View Single Post
Old Posted Jan 19, 2015, 11:36 PM
Kisai Kisai is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 1,117
Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture View Post
they should copletely get rid of the name "TransLink" and become the GVTA "Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority." Officially "Metro Vancouver" is still the "Greater Vancouver Regional District" and i think the average person would think that with the new name there would be restructuring when in fact you could leave it pretty much as is.

this new name would fit in well with the GVRD, Metro Vancouver's official name, the GVWD, the Greater Vancouver Water District, and the GVS&DD, the Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage District. as an added bonus the name change of MVHC, the Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation, to GVHC, Greater Vancouver Housing Corporation, would be nice to keep the nomenclature the same. i was never a fan of the "Metro Vancouver" name myself, and officially, GVRD is still the name of the governed area.
The appellant transit authorities, the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority (“TransLink”) and British Columbia Transit (“BC Transit”), operate public transportation systems in British Columbia.
GVRD also refers to Greater Victoria, which is also known as Capital Regional District. See the problem?

As for electing people directly to Translink... I think this is foolish. The Mayors are already elected, and they're the ones screwing around and not raising property taxes. Translink is essentially a private company that keeps being meddled with by politicians instead of being left alone to do what is best for the region. If there is no political will from the mayors to raise taxes, nor the province or feds for capital projects, then Translink should just raise all the fares or cut service to each region that isn't paying for the amount of services required. Translink has a government mandated monopoly on transit, and then some. I'm sure the South of Fraser feels they aren't getting their moneys worth, but that is because of the geography. It costs more money to run buses in less dense areas, because more buses are needed to get comparable service to North of Fraser.

Nothing is going to change that in the short term as long as communities South of the Fraser keep on urban sprawling. Any form of rapid transit is completely wasted without the transit oriented development. And picking the wrong kind of "rapid" transit, will not bring the right kind of development.
Reply With Quote