink still manages to end up far from the bottom of the efficiency pile when it comes to transit authorities.

[gars]

$4.00 for two zones!?

Great car buying incentive, I'll never take transit again unless I absolutely need to.

If you take transit regularly, there should be NO reason for you to pay full price for your fare. the faresaver books gets you 10 trips for $3.15 each journey.

I'm not going to be surprised if they turn out to be like London. Where cash prices are more than double the oyster card prices. There - only the tourists who know nothing pay the cash price. Everyone else will pay the discounted price.

[MindBomber]

Time to privatize this puppy, how many more years of ridiculous losses funded by taxpayers do we need?

It's not even a good system here, and those that say it is hasn't travelled

Privatize the system because of the bus drivers earning $100k+, right?

It's a very good system compared to many comparable cities, and yes, I've traveled.

[inv4zn]

Translink seems to use its resources pretty efficiently, and they've been consistently seeking out and eliminating inefficiencies for years.

Fares haven't been raised in five years, an adjustment is appropriate after that length of time.

$2000 is expensive, but still significantly less than one would pay to drive.
See, that's the thing. even if Translink is doing the best possible job with what it has available, in the public's eye, it's doing a terrible job. And the level of negative opinions about Translink aren't unjustified. They're trying hard, I agree, but they are intent on eliminating each problem as it arises, rather than thinking ahead and making decisions that will last down the road. The mess we are in proves this point.

Again, yes, 5 years is a good point. But everyone will think "they are raising prices again??" Go to cbc and look at the comments.

$2000 is expensive any way you put it. No public transit should cost an individual $2000 a year. It's significantly cheaper, but exponentially more inconvenient. Factor in if you have a family, etc, and it's not so cheaper anymore.


So how could they have properly and effectively used their resources?

The two most common arguments I hear are:
> I'd take transit more if busses didn't come every fucking <percieved unreasonable time>
> If they don't have fucking full busses, then don't send them so often? Why don't they just cut service!?


The GVRD is not like other cities. Metro Vancouver (which Translink is responsible for) is spread out over 2800 square kilometres, and yet only has 2.3 million people. Cars are great in areas where density is low. Public transportation is amazing where density is high. The GVRD is full of a shitload of shotgunning of areas; transportation hubs are where density is, and if you don't live in a dense area (read: where prices are low and things are usually not walking/bussing distance) then transit will suck because nobody fucking lives there.

The solution? Increase the population density. The city of vancouver has started more proposals to get density up, by identifying core transit lines and adding new zoning along them and within a couple blocks of those hubs. Burnaby has started rezoning huge swaths of main streets (Hastings all along the Burnaby Heights near where I live has been completely rezoned to the new-again-trendy retail main floor townhouses above, acknowledging the prices of housing and the necessity of these things.

For the next 20-30 years, it will probably suck to live across any bridges from Van/Burnaby/New West from a transit standpoint. As more people move across the bridges, there will be more need and demand for transit.

Transit, much like healthcare, is a necessary public service. Poor people need to get places too. I would love to see where you can pay for a car, insurance, gas, maintenance and sometimes parking, all for $1836 ( (12*170)*0.9). If you can do that, you would solve a fuckton of peoples' transportation needs. Until then, people who cannot afford cars will continue to take transit which will continue to be subsidized. And it will always be subsidized until and unless density increases along with ridership.


Also, TBH, I'd quite like it if they would separate the transit and the road repairs sections of Translink even though it would create another group of executives. I think it kind of muddies the water on how much public transit costs, since most people associate "translink" with busses and not roadworks.

Your argument makes sense, but the population density part is a bit shaky. The "outer" regions of the GVRD, maple ridge, delta, white rock, etc. already have shitty transit service. They're not the ones complaining of buses being full. Population density is already high enough in most of the GVRD. Sure, it's not like HK or the larger Asian cities, but there are still a lot of people.

All I wonder is why it's so bloody hard to run a crown corporation properly, and maintain a positive image in the public's eyes. That's all this is about IMO. People have lost faith in such corporations (BCF, Translink, etc) that it no longer matters what they do, it'll always be perceived as terrible.

[tonyzoomzoom]

it is hard to run a crown corp because the gov't likes to pull you in a thousand different directions all at the same time. sometimes you wonder if the crown corps are there to serve the government (and their party supporters) or the public.

[Soundy]

$2000 is expensive any way you put it. No public transit should cost an individual $2000 a year. It's significantly cheaper, but exponentially more inconvenient. Factor in if you have a family, etc, and it's not so cheaper anymore.
You haul your entire family to and from work with you every day?

[Graeme S]

The problem isn't necessarily running a crown corp properly, it's that crown corporations are (generally speaking) money-losing enterprises which would cost individuals more money if they didn't exist. The reason they're run by the government is because it's the least-inefficient way of making everyone pay for a common benefit.

It's extremely rare to see a government compete and win in a competitive market in a profitable industry. However, no company wants to lose money. Governments are there to serve the people (their shareholders, if you will), while corporations are there to serve their corporate shareholders. If a venture won't make money, corporations can just say "no, we're cool. We'll sit this one out." Governments can't do the same.

It's like the argument about public vs private schools; private schools will always seem better...but that's because they can choose what students they accept, offer the students newer and better textbooks, and take get them taking (more/any) extracurricular activites...because there are more resources. Public schools, however, must take anyone and everyone.

Crown corporations can't compete against the private sector for profits, and the private sector won't compete against the crown where there's money to be lost.

[MindBomber]

See, that's the thing. even if Translink is doing the best possible job with what it has available, in the public's eye, it's doing a terrible job. And the level of negative opinions about Translink aren't unjustified. They're trying hard, I agree, but they are intent on eliminating each problem as it arises, rather than thinking ahead and making decisions that will last down the road. The mess we are in proves this point.

Again, yes, 5 years is a good point. But everyone will think "they are raising prices again??" Go to cbc and look at the comments.

$2000 is expensive any way you put it. No public transit should cost an individual $2000 a year. It's significantly cheaper, but exponentially more inconvenient. Factor in if you have a family, etc, and it's not so cheaper anymore.


I disagree that Translink is not making decisions ahead of problems arising, or considering long term solutions. Since Translinks inception in 2000, the Millenium line, RAV line, Evergreen line, Golden Ears, and Roberts Bank Corridor projects have all been completed or started, and those are multi-billion dollar upgrades. The UBC line is set to enter final planning stages shortly, and the Pattullo replacement is beginning planning stages now. Bus service has increased substantially, and the introduction of community shuttles in 2004 re-defined GVRD transit. That's a lot of progress in only 12 years.

In my eyes, the issue is that people will criticize any action taken by Translink without first considering the facts. In the case of fare increases, people read news articles designed to provoke a reaction at face value, and never consider the 9.5% inflation or 20% fuel price increase since the last fare adjustment. Unfounded criticisms achieve nothing.

[inv4zn]

You haul your entire family to and from work with you every day?

I meant that if you had a family, and they also need to take transit, then it makes more sense to own a car.

You know, to do family things with your family. :suspicious:

In my eyes, the issue is that people will criticize any action taken by Translink without first considering the facts. In the case of fare increases, people read news articles designed to provoke a reaction at face value, and never consider the 9.5% inflation or 20% fuel price increase since the last fare adjustment. Unfounded criticisms achieve nothing.

How would Translink change this then? There are people who are blindly complaining without knowing what they are complaining about, yes, but just like there are good things that Translink is doing - and btw I agree, the progress they made this far is commendable if not anything - but there are also very real issues that are clearly being mishandled.

You see, Translink (and many other crown corporations, ICBC, BCF, etc) are seen as arrogant, and rarely caring for "the people". They are supposed to be government subsidized/owned companies that are supposed to work for "the people", while as you've said, minimizing loss of money. They're not supposed to turn a profit. Most educated people understand this. We all know privatization is not the answer.

The problem mainly is that people have developed such a distrust for whomever's in charge right now, that EVERYTHING they do looks bad. It may not "unfounded criticism", but it's not entirely undeserved. As an example the HST. It was beneficial, but it was repealed. Why? Because the Liberals did a dismal job explaining to the people WHY it was beneficial.

Criticizing Translink for increasing fares for legitimate and valid reasons may be unfounded, but if the people can't see and understand why these hikes are necessary, then it will just add to the mountain of things people thing Translink is doing wrong. And this doesn't stem entirely from misinformation and ignorance.

I'm rambling a bit because it's been a long day :okay:

[european]

Just heard on the news that the fares are being increased. Crazy!

[murd0c]

good and they should increse the fairs rather then gas prices like they have been doing for ages.

[Soundy]

Don't forget too, if TransLink was privatized, they'd probably lose a lot of their current funding sources from various taxes and levies... and even if they existed as a non-profit, you'd probably see fares go to $10 for a single zone, just to cover costs.

[melloman]

Odd question, but why hasn't Translink gone into property?

By that I mean building residential highrises, solely for rental purposes, and then using that rental income to use for improving our transit structure. Ofcourse there's downsides to this idea, yet I think overall a profit off the highrises could be taken and used to fund some of their projects.

Instead of hurting everyone's pockets every which way. :D

[Soundy]

I really doubt there's THAT much profit to be made in being a landlord, relative to the kind of money they need on an annual basis.

[Tapioca]

Odd question, but why hasn't Translink gone into property?

By that I mean building residential highrises, solely for rental purposes, and then using that rental income to use for improving our transit structure. Ofcourse there's downsides to this idea, yet I think overall a profit off the highrises could be taken and used to fund some of their projects.

Instead of hurting everyone's pockets every which way. :D

The MTR model. For it to be profitable, Translink would need breaks on property taxes and other incentives. Besides, the NIMBYism in Metro Vancouver would turn Translink into a more despised organization than it already is. People like density, but only if it's not in their backyard.

This has been a very interesting thread. What I've concluded is that it's not so much governments not caring (contrary to what the enlightened minds of RS may think, public servants are quite bright and strategic - almost to a fault which results in a tendency towards risk aversion)- it's that people are being selective in what they read and want to hear. Quite frankly, people have gotten lazy (in spite of the fact that information is more accessible today than in any point in human history.)

But hey, let's just keep on believing that Translink's pigs at the trough are the sole cause of all the problems of transit in this city. Fire them all and replace them with fresh students from UBC's urban planning school and pay them $50K/year. Keep them on year-to-year contracts and then replace them with more students when they get too expensive. Better yet, let's privatize the damn thing once and for all so that I can drive my leased 3-series in peace! It's not my fault that others are too poor to afford my lifestyle!
Posted via RS Mobile

[4444]

Privatize the system because of the bus drivers earning $100k+, right?

It's a very good system compared to many comparable cities, and yes, I've traveled.

Hahahahah, ya, travelled around North America maybe.

Look, North America was built on the car, but Vancouver has shit roads, ok, if we're not going to built some huge infrastructure, lets go European, high density, great mobility sans car - nope, we get translink bs

We have a so-so transit system and crap roads... World class city my arse

[4444]

privatization doesn't guarantee better service or lower prices. Just look at bcferries. The only thing you can be sure of is that the execs will make sure that they are compensated at ridiculous levels.

What needs to happen is that the execs need to be held accountable for all their decisions and should be paid according to performance against real targets.

Bc ferries is a government entity - not sure I get this.

If it were privatized, at least we wouldn't be mandated fuel surcharges, and if the service sucked, there'd be room for a competitor to come in and steal business - cant have either of those right now

[bing]

^LOL, Tony check your facts before you speak (BC Ferries is a corporate entity, but they are a private company with the Crown as the sole shareholder).

I disagree with your assessment of their remuneration. Nothing is ridiculous about their compensation as they would easily get that in the private sector. How else would you attract talent? by paying them peanuts and demanding them to take on the same kinds of responsibilities when another private entity is willing to pay them more? If there were more capable people around, maybe these companies wouldn't have to pay such "high salaries". Let's not forget there's no such thing as a cushy 40 hour work week either.

Mindbomber made an interesting point about this in the BC Ferries thread.
http://www.revscene.net/forums/674650-b-c-ferries-raise-rates-again-5.html

[Graeme S]

Hahahahah, ya, travelled around North America maybe.

Look, North America was built on the car, but Vancouver has shit roads, ok, if we're not going to built some huge infrastructure, lets go European, high density, great mobility sans car - nope, we get translink bs

We have a so-so transit system and crap roads... World class city my arse

So...wait. You're saying that it's translink's fault Vancouver isn't built up European style, or isn't spread out american style? :fulloffuck:

Bc ferries is a government entity - not sure I get this.

If it were privatized, at least we wouldn't be mandated fuel surcharges, and if the service sucked, there'd be room for a competitor to come in and steal business - cant have either of those right now

I don't know about you, but I seem to remember having to pay a fuel cost surcharge when I flew a few years ago. Crude prices were high and unstable, and companies didn't want to increase ticket prices so they added a fuel surcharge. Airlines are private entities...and they had a fuel surcharge. Not sure what your point is there.

And as I've said before in this post, when there is a profit to be made, private companies are more than happy to swoop in and steal business from government. But when the industry is a necessity for the people which would not be affordable to the ordinary individual, it's very unlikely to turn a profit. Yet its necessity mandates that it exist. It is because of these two factors that a lot of crown corporations "lose money" and "require government subsidies".


If private corporations could build roads and profit from it, don't you think they would? If private companies could make money from public transit, don't you think they'd be lobbying the government and advertising to us that "they deserve a chance to prove what they can do"? I mean, god knows they do it enough for forestry and mining and oil and the like.

What's stopping them?




Oh, right. These things lose money.

[Soundy]

if we're not going to built some huge infrastructure, lets go European, high density, great mobility sans car
Yes, great idea.

Let's do the math (setting aside for the moment that North America has really only seen substantial population growth for the last 300 or so years, vs. a few thousand years for Europe):

Land area of Europe: 10,180,000 km²
Population of Europe: 739,165,030 (2011)
Population density of Europe: 72.6 people per square kilometer.

Land area of Canada: 9,985,000 km²
Population of Canada: 34,482,779 (2011)
Population density of Canada: 0.3 people per square kilometer.

You want European density, you need to be ready to invite in half the population of China... or get REALLY fuckin' busy makin' babies.

[4444]

So...wait. You're saying that it's translink's fault Vancouver isn't built up European style, or isn't spread out american style? :fulloffuck:



I don't know about you, but I seem to remember having to pay a fuel cost surcharge when I flew a few years ago. Crude prices were high and unstable, and companies didn't want to increase ticket prices so they added a fuel surcharge. Airlines are private entities...and they had a fuel surcharge. Not sure what your point is there.

And as I've said before in this post, when there is a profit to be made, private companies are more than happy to swoop in and steal business from government. But when the industry is a necessity for the people which would not be affordable to the ordinary individual, it's very unlikely to turn a profit. Yet its necessity mandates that it exist. It is because of these two factors that a lot of crown corporations "lose money" and "require government subsidies".


If private corporations could build roads and profit from it, don't you think they would? If private companies could make money from public transit, don't you think they'd be lobbying the government and advertising to us that "they deserve a chance to prove what they can do"? I mean, god knows they do it enough for forestry and mining and oil and the like.

What's stopping them?




Oh, right. These things lose money.
Gas surcharge, as in for drivers, not some transit surcharge, not sure how you missed that one

[4444]

Yes, great idea.

Let's do the math (setting aside for the moment that North America has really only seen substantial population growth for the last 300 or so years, vs. a few thousand years for Europe):

Land area of Europe: 10,180,000 km²
Population of Europe: 739,165,030 (2011)
Population density of Europe: 72.6 people per square kilometer.

Land area of Canada: 9,985,000 km²
Population of Canada: 34,482,779 (2011)
Population density of Canada: 0.3 people per square kilometer.

You want European density, you need to be ready to invite in half the population of China... or get REALLY fuckin' busy makin' babies.
Thanks Wikipedia

I agree, so why are we bothering with all this crap transit bs, why not build highways, 4 lanes each way, from west van through north van to Burnaby, no. 1, but also, 4 lanes each way interrupted from Burnaby to downtown, downtown to the ferries - none of this 2 lane tunnel, 2 lane bridges, all the bottlenecks - we can spread so much further if we built the infrastructure

This lack of planning will fuck over greater vancouver a growth - little city with a little city mentality, little minded peopl

[4444]

So...wait. You're saying that it's translink's fault Vancouver isn't built up European style, or isn't spread out american style? :fulloffuck:



I don't know about you, but I seem to remember having to pay a fuel cost surcharge when I flew a few years ago. Crude prices were high and unstable, and companies didn't want to increase ticket prices so they added a fuel surcharge. Airlines are private entities...and they had a fuel surcharge. Not sure what your point is there.

And as I've said before in this post, when there is a profit to be made, private companies are more than happy to swoop in and steal business from government. But when the industry is a necessity for the people which would not be affordable to the ordinary individual, it's very unlikely to turn a profit. Yet its necessity mandates that it exist. It is because of these two factors that a lot of crown corporations "lose money" and "require government subsidies".


If private corporations could build roads and profit from it, don't you think they would? If private companies could make money from public transit, don't you think they'd be lobbying the government and advertising to us that "they deserve a chance to prove what they can do"? I mean, god knows they do it enough for forestry and mining and oil and the like.

What's stopping them?




Oh, right. These things lose money.

Most of ur points aren't valid, much of britains transit is privately owned

Roads are a right (of sorts), they must be provided by the government (if they weren't the government would be voted out), and yes, if u wanted to allow privatization, they would be built, tariffed, and thus profitable for said builder - look at pipelines, roads are pipelines

[4444]

^LOL, Tony check your facts before you speak (BC Ferries is a corporate entity, but they are a private company with the Crown as the sole shareholder).

I disagree with your assessment of their remuneration. Nothing is ridiculous about their compensation as they would easily get that in the private sector. How else would you attract talent? by paying them peanuts and demanding them to take on the same kinds of responsibilities when another private entity is willing to pay them more? If there were more capable people around, maybe these companies wouldn't have to pay such "high salaries". Let's not forget there's no such thing as a cushy 40 hour work week either.

Mindbomber made an interesting point about this in the BC Ferries thread.
http://www.revscene.net/forums/674650-b-c-ferries-raise-rates-again-5.html


Private, but owned 100% by crown corp... So, is a crown corp, fact checked- the crown won't sell it if it underperforms, they wouldn't, and couldn't for anything above their cost, as its run like a dog, funded by the crown, thus government entity

[Graeme S]

Britain has the same population as Canada, yet a much much much smaller footprint. Again, it comes back to population density.

Roads are not a right by any means. Roads are an essential part of infrastructure, certainly. But the fact that you need a license to access them, the fact that you can have said license taken away, and the fact that you are taxed in order to use them....that means they are not roads.

And yes, some roads are toll roads, but as I've said before: where there are profits, there are companies fighting over them. And in Canada, there are no profits to be had over roads. Which is why we have no toll roads (and those we do are done by the government in order to pay for things without raising taxes).

[MindBomber]

Hahahahah, ya, travelled around North America maybe.

Look, North America was built on the car, but Vancouver has shit roads, ok, if we're not going to built some huge infrastructure, lets go European, high density, great mobility sans car - nope, we get translink bs

We have a so-so transit system and crap roads... World class city my arse

I've traveled to the UK, France, and Netherlands.

The North American urban planning model is an abysmal failure.

No one in Europe will look at an American city built around 14 lane highways in envy.

Progress requires densification and transit infrastructure, which is exactly what is being attempted.

[yray]

^ we can always do garden city movement :troll:

[Soundy]

No one in Europe will look at an American city built around 14 lane highways in envy.
Okay, the Europe/NA comparisons really need to stop. There's no point in looking at one and saying the other should or shouldn't be like it, because the two are vastly different worlds ("Old" and "New" worlds, if you will).

Transit and bicycles and walking everywhere you go WORKS in Europe because everything and everyone are packed in so tight. It's also NECESSARY in Europe, because everything and everyone are packed in so tight and there's NO ROOM for 14-lane highways. Their entire transportation infrastructure has been built up this way since long before cars, long before trains.

Meantime, transit and bicycles and walking everywhere you go DOESN'T WORK in much of NA (ie. outside of major metro centers), because of the low number of people and the vast spaces covered. Meanwhile, large highways DO work, because there's lots of room to build them. People have to go long distances, without the ability to drag large groups along with them to share the costs.

The vast majority of North America, public transit simply isn't an efficient way to move small numbers of people around large areas... and trying to force the model is how you come up with money-losing, tax-subsidized transit systems.

Britain's transit system privately owned? Okay... but London alone has TWICE THE POPULATION OF ALL OF BC, crammed into 1500km² - that's half the size of the entire GVRD. This is not complex math: your transit system serves and extremely small area and a massive number of people, it's pretty easy not just to make transit an attractive alternative, but to cover that entire area, AND turn a nice profit at it.

Here's a great example of how different the two worlds are: when I was in 11th grade in 100 Mile House, we had a 12th grade exchange student from Belgium. At the end of the year, he wrote a piece for the yearbook about his time there. He said the biggest culture shock for him was the difference in how we perceived distances: from his home, the capital city was an hour's drive, and going there was a MAJOR outing that they'd do maybe twice a year; meantime, in 100 Mile, people thought nothing of driving an hour to Williams Lake to do their grocery shopping if the local Overwaitea was out of something. In the Cariboo, people would regularly make the 2.5 hour drive to Kamloops... back home, you could drive for two hours in any direction and be in another country.

You just can't compare the two this way. It doesn't work. It never will. Forget apples and oranges; this is comparing pumpkins to grapes (on a size scale).

[Lomac]

I agree, so why are we bothering with all this crap transit bs, why not build highways, 4 lanes each way, from west van through north van to Burnaby, no. 1, but also, 4 lanes each way interrupted from Burnaby to downtown, downtown to the ferries - none of this 2 lane tunnel, 2 lane bridges, all the bottlenecks - we can spread so much further if we built the infrastructure

This lack of planning will fuck over greater vancouver a growth - little city with a little city mentality, little minded peopl

I agree, especially when it comes to Vancouver. While it certainly makes it unique in it's own way, the fact that Vancouver's council back in the day defeated the proposed Highway 99 extension through the city was, simply put, short sighted. Vancouver is one of the few major cities in North America that doesn't have a highway running through it.

The problem with updating many of today's roads is that there's so much growth that it would cost a large fortune to buy all the land required to widen most of the roads, though I can't really think of any major arterial roads that are only two lanes.

However...

Bc ferries is a government entity - not sure I get this.

If it were privatized, at least we wouldn't be mandated fuel surcharges, and if the service sucked, there'd be room for a competitor to come in and steal business - cant have either of those right now

Most of ur points aren't valid, much of britains transit is privately owned

Roads are a right (of sorts), they must be provided by the government (if they weren't the government would be voted out), and yes, if u wanted to allow privatization, they would be built, tariffed, and thus profitable for said builder - look at pipelines, roads are pipelines

Allowing competition is great and everything, but there has to be a sustainable market for it. Take a look at BC Ferries. If you look at it today, you'd think that it's a perfect opportunity for competition to swoop in and take advantage of their misery. However, there's not enough people looking to take a boat ride across the water. And even if there were enough, private companies have no way of being able to compete with BC Ferries. They get a huge subsidy from the government in order to keep their fares low (though I realize that it's a relative term, nowadays). There have been several companies vying for part of BC Ferries customer base, either drop-trailer or walk-on passenger, and most of either gone belly up or are barely hanging on when it comes to competing routes because they can't match the prices.

Now look at Translink. They take in over $300 million in subsidies from the government. While that money gets divvied over various branches, over a third of it goes towards their bus and trolley division. Without that sort of subsidy to offset a competitor's price, how much do you think a ticket would now cost? Sure, downtown core might be able to get away with it's own private bus company instead of Translink, but services will be largely cut, as will hours of operations. No where else in BC exists a dense enough population in a small enough area for a private company to even consider a route.

Hahahahah, ya, travelled around North America maybe.

Look, North America was built on the car, but Vancouver has shit roads, ok, if we're not going to built some huge infrastructure, lets go European, high density, great mobility sans car - nope, we get translink bs

We have a so-so transit system and crap roads... World class city my arse

Keep in mind that Translink maintains over 2200km's of roads, four major bridges (potentially five in the near future), hundreds of buses and trolleys including Handydart, the Seabus, the West Coast Express and probably a couple hundred Skytrain cars. Now factor in the maintenance costs associated with looking after this large of a fleet, along with everyone's salaries. I'm sure there's a lot of wasted money somewhere within Translink, but the fact that they're able to keep even the current prices roughly around where they are is still pretty amazing.

And for the record, I've travelled through most of Europe and even there their transit system isn't exactly as great as most people claim it to be. Sure, it's great when it comes to major cities, but just like Vancouver and the GVRD, as soon as you get outside the major city hub, the quality of service drops.

[Wykydtron]

I get that they have to up fares as costs keep rising across the board. But if I have to pay more to use transit, make the fucking system accessible.

Copypasta from a friend:

I'll give that Translink covers a larger service area than anywhere else in Canada... but c'mon.

The next most expensive cities for Transit are Montreal and Toronto, with single fares being $3 dollars... but no zoning systems! A 3 zone single fare will be $5.50 Starting Jan 1st 2013!!!

Monthly fares in those same cities are $75 in Montreal, Toronto, 126 dollars a month (with a 12 year program that one can sign up for to reduce cost to $115).
Our new 3-Zone cost? Hold your breath... $170 a month.

Another one of my friends pointed out to me another decent point:
Something that strikes me as a huge flaw in translink's fare and zoning system, is that you need a three zone to go from Horseshoe Bay to Langley, the funny thing is, that Five Dollar transfer expires before you're even off the skytrain. In the end it's $7.50 and a two and a half hour trip.

[Graeme S]

Funnily enough...both those cities have higher populations than Metro Van.


Sigh. Sometimes I feel like Sisyphus.

[Tapioca]

Thanks Wikipedia

I agree, so why are we bothering with all this crap transit bs, why not build highways, 4 lanes each way, from west van through north van to Burnaby, no. 1, but also, 4 lanes each way interrupted from Burnaby to downtown, downtown to the ferries - none of this 2 lane tunnel, 2 lane bridges, all the bottlenecks - we can spread so much further if we built the infrastructure

This lack of planning will fuck over greater vancouver a growth - little city with a little city mentality, little minded peopl

So, your model city is Toronto? Which has highways going into the city from the north, east, and west and yet has some of the worst congestion in North America?

[Lomac]

I get that they have to up fares as costs keep rising across the board. But if I have to pay more to use transit, make the fucking system accessible.

Copypasta from a friend:

I'll give that Translink covers a larger service area than anywhere else in Canada... but c'mon.

The next most expensive cities for Transit are Montreal and Toronto, with single fares being $3 dollars... but no zoning systems! A 3 zone single fare will be $5.50 Starting Jan 1st 2013!!!

Monthly fares in those same cities are $75 in Montreal, Toronto, 126 dollars a month (with a 12 year program that one can sign up for to reduce cost to $115).
Our new 3-Zone cost? Hold your breath... $170 a month.

Another one of my friends pointed out to me another decent point:
Something that strikes me as a huge flaw in translink's fare and zoning system, is that you need a three zone to go from Horseshoe Bay to Langley, the funny thing is, that Five Dollar transfer expires before you're even off the skytrain. In the end it's $7.50 and a two and a half hour trip.

- Montreal has three times the population of Vancouver
- Montreal's Metro is 20 years older than our Skytrain, meaning it was easier and cheaper to build than it is today (or even back in the 80's when ours was built)
- Montreal's STM is only in charge of the bus and Metro systems, unlike Translink's large umbrella

Also... Translink also offers a Daypass for $9, allowing you to travel it's entire network (sans WCE) all day without having to worry about your pass expiring.

[MindBomber]

I get that they have to up fares as costs keep rising across the board. But if I have to pay more to use transit, make the fucking system accessible.

Copypasta from a friend:

I'll give that Translink covers a larger service area than anywhere else in Canada... but c'mon.

The next most expensive cities for Transit are Montreal and Toronto, with single fares being $3 dollars... but no zoning systems! A 3 zone single fare will be $5.50 Starting Jan 1st 2013!!!

Monthly fares in those same cities are $75 in Montreal, Toronto, 126 dollars a month (with a 12 year program that one can sign up for to reduce cost to $115).
Our new 3-Zone cost? Hold your breath... $170 a month.


Toronto Transit Commission covers a 622 square kilometer service area.

Translink covers a 2977 square kilometer service area.

It's completely unreasonable to compare the pricing of a Translink 3 zone pass to a TTC pass, because the two passes service completely incomparable sized areas. It's like saying a flight to Toronto should cost the same as a flight to Calgary.

It would be reasonable to compare pricing of a Translink 1 zone pass to a TTC pass, because those two passes service comparable sized service areas. Oddly enough, Translink suddenly offers much better value when you do that - Translink $91 (2013) 1 zone pass compared to the TTC $126 pass.

[bing]

Private, but owned 100% by crown corp... So, is a crown corp, fact checked- the crown won't sell it if it underperforms, they wouldn't, and couldn't for anything above their cost, as its run like a dog, funded by the crown, thus government entity

Wasn't disagreeing with you. Comment was aimed to the brilliance of tonyzoomzoom. I was too lazy to use the direct quote.

[tonyzoomzoom]

Not nearly as brilliant as those translink execs who decided that fare gates aren't needed at the Skytrain stations and then later being surprised at the amount fare evasion that was going on. Needing to pay market rates to attract quality execs is just an excuse. No good exec in their right mind would want to work for a crown corp given all the political interference from the government. You take all the flak for all the stupid government decisions. What you end up getting are either execs from the bottom of the barrel, exec wannabe's, or friends of the government.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Graeme S]

Not having fare gates was a decision made LONG before translink (which, as a body separate of BC Transit was only created in '00 IIRC). Criticizing the current execs for a decision made thirty years ago is a pointless, irrelevant argument.

[melloman]

Yet those decisions screwed us then, and now we're playing catch up with EVERYTHING.

Be it fare gates, Compass card, Portmann bridge & Highway1 expansion.

I think too much money is going out the door way too quickly and Translink doesn't have any actual plans to raise this money other then making tax payers foot the bill.

Given the tolls for Portmann, increased fares for Evergreen Line, etc. I'm waiting to see the new plans for the Patullo bridge project and the Broadway Corridor. Everyone should know those 2 will be multi-billion dollar projects because of the complexities of both.

[gars]

Toronto Transit Commission covers a 622 square kilometer service area.

Translink covers a 2977 square kilometer service area.

It's completely unreasonable to compare the pricing of a Translink 3 zone pass to a TTC pass, because the two passes service completely incomparable sized areas. It's like saying a flight to Toronto should cost the same as a flight to Calgary.

It would be reasonable to compare pricing of a Translink 1 zone pass to a TTC pass, because those two passes service comparable sized service areas. Oddly enough, Translink suddenly offers much better value when you do that - Translink $91 (2013) 1 zone pass compared to the TTC $126 pass.

TTC as well has some of the most antiquated technology as well. Yes, they have fare gates - but they're using these tiny little tokens that are really easy to lose. You have to physically ask someone for a transfer if you need it - and it's like those old, OLD BC Transit newsprint transfers we used to have.

And riding their subways/buses/trams - makes you feel like you took a time machine to 30 years ago. Our buses and skytrains feel like limos in comparison.

[Tapioca]

Yet those decisions screwed us then, and now we're playing catch up with EVERYTHING.

Be it fare gates, Compass card, Portmann bridge & Highway1 expansion.

I think too much money is going out the door way too quickly and Translink doesn't have any actual plans to raise this money other then making tax payers foot the bill.


So, based on decisions that were made decades ago (which were arguably logical at the time), the current management deserves to be blamed in perpetuity? Do you blame your parents for who you are today? Do you dwell on the past, or do you try to move forward (whether it comes to your career or personal life) with what you are given to work with?

People are fixated on things that are somewhat unimportant in the grand scheme of things - faregates, management salaries, etc. The real reason why we have transit problems in the city is the result of broad failures in urban planning, the housing market and globalization of financial capital, and antiquated sentiments about the type of life we're entitled to in North America. Many of these causes are beyond the scope and capacity of Translink to solve. These problems more specifically are:

- Suburban sprawl that is largely driven by the housing preferances (ie. Single family detached houses) of North Americans, and the cost of housing in Metro Vancouver
- the astronimical growth in housing prices which has been driven by offshore capital and loosening credit
- the failure of muncipalities to gain anything from the paradigm shift in the local real estate market in the form of increased taxes and community contributions
- the fact that jobs are no longer stable which means people can expect to alter commuting patterns every 2-3 years
- the stigma against public transit in North America
- the relatively low cost of owning, and operating a car in North America (gas, leasing options, and free maintenance)
- NIMBYism that is particularly strong
Posted via RS Mobile

[Tapioca]

Needing to pay market rates to attract quality execs is just an excuse. No good exec in their right mind would want to work for a crown corp given all the political interference from the government. You take all the flak for all the stupid government decisions. What you end up getting are either execs from the bottom of the barrel, exec wannabe's, or friends of the government.
Posted via RS Mobile

I agree you for the most part, so what is your solution to attracting top quality talent? Translink had the former CEO of the NYC transit authority for a while, but he left the job and went back to NYC because he soon realized how much of a clusterfuck public transit is in Vancouver.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Mr.HappySilp]

I don't mind the fare increase but transit needs to reliable. Is not relibable when a bus is schedule to come at 7:20 instead never comes and have to wait for the next bus. Yet ppl are waiting there at 7:10. This happens 80% of the time around my house. So either the bus driver decided to skip work or something went wrong.
Skytrains and jam pack during rush hours. People are having to wait a few skytrains before they can get on. Now think what the ever green line will do. You are going to have people waiting for 30mins just to get on a skytrain.
When it snows huge delays up to 2hours or more. Thats unacceptable. Come on is Vancouver you know we have snow every year but you did nothing to prepare for it and make excuse every year.

[Graeme S]

I don't mind the fare increase but transit needs to reliable. Is not relibable when a bus is schedule to come at 7:20 instead never comes and have to wait for the next bus. Yet ppl are waiting there at 7:10. This happens 80% of the time around my house. So either the bus driver decided to skip work or something went wrong.
Skytrains and jam pack during rush hours. People are having to wait a few skytrains before they can get on. Now think what the ever green line will do. You are going to have people waiting for 30mins just to get on a skytrain.
When it snows huge delays up to 2hours or more. Thats unacceptable. Come on is Vancouver you know we have snow every year but you did nothing to prepare for it and make excuse every year.
Where do you live? I get the odd skipped bus here, but the busses here run every 5-10 minutes (135).

Skytrains are packed during rush hour. People having to wait a few trains is very weird, man. I used to take the skytrain to work sometimes, and I would get on at commercial heading downtown. This is the worst place to get on a skytrain. There's always enough room, though. Maybe not at the front (near broadway), but at the back I'll sometimes even find a seat. It's all about knowing your commute.


Gods, don't even get me started about snow though. I'm of two minds about that one. ninety percent of Vancouver drivers don't know what they're doing in the snow. When I used to work as a parts guy, as soon as I saw even the lightest feather dusting of snow, I knew I was going to make my parts quota for that month and then some.

Our transit system really wasn't designed for the cold either. We had that really cold winter a couple years ago where the trolley busses couldn't even run because the lines had frosted up. Now, when it gets that cold, they actually have "ice cutter" trolley busses that run overnight to make sure the lines don't freeze up in the same way. It's a step in the right direction.

The most contentious thing for me and the one I feel most strongly about (both ways) is the fact that Translink doesn't have winter tires. All busses only use all seasons. On one hand, I get it. It snows (typically) less than two weeks a year, why have tires. On the other hand, what the fuck. Trolley busses are USELESS on any kind of hill or incline AND THIS IS VANCOUVER. Good luck avoiding inclines. Bendy busses are just as bad. Hell, the SFU busses just turn around at the base of the mountain when there's a speck of white that lands up top. It's nuts.

In the end, though, I think not having winter tires is a lot like not having a/c on the busses: it's all about not spending money they don't really have to. 'Cause I'd imagine adding a/c and/or winter tires would be pretty fuggin 'spensive.

[melloman]

So, based on decisions that were made decades ago (which were arguably logical at the time), the current management deserves to be blamed in perpetuity? Do you blame your parents for who you are today? Do you dwell on the past, or do you try to move forward (whether it comes to your career or personal life) with what you are given to work with?

People are fixated on things that are somewhat unimportant in the grand scheme of things - faregates, management salaries, etc. The real reason why we have transit problems in the city is the result of broad failures in urban planning, the housing market and globalization of financial capital, and antiquated sentiments about the type of life we're entitled to in North America. Many of these causes are beyond the scope and capacity of Translink to solve. These problems more specifically are:

- Suburban sprawl that is largely driven by the housing preferances (ie. Single family detached houses) of North Americans, and the cost of housing in Metro Vancouver
- the astronimical growth in housing prices which has been driven by offshore capital and loosening credit
- the failure of muncipalities to gain anything from the paradigm shift in the local real estate market in the form of increased taxes and community contributions
- the fact that jobs are no longer stable which means people can expect to alter commuting patterns every 2-3 years
- the stigma against public transit in North America
- the relatively low cost of owning, and operating a car in North America (gas, leasing options, and free maintenance)
- NIMBYism that is particularly strong
Posted via RS Mobile

Don't get me wrong here, I am not saying that today's people should be held liable for the mistakes made by people 30 years ago. I just think that not enough time and thought are put into the major billion dollar projects that they are proposing today.

[inv4zn]

^This is what the people who are making educated comments are arguing about.

The plans they have today are not much better in relation to the decisions that were made 30 years ago.

Futureproofing infrastructure should be a priority, but so much effort is spent on cleaning up shit from yesteryears that there aren't enough resources to do it.

I understand it's a pickle, and maybe people are making unreasonable demands, but the point is the way it's going now, my children will be arguing about your children about the exact same things.

What is the solution? I donno. I agree that we can't "compare" ourselves to other cities, due to excellent points made on population densities. But ironically that's what Translink seems to be doing, and they're looking in all the wrong places.

I know people that work there aren't idiots. They must have many certificates lining the walls of their offices, and have much more experience than I do. But then how come so many bad decisions are made that are incomprehensible. Is it that they're exponentially smarter than I am that i can't even begin to get it? No, I don't think so.

Truth is, I don't think there's anyone smart enough (and not greedy enough) to step up and pull Translink out of the shithole. The public views them as an evil necessity, politicians use them to get more votes, and the people left suffering in the end, is everybody; whether they're transit users, public road drivers, or even Translink employees.

This thread alone is proof of how Translink is a mess lol. 8 pages of arguments and each and every one of them is valid (again, minus the retards.)

[Tapioca]

Don't get me wrong here, I am not saying that today's people should be held liable for the mistakes made by people 30 years ago. I just think that not enough time and thought are put into the major billion dollar projects that they are proposing today.

There are two plans: one for the next 10 years and Transport 2040, both of which are on the front page of Translink's website. But, it's my opinion that people are too lazy to read these plans and instead try to pass off their ill-informed views (based on deep-seated values about what they believe public transit is) as gospel. I'm not saying that Translink should be exempt from criticism, but at least if one is going to be critical, at least criticize the content of their plans.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Tapioca]

I don't mind the fare increase but transit needs to reliable. Is not relibable when a bus is schedule to come at 7:20 instead never comes and have to wait for the next bus. Yet ppl are waiting there at 7:10. This happens 80% of the time around my house. So either the bus driver decided to skip work or something went wrong.
Skytrains and jam pack during rush hours. People are having to wait a few skytrains before they can get on. Now think what the ever green line will do. You are going to have people waiting for 30mins just to get on a skytrain.
When it snows huge delays up to 2hours or more. Thats unacceptable. Come on is Vancouver you know we have snow every year but you did nothing to prepare for it and make excuse every year.

That's unfortunate to hear. In my experience, bus service is usually fairly reliable (but I limit my bus travel to main routes in the City of Vancouver.) If it's a persistent problem, you could always call customer relations or even Tweet Translink (I'm being absolutely serious.) Or you could always send a text to 33333 with your bus stop number and figure out when the next bus is coming (information is real time now.)

I don't think there is any transit system in the world that isn't busy during rush hours. If you think about it, being busy during rush hour is a good thing (it means that there is a demand and fares are being paid.) I get on at Commercial and Broadway every day during rush hour and 95% of the time, I get on the first train because I go to the back of the platform. People who wait at the front of the platform and can't get on trains are quite frankly, foolish. Like anything else in life, you sometimes need to be aggressive and that includes getting on a train.

People conveniently forget that driving is subject to the same delays as transit. Accidents happen all of the time which can cause massive delays. I suppose though that you can at least sit in a warm car with your tunes and avoid the hordes of ne'er do wells that take transit.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Soundy]

Futureproofing infrastructure should be a priority, but so much effort is spent on cleaning up shit from yesteryears that there aren't enough resources to do it.
This is what's always struck me as the root of the problem: nobody thinks far enough ahead. Hwy. 1 through Coquitlam/Burnaby is a good example: the HOV lanes were put in a mere, what, 10-12 years ago? Now they're tearing it all up to do it all again. Wouldn't it have been smarter to go to five lanes with express bus lanes and the like right from the start?

Sure, people then would have been harping on the gov't spending all that money and land on a huge highway that's virtually empty... but they'd be happier for it today. And with the way the cost of EVERYTHING has shot up the last half-dozen years, it would have cost SUBSTANTIALLY less to have done in then.

The Cape Horn Interchange is an even better example of band-aid construction: in the last 20 years, I can think of at least three major re-alignments that did little to IMPROVE traffic flow - it just shifted some of it from one place to another while keeping most of the bottlenecks in place (like the freeway overpass). They're finally, with the Gateway Project, doing it all right - effectively redoing the entire thing from scratch. Before it was like a half-assed interchange between Hwy. 1 and Lougheed, with United and the Mary Hill Bypass linked in as an afterthought... the planners this time around appear to have realized that you have FOUR major commuter routes connecting in one place, and have designed things to be more accommodating to that fact.

[Soundy]

People conveniently forget that driving is subject to the same delays as transit. Accidents happen all of the time which can cause massive delays. I suppose though that you can at least sit in a warm car with your tunes and avoid the hordes of ne'er do wells that take transit.
Posted via RS Mobile
Remember the news bit a couple years ago, where they had one reporter take transit from Langley to downtown Vancouver, and another drive it using the main commuter routes (as most people would do, not zipping around secret taxi shortcuts and such)? The two arrived at the target location within *two minutes* of each other.

[bobbinka]

hindsight is 20/20. it's easy for people to say "they should have done this or that". predicting future demand is VERY difficult. setting plans in motion to fix current problems also take time, many years in some cases. by the time the "fix" is in place, something will have changed so that the "fix" is no longer the full solution.

the people that complain saying "they should take more time before engaging in such expensive projects" will also be the same people complaining about how slow translink is in addressing problems if a 5 year project now takes 7 or 8 years, or if a 1 year planning phase becomes 2 years.

people can't seem to understand that the government exists to serve the public and makes tough choices everyday to do so. there is a budget, a very limited budget that comes from the taxes you pay. there are only TWO ways to solve this "shithole" of a public transit system as some of you call it:

1). allocate more resources from other programs/areas to translink
2). pay more gaddamn taxes

in the end, it all comes down to money. and no matter which solution is used, it will be a lose-lose situation to you. you want a better transit system? either pony up some extra money to pay taxes or suffer from funding being cut from other programs. Or you could just accept the system as it is being handled and quit complaining.

[Soundy]

hindsight is 20/20. it's easy for people to say "they should have done this or that". predicting future demand is VERY difficult. setting plans in motion to fix current problems also take time, many years in some cases. by the time the "fix" is in place, something will have changed so that the "fix" is no longer the full solution.
True in many cases... in the case of the Cape Horn interchange, anyone who drove it on a daily basis could tell you what the problems with it were. The problem there wasn't the lack of foresight, I don't think, so much as the unwillingness to spend what was necessary to fix it right, since putting a bandage on it is much faster and cheaper and at least gives the appearance of improving things (and maybe makes a short-term improvement).

In fairness, fixing it properly has also included major realignments of Hwy. 1, Lougheed highway, the rail lines, United Blvd., and ultimately needed a whole new bridge to tie into.

in the end, it all comes down to money.
:werd:

[inv4zn]

A majority of problems in BC would be solved by doing a few things:

- Electing people whose interests are of the people - regardless of political party - and trusting them. This is probably impossible.

- Telling certain people to shut the fuck up - the ones who complain about everything and demand their voice be heard because we live in a democracy, without knowing fuckall about what they're complaining about. Christ.

[inv4zn]

in the end, it all comes down to money. and no matter which solution is used, it will be a lose-lose situation to you. you want a better transit system? either pony up some extra money to pay taxes or suffer from funding being cut from other programs. Or you could just accept the system as it is being handled and quit complaining.

I'm generalizing, mixing up federal and provincial governments, and not talking about translink now, but the biggest problem is not money, but allocation of money.

When I drive down the street full of potholes and mismanaged roads, while looking at the million of mailboxes that were freshly repainted, I have to wonder.

Government spends money on a new roof that a majority of the population don't give a shit about, while cutting education costs, I have to wonder.

Same thing with transit. Yes, it's all about money. But not in the sense that you put it in.

[Tapioca]

people can't seem to understand that the government exists to serve the public and makes tough choices everyday to do so. there is a budget, a very limited budget that comes from the taxes you pay. there are only TWO ways to solve this "shithole" of a public transit system as some of you call it:

1). allocate more resources from other programs/areas to translink
2). pay more gaddamn taxes

in the end, it all comes down to money. and no matter which solution is used, it will be a lose-lose situation to you. you want a better transit system? either pony up some extra money to pay taxes or suffer from funding being cut from other programs. Or you could just accept the system as it is being handled and quit complaining.

While these arguments make sense, when your initial position is that government is all bad and that those who work for it are lazy and incompetent, then nothing will ever please you short of the impossible. Sadly, a lot of people these days seem to expect everything for nothing. It's hard to blame them though - stagnant salaries and rising living costs are putting people on edge.

[bing]

Not nearly as brilliant as those translink execs who decided that fare gates aren't needed at the Skytrain stations and then later being surprised at the amount fare evasion that was going on. Needing to pay market rates to attract quality execs is just an excuse. No good exec in their right mind would want to work for a crown corp given all the political interference from the government. You take all the flak for all the stupid government decisions. What you end up getting are either execs from the bottom of the barrel, exec wannabe's, or friends of the government.
Posted via RS Mobile

First of all, what do you do for a living sir? I'd like to know how hard you tried in life before you can say that these executives are paid unfairly.

You're right, there are "good" and "bad" execs, but at the end of the day Translink still needs execs to run a company with an annual budget of almost a billion dollars. So if these are "bottom of the barrel" executives because nobody in their right mind would want to work for a government entity what's a fair salary? 150K? Translink CEO Ian Jarvis made $352,242 in 2010 (apparently 382,954 in 2012) and all the other execs probably make significantly less than him. That's not a lot of money for the amount of responsibility they have and there's only 6 other executives (according to their web page) so its not an excessive number. All the executives I personally know are always busy.

There are many transit police, glorified ticket checkers you could say, easily clearing 6 figures (59/169 officers and all made over 75k) with usually nothing more than a bachelors degree - which does not imply that you need top grades either. On the other hand, family doctors also make hundreds of thousands of dollars and nobody usually bitches. BUT BUT, its not okay to pay executives (many with professional degrees: CA, MBA, masters - which means their grades are usually good enough to get into medical school if they really wanted) at companies such as Translink who are responsible for running large companies in the salary range of 200-350k? Let me ask you, what's harder to manage, a clinic or a company with almost a billion dollar budget? Yes, doctors have some expenses, but there are even local family doctors that clear up to and slightly over 500k. Oh, and might I remind you that the majority of the taxes paid are from the high income earners. So that free health care you benefit from and your children's subsidized education, you can thank people like the Translink execs.

[Tapioca]

First of all, what do you do for a living sir? I'd like to know how hard you tried in life before you can say that these executives are paid unfairly.

I was a bit confused by his post too, but I think his main point was that Translink gets shitty leadership because the pay sucks (compared to more glorious jobs in the private sector) and the work sucks (after all, who wants to be scrutinized everyday by ill-informed citizens and politicians looking to take cheapshots in order to improve their political careers?)

All the executives I personally know are always busy.

You mean, they aren't all playing golf on the company dime?

The thing is that most people work for small to medium sized companies and organizations with shitty corporate cultures, shitty pay, and SOBs for bosses. It's hard for them to have any empathy for executives of large organizations who probably get to see their kids play hockey after a day in the office. In the mind of most people, if you're making 6-10 times the money they're making, then you better do a pretty close to perfect job.


On the other hand, family doctors also make hundreds of thousands of dollars and nobody usually bitches.

Doctors provide a valuable service that is tangible to the layperson. Transit executives' work is not tangible and all people see are late buses, higher fares, etc.


BUT BUT, its not okay to pay executives (many with professional degrees: CA, MBA, masters - which means their grades are usually good enough to get into medical school if they really wanted) at companies such as Translink who are responsible for running large companies in the salary range of 200-350k? Let me ask you, what's harder to manage, a clinic or a company with almost a billion dollar budget? Yes, doctors have some expenses, but there are even local family doctors that clear up to and slightly over 500k. Oh, and might I remind you that the majority of the taxes paid are from the high income earners. So that free health care you benefit from and your children's subsidized education, you can thank people like the Translink execs.

To be fair, educational credentials are not always commensurate with a person's intellect or his ability to perform a job well.

Again, the issue here is that most people will never manage anything beyond a household in their lives. They don't understand the hard work, the endless strategic thinking, the endless demands, and so on of executive work, particularly in large organizations. They only see something wrong and place the blame on the guys making the large salaries because it's easy.

[Mr.HappySilp]

Where do you live? I get the odd skipped bus here, but the busses here run every 5-10 minutes (135).

Skytrains are packed during rush hour. People having to wait a few trains is very weird, man. I used to take the skytrain to work sometimes, and I would get on at commercial heading downtown. This is the worst place to get on a skytrain. There's always enough room, though. Maybe not at the front (near broadway), but at the back I'll sometimes even find a seat. It's all about knowing your commute.


Gods, don't even get me started about snow though. I'm of two minds about that one. ninety percent of Vancouver drivers don't know what they're doing in the snow. When I used to work as a parts guy, as soon as I saw even the lightest feather dusting of snow, I knew I was going to make my parts quota for that month and then some.

Our transit system really wasn't designed for the cold either. We had that really cold winter a couple years ago where the trolley busses couldn't even run because the lines had frosted up. Now, when it gets that cold, they actually have "ice cutter" trolley busses that run overnight to make sure the lines don't freeze up in the same way. It's a step in the right direction.

The most contentious thing for me and the one I feel most strongly about (both ways) is the fact that Translink doesn't have winter tires. All busses only use all seasons. On one hand, I get it. It snows (typically) less than two weeks a year, why have tires. On the other hand, what the fuck. Trolley busses are USELESS on any kind of hill or incline AND THIS IS VANCOUVER. Good luck avoiding inclines. Bendy busses are just as bad. Hell, the SFU busses just turn around at the base of the mountain when there's a speck of white that lands up top. It's nuts.

In the end, though, I think not having winter tires is a lot like not having a/c on the busses: it's all about not spending money they don't really have to. 'Cause I'd imagine adding a/c and/or winter tires would be pretty fuggin 'spensive.

I live by BCIT so I take the 123 every morning. The translink schedule and the online schedule both saids there should be a 123 going by at 8:17. It comes maybe like 1 to 2 out of 5 days. I always waited there at 8:10 so I know it never show up. Is not like it is full and didn't stop it just never came.

I go to the back at Boardway station and usually I only have to wait 2 skytrains at most but sometimes it takes longer. Partly I blame on the people who carry backpacks and doesn't take them off thus wasting space. I carry a backpack myself and always takes it off when entering a skytrain.

I am not really looking forward to this year winter since I know translink isn't prepare for it and there are going to be huge delays. Is understandable for bus to be late due to road condition but is not acceptable when skytrain is having issue as well. Is not acceptable when people are stranded for 2 or more hours in the skytrain station because skytrain is having issue and it is packed. So why not prevent it from happening? This happens every winter and translink should have learn something by now.

[inv4zn]

Again, the issue here is that most people will never manage anything beyond a household in their lives. They don't understand the hard work, the endless strategic thinking, the endless demands, and so on of executive work, particularly in large organizations. They only see something wrong and place the blame on the guys making the large salaries because it's easy.

Couldn't I just turn this around and say that because they are making the large salaries, they should do their job, even if it involves hard work, endless thinking, and unreasonable demands?

I would like to think that these people accepted their executive positions not based on their remuneration, but because they felt they'd be up to the task. And this is where the people kind of lose faith in the entire thing, because they feel that the people making big bucks aren't doing a good job.

[Soundy]

Couldn't I just turn this around and say that because they are making the large salaries, they should do their job, even if it involves hard work, endless thinking, and unreasonable demands?

I would like to think that these people accepted their executive positions not based on their remuneration, but because they felt they'd be up to the task. And this is where the people kind of lose faith in the entire thing, because they feel that the people making big bucks aren't doing a good job.

I think you just made his point for him. The average radio-call-in-show whiner has no idea what work these people are actually doing behind the scenes, what their job actually entails, what hours they are or aren't actually putting in - they just assume that running a massive region-wide transit system is no more complex than running a household and thereby assume that they couldn't possibly be doing anything that's worth anywhere near what they get paid.

[Tapioca]

I am not really looking forward to this year winter since I know translink isn't prepare for it and there are going to be huge delays. Is understandable for bus to be late due to road condition but is not acceptable when skytrain is having issue as well. Is not acceptable when people are stranded for 2 or more hours in the skytrain station because skytrain is having issue and it is packed. So why not prevent it from happening? This happens every winter and translink should have learn something by now.

We get one major snowstorm a year, if we're lucky. Is it worthwhile for Translink to spend likely tens of millions on snow removal technology for Skytrain (even if there is such a thing) for one storm a year? Yeah, it does suck if you happen to use the service on the one day every year that results in delays, but it does not make sense economically.

[bing]

I was a bit confused by his post too, but I think his main point was that Translink gets shitty leadership because the pay sucks (compared to more glorious jobs in the private sector) and the work sucks (after all, who wants to be scrutinized everyday by ill-informed citizens and politicians looking to take cheapshots in order to improve their political careers?)

I get that. He implies that because their "shitty" executives, they should also be paid peanuts yet have all the responsibilities of a large organization. Since it can't go both ways - if we pay them peanuts, then we shouldn't expect much to be fixed either. A better way to judge would be to look at the company's accomplishments given their mandate and resources, but for the average person, that's too much work already.

The thing is that most people work for small to medium sized companies and organizations with shitty corporate cultures, shitty pay, and SOBs for bosses. It's hard for them to have any empathy for executives of large organizations who probably get to see their kids play hockey after a day in the office. In the mind of most people, if you're making 6-10 times the money they're making, then you better do a pretty close to perfect job.

People are paid what their worth and their in those positions because they have no other tangible skills to offer. Whose fault is that?

Doctors provide a valuable service that is tangible to the layperson. Transit executives' work is not tangible and all people see are late buses, higher fares, etc.

True, but they fail to see that these high income earners are the ones funding their medical entitlements in the first place. I guess its a selfish mentality, if it benefits me, then I just won't complain. The majority of the tax money funding these things like transit aren't even from their pockets in the first place. If they actually think they contribute much by paying 3.25 for a 1 zone fare, then they are sadly mistaken. I am not complaining but I spend $15 on gas just to go to school for one day (not including $7-13 parking per day) as I have no choice but to drive. I also did take transit for over half a year for hour and a half long trips daily and I have no complaints about the service (buses were mainly on time and I rarely had to wait for extra trains). For whiners that have no options - their fortunate to even have transit options.

I guess the myth that just because people pay GST/PST, property taxes, and a small amount of income taxes means that all taxpayers are equal. They fail to see how much of that goes back to benefit themselves.

To be fair, educational credentials are not always commensurate with a person's intellect or his ability to perform a job well.

Probably true, but in most cases, the family members I know that had the ambition to get those degrees mastered a lot of other things that made them successful: time management, rational thinking, willingness to learn, adaptability etc.

Again, the issue here is that most people will never manage anything beyond a household in their lives. They don't understand the hard work, the endless strategic thinking, the endless demands, and so on of executive work, particularly in large organizations. They only see something wrong and place the blame on the guys making the large salaries because it's easy.

Which is exactly why they have no right to complain. They are where they are in life because of themselves and the excuses they tell themselves.

[Tapioca]

I get that. He implies that because their "shitty" executives, they should also be paid peanuts yet have all the responsibilities of a large organization. Since it can't go both ways - if we pay them peanuts, then we shouldn't expect much to be fixed either. A better way to judge would be to look at the company's accomplishments, but for the average person, that's too much work already.

Yes, good point, but here's an argument frequently put forward:
If I can't drive a BMW, then why should our public services aim to be the best? The driving operating philosophy behind public services is that they should be merely adequate and that means finding competent if not stellar staff who can do a "good enough" job.


I guess the myth that just because people pay GST/PST, property taxes, and a small amount of income taxes means that all taxpayers are equal. They fail to see how much of that goes back to benefit themselves.

Bingo!


Probably true, but in most cases, the family members I know that had the ambition to get those degrees mastered a lot of other things that made them successful: time management, rational thinking, willingness to learn, adaptability etc.

I doing a Master degree part-time right now and I've been surprised by the calibre of students that have been admitted into the program (both ways.)


Which is exactly why they have no right to complain. They are where they are in life because of themselves and the excuses they tell themselves.

The job market stinks and people are afraid of leaving their jobs for better opportunities elsewhere. There is no doubt that incomes are stagnant (though, I'm not sure why governments should get the blame indirectly for the actions of private companies who don't invest in their employees.) The prevailing mantra is that if we at the bottom suffer then everyone at the top should suffer as well. I can understand this argument, but I also think that everyone is more or less in control of their lives and to make the best of their situation.

Posted via RS Mobile

[bing]

If I can't drive a BMW, then why should our public services aim to be the best? The driving operating philosophy behind public services is that they should be merely adequate and that means finding competent if not stellar staff who can do a "good enough" job.

Are you referring to the general attitude of the citizenry? I think Translink should aim to do the best given the resources they have and unfortunately that may translate to only competency at the moment until they stop losing money. To the whiners, I can only say, "beggars can't be choosers" or maybe an increase in fares should be in order for increased services.

And, the previous contention started because far too many people constantly denigrate the execs over pay when there's only 6 VPs + 1 CEO. It's a paltry sum to pay for salaries compared to their almost billion dollar budget and people don't understand what it takes to be one in the first place.

I doing a Master degree part-time right now and I've been surprised by the calibre of students that have been admitted into the program (both ways.)

First off, good for you I can always respect someone who goes for more education to further themselves. Are you doing your masters program here in BC? I guess it'll depend what school you go to and the program itself since I don't think you could suck in an engineering program or be weeded out easily compared to a master's in history for instance.

The job market stinks and people are afraid of leaving their jobs for better opportunities elsewhere. There is no doubt that incomes are stagnant (though, I'm not sure why governments should get the blame indirectly for the actions of private companies who don't invest in their employees.) The prevailing mantra is that if we at the bottom suffer then everyone at the top should suffer as well. I can understand this argument, but I also think that everyone is more or less in control of their lives and to make the best of their situation.

I have to agree with you. It's far easier to blame someone or something else.

[Tapioca]

Are you referring to the general attitude of the citizenry? I think Translink should aim to do the best given the resources they have and unfortunately that may translate to only competency at the moment until they stop losing money. To the whiners, I can only say, "beggars can't be choosers" or maybe an increase in fares should be in order for increased services.

There were people on the BC Ferries thread advocating for a no-frills ferry service. I frequently see this type of philosophy being spouted in the media, on the internet, and so on. There is nothing wrong with this general operating principle; people just need to keep their mouths shut if buses don't come with A/C, or if GPS technology is not available, or if Skytrains run on reduced service in freak snowstorms, for example.


First off, good for you I can always respect someone who goes for more education to further themselves. Are you doing your masters program here in BC? I guess it'll depend what school you go to and the program itself since I don't think you could suck in an engineering program or be weeded out easily compared to a master's in history for instance.

Thanks. I'm doing a Master degree locally and it is in a basket-weaving (i.e. non-technical) discipline.

[Mr.HappySilp]

We get one major snowstorm a year, if we're lucky. Is it worthwhile for Translink to spend likely tens of millions on snow removal technology for Skytrain (even if there is such a thing) for one storm a year? Yeah, it does suck if you happen to use the service on the one day every year that results in delays, but it does not make sense economically.

When it snows more people opt to use the tranist system. Now you have more ppl using public tansit and because of the shitty weather half of the buses and mass delays of skytrains will only cause more people waiting. I think it was a few years ago major snow (not really much snow). Skytrains was delays for more than 2hours and most of the buses wasn't operating yet my dad shitty 1990 toyota with all season have no issue.

You increase fare prices people are going to expect better service.

[Graeme S]

When it snows more people opt to use the tranist system. Now you have more ppl using public tansit and because of the shitty weather half of the buses and mass delays of skytrains will only cause more people waiting. I think it was a few years ago major snow (not really much snow). Skytrains was delays for more than 2hours and most of the buses wasn't operating yet my dad shitty 1990 toyota with all season have no issue.

You increase fare prices people are going to expect better service.
So what would you suggest? The purchasing of snow tires for all of the 1462 busses in the fleet? Snowplows on the skytrains?

I agree that there are some flaws for sure. There are certainly some things which should be dealt with. But some problems are unavoidable unless we are willing to spend a disproportionately large amount of money to solve a relatively rarely-occurring problem. The last big snowstorm we had, IIRC, was accompanied by a windstorm. Many of the delays on the Skytrain were from ice or branches that had been blown or fallen on to the tracks; for the most part the Skytrains were running smoothly.

While the trolleybusses really don't do well on slippery hills, I think that's something that needs to be looked at in general; I think if we got rid of the trolley lines it would be beneficial in general, especially if we switched those busses to CNG which are lower cost to run and maintain than diesel, and would allow the maintenance costs to be less split between the various bus types.



This is the kind of thing we should be doing: looking at problems, analyzing the needs and resources we have, and making suggestions that improve overall efficiency to the system and to the problem at hand, rather than simply throwing money at things we don't like. It seems to me that many of the largest complaints people have about Translink is that it throws money down pits, yet people insist that "X problem be solved" without a thought for the costs.

[melloman]

Got to bump this again with more of Translink's AWESOME ideas:

15-month renovation project

TransLink is considering closing Metrotown SkyTrain Station for a 15-month renovation project because the station is due for an upgrade, starting in 2014. It’s going to be a big project and the options under consideration are the 15-month renovation project or one that would involve 28 months of construction.

This is the cheaper option; however, Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan says the cheaper alternative may not be the better choice.

“I think our community is going to react fairly negatively to that kind of impact on a transit station that is taking the most passengers in our city,” Corrigan states.

TransLink employee Jennifer Siddon says no final decision has been made about the renovation project.

Siddon says, ” We are just beginning the discussions with our stakeholders, including the City of Burnaby about how best to proceed with this important upgrade project.”

She says safety during the upgrades will be the top priority.

If Metrotown Skytrain Station is closed, a temporary station would be built nearby.

Image Credit: News1130


Sauce: TransLink considers renovations at Metrotown Skytrain Station | Vancity Buzz | Vancouver Blog (http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2012/12/translink-considers-a-15-month-renovation-project/)

Discuss.

[Graeme S]

Well, it says "they'll build a temporary station nearby". I think it's pretty nuts that they can build a second station, then close the first one, rebuild it, then demolish the replacement all in 15 months for less than it takes to fix the first one.


So, we have our choice on what to make people bitch about: "I can't believe they're making us walk an extra block to get to metrotown--and for more than a year!" or "Can you believe that this construction is taking more than two years to finish? It must be all the unions!"

My big concern is what they're going to do with the Canada line. Most of the stations are at capacity already during rush hour if I remember correctly. And yet Vancouver is building up more along the lines, and the stations have no upgrade capacity. That's gonna be a whole 'nother gong show a decade from now.

[inv4zn]

^sometimes it's inevitable to inconvenience, and inevitably frustrate the public.

This is an instance where I "agree" with Translink's foresight to upgrade the station.

I really don't see any other way to upgrade the station without doing what they said they'd look into doing.

What I would like to see is how well they can convince the public that this is necessary, and reduce any (hardly likely, I know) backlash and mindless complaining.

[melloman]

My issue is the same as Graeme's... How the fuck can you find it CHEAPER and QUICKER to build a temporary station..

Cheapest solution is to close Metrotown and tell everybody to fucking walk from Patterson. :derp: Which would have MASSIVE backlash from the public.

[Graeme S]

I'm surprised they didn't propose a bus bridge. Wouldn't that be cheaper? A bus bridge from Royal Oak and Patterson running in just constant cycles. I mean, it'd be chaos, but wouldn't that be cheaper than building and demolishing a whole new station?

[UFO]

My issue is the same as Graeme's... How the fuck can you find it CHEAPER and QUICKER to build a temporary station..

Cheapest solution is to close Metrotown and tell everybody to fucking walk from Patterson. :derp: Which would have MASSIVE backlash from the public.

When I read this in the paper the other day, I understood it as they are rebuilding the bus loop, not the whole skytrain station. Temporary bus loops/stations are easy and cheap to build/take down. Maybe I read it wrong

[Mr.HappySilp]

THEY could shorten it a good 30% if they have people working 16hours a days even on holidays......

Is going to be a gong show for sure.

[tgill]

I'm surprised they didn't propose a bus bridge. Wouldn't that be cheaper? A bus bridge from Royal Oak and Patterson running in just constant cycles. I mean, it'd be chaos, but wouldn't that be cheaper than building and demolishing a whole new station?
Quite simple actually, a storage or pocket track exists just east of the current station, setup some temporary stairs, some scaffolding for shelter, and a temporary platform and your done.

http://www.abload.de/img/quitesimpleoves3.jpg

The RFP for the design of Metrotown Station upgrade is issued here (http://www.translink.ca/~/media/Documents/about_translink/doing_business_with_translink/bidding_opportunities/Q12%20115/Q12115%20RFP.ashx)

The estimate time for construction begin early 2014, and complete early-mid 2016.

Description of the works:
(a) Modifications to the existing Metrotown Station
(i) New east entry
(ii) Addition of a new west entry
(iii) Addition of a central entry at the elevators/central stair
(iv) Addition of new vertical circulation elements that improve access to/from the platform:
a. A new down escalator descending from the platform to the mezzanine.
b. Removal of the existing elevator
c. New stair and escalators from mezzanine to grade at the west entry
d. New stair and escalators from mezzanine to grade at the east entry
e. Two new elevators located near the middle of the platform, accessible via the new central entry
f. A new stair provided mid-platform, connecting to mezzanine and grade level (central entry).
g. New stairs and up escalator provided at east end of the platform to replace existing ones
h. New stairs and up escalator at the west end of the platform
(v) Addition of a full length mezzanine connecting all entries and providing rain protection for passenger island at grade, with each of the three entries containing fare gates and ticketing equipment.
(vi) Bike facility and additional auxiliary spaces at grade level
(b) An expanded transit exchange and a proposed passenger island under the station, including:
(i) Design of the bus exchange, including a traffic impact analysis
(ii) Several direct pedestrian connections between the exchange and the station, as well as connections between the exchange and adjacencies.
(iii) Landscape design at grade level
(c) New hoop trusses and extension of the platform roof at the west end
(d) Design to provide for faregates and equipment implementation
(e) Replacing mesh panels with glazing at platform level of existing Metrotown Station

The cost review recommend a complete shutdown of Metrotown station to decrease construction. An option considered for this is to build a temporary "Metrotown East" station at the current pocket track area. Other options include modification of bus routes and temporary bus bridge.

[tiger_handheld]

what I would do:

shut down the station

have 4 99 b line busses operating as a bus bridge from Patterson
have 2 99 b line busses operating as a bus bridge from Royal Oak
have car 2 go / modo / car coop cars at Patterson / Royal Oak

Free rides from Royal Oak to Patterson (can be done with Compass card) to subsidize the extra walking / commute.

[Not really racist!]

One thing I have to agree with is that the Metrotown station is long overdue for an upgrade.... it gets pretty chaotic having that one entrance and one exit

[Tapioca]

They should just shut the station down and make people walk, or at the very most, set up a bus bridge. Part of the reason why the province created Translink was so that sound, but politically unpopular decisions could be made without opposition from the frothing mouths of the public.

15 months of inconvenience for 20 years of improved service. Sounds like a pretty good trade-off to me.
Posted via RS Mobile

[inv4zn]

15 months of inconvenience for 20 years of improved service. Sounds like a pretty good trade-off to me.
Posted via RS Mobile

What you forget is most people in Vancouver are selfish and couldn't give two fucks about benefits in the future if it inconveniences them today.

[Mr.HappySilp]

They should just shut the station down and make people walk, or at the very most, set up a bus bridge. Part of the reason why the province created Translink was so that sound, but politically unpopular decisions could be made without opposition from the frothing mouths of the public.

15 months of inconvenience for 20 years of improved service. Sounds like a pretty good trade-off to me.
Posted via RS Mobile

You also have to think about tons and tons of people get off at Metro station to take other buses. There is no49, 130 (Goes to BCIT, HASTING), 430(goes to richmond), 144(SFU), 106 (New West) just to name a few and these are very very popular buses.

Not to mention what about people with disability who lives near Metrotown and needs to use the skytrain.

Have you been to the New West station when they shut it down(at least shut down partway) so new bus loop, apartments and shopping centers can be built around it? It was chaos and New West is not as big as a station as Metro so I expect this to be worse.

What tgill pointed out I don't think it will work, there is simply too many passenger and during rush hour it will slow the heck of the whole system down.

[GLOW]

My issue is the same as Graeme's... How the fuck can you find it CHEAPER and QUICKER to build a temporary station..

Cheapest solution is to close Metrotown and tell everybody to fucking walk from Patterson. :derp: Which would have MASSIVE backlash from the public.

first thing that came to mind was to just walk from patterson.
:derp:

second would be to phase the construction to allow partial access like they did at broadway/commercial a while back?

[Graeme S]

As they mentioned; shutdown, 15 months. Phased, 28 months. That's almost double the time.

[Phozy]

Man fuck translink. Major delays right now.

Getting shittier and shittier by the day.
Posted via RS Mobile