Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion II

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

So I just want some clarification, but is transit free?

I'm only asking because on my way to work this morning I saw four people get on without paying

It's free for children aged 12 and under.

If you see someone breaking the law on Transit property, text the Metro Vancouver Transit Police at 87-77-77. They don't monitor this forum for passive aggressive posts.

[madog222]

Translink is looking into the possibility of extending the life of the first batch of Mark II trains.

Project Summary: This Request for Proposal (“RFP”) is seeking a consultancy/experienced vendor to conduct and manage a feasibility study that will comprehensively assess the current state of 60 MK II 1100-1200 series cars and determine their ability to operate reliably until the end of their designed 30-year lifecycle and explore the potential to extend their operational lifespan by an additional 10 years.

https://portal.us.bn.cloud.ariba.com/discovery/public/rfx/22989823/preview

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by madog222

Translink is looking into the possibility of extending the life of the first batch of Mark II trains.


https://portal.us.bn.cloud.ariba.com/discovery/public/rfx/22989823/preview

Is their end-of-service cycle 2030 or 2032?

(Testing began in 2000 but their didn't officially enter (fully) into service until 2002)

And would this be because they're anticipating a delay in some of the new Mark V's?

And I assume if an extension is approved, it's going to be only on the Millenium line.

[jollyburger]

In the 2024 Investment Plan they budgeted for a Mark II (1100-1200) Replacement in 2026-2028

Mark II (1300-1400) Replacement was listed as 2033

[Mac Write]

Any rumours/info if the 2024 option of 100 Mark V car was exercised?

[greenturnedblue]

Is there any reason to retire some MKII other than age? When I take the Millennium Line they seem modern enough. Big difference over the MKIs.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

And would this be because they're anticipating a delay in some of the new Mark V's?

If you can get 10 more years of life out of these cars for less than 25% of the cost of new cars expected to last for 40 years, then it's a no-brainer.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

If you can get 10 more years of life out of these cars for less than 25% of the cost of new cars expected to last for 40 years, then it's a no-brainer.

For the sake of comparison, the Mark 1 overhaul cost $330k per car while the initial Mark V order was $3.5 million per car.

[mattropolis]

I ride the Millennium line regularly and the noise of these cars is horrendous. Hope they do something about the insulation and horrible shrieking sounds. It’s especially bad in the Burquitlam tunnel.

[mcj]

Originally Posted by mattropolis

I ride the Millennium line regularly and the noise of these cars is horrendous. Hope they do something about the insulation and horrible shrieking sounds. It’s especially bad in the Burquitlam tunnel.

Noisy and the seating needs an overhaul, the seats are probably worse than the Mk Is in my opinion, also 2x2 seating makes them really cramped for standing room during busy times. Make them as much like the Mk 2.5s as possible (and hopefully with noise reduction measures).

[madog222]

Minimum scope for an overhaul should definitely include replacing the bogies, that would address the noise issue.

[Changing City]

Here's the news that will finally allow ssiguy to sleep soundly, without repetitively posting that the end is nigh.

"TransLink and the B.C. government have announced a combination of tax increases, fare increases and new funding that will end the systemic deficit that has plagued Metro Vancouver's transit authority since the pandemic — at least for the next three years.

News releases issued by the government and TransLink outlined the details, which will have to be approved by the Mayors' Council and TransLink board on April 30.

The agreement includes:

A 0.5 per cent property tax increase across Metro Vancouver, adding approximately $20 to the median household;
A 5 cent increase in transit fares beginning in July;
A $1.50 increase in the YVR AddFare for trips from Vancouver International Airport;
An increase in off-street parking taxes from 24 per cent to 29 per cent;
$312 million from the provincial government over the next three years.
According to TransLink, the deal will keep them fiscally sustainable until the end of 2027. It will also allow them to increase service on up to 50 bus routes, add 40 new or additional routes, and extend the North Short RapidBus to Metrotown by 2027."

CBC

[mcj]

Originally Posted by madog222

Minimum scope for an overhaul should definitely include replacing the bogies, that would address the noise issue.

Yeah that absolutely should, however in the Burquitlam to Port Moody tunnel a lot of the noise permeates in through the gaps between doors/windows and the body of the carriage itself. It's much worse on the Mk IIs than the Mk IIIs in the Dunsmuir tunnel.

Originally Posted by Changing City

Here's the news that will finally allow ssiguy to sleep soundly, without repetitively posting that the end is nigh.

"TransLink and the B.C. government have announced a combination of tax increases, fare increases and new funding that will end the systemic deficit that has plagued Metro Vancouver's transit authority since the pandemic — at least for the next three years.

News releases issued by the government and TransLink outlined the details, which will have to be approved by the Mayors' Council and TransLink board on April 30.

The agreement includes:

A 0.5 per cent property tax increase across Metro Vancouver, adding approximately $20 to the median household;
A 5 cent increase in transit fares beginning in July;
A $1.50 increase in the YVR AddFare for trips from Vancouver International Airport;
An increase in off-street parking taxes from 24 per cent to 29 per cent;
$312 million from the provincial government over the next three years.
According to TransLink, the deal will keep them fiscally sustainable until the end of 2027. It will also allow them to increase service on up to 50 bus routes, add 40 new or additional routes, and extend the North Short RapidBus to Metrotown by 2027."

CBC

Honestly, if this is really all it takes to solve the budget issue we should have done this yesterday. Almost ridiculous how marginal these increases are, that ~$100M per year from the Province shouldn't even be necessary. As a homeowner I'd rather see a permanent solution that involves a much larger property tax increase component to it and scrap the reliance on the Provincial government for operating funds that could be directed to capital improvements instead.

[jollyburger]

Public engagement begins on TransLink’s 2025 Investment Plan

The largest increase in bus service since 2018, including:
Increasing service on up to 50 bus routes to address overcrowding
40 new or improved routes to support transit-oriented communities, industrial areas, as well as neighbourhoods with limited or no transit services
Seven new or improved seasonal services to parks and beaches
Extending the North Shore’s R2 RapidBus to Metrotown by 2027
Design of three BRT corridors
Additional HandyDART trips in response to growing ridership
Adding West Coast Express train cars to address customer demand
More funding for the Major Road Network, including funding to address the deterioration of road conditions in many areas of the region
Continuing investments in local active transportation infrastructure and bus priority infrastructure, which also speeds up bus service and makes it more cost-efficient to deliver

https://www.translink.ca/news/2025/april...%20translinks%202025%20investment%20plan

I guess North Shore BRT in 2030?

[mcj]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

https://www.translink.ca/news/2025/april...%20translinks%202025%20investment%20plan

I guess North Shore BRT in 2030?

I'd call 2030 optimistic at this rate, even this new funding brings the R2 extension out to 2027. Ideally the R2 extension (and existing R2 route) is progressively improved to BRT standards over the next 5 years, and ridership materializes from relatively low ridership on the 222.

My (pessimist/realist) prediction is that NIMBYs in Burnaby and the North Shore will fight tooth and nail to keep their street parking from becoming a bus lane. Drivers cause a political uproar with any attempt to reallocate space on the Second Narrows. And, ridership on the extended R2 is low relative to the King George corridor which overtakes it as BRT priority #1 and we don't really see a full BRT to the North Shore until the 2040s with ridership being consistently too low to justify a Skytrain.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by mcj

I'd call 2030 optimistic at this rate, even this new funding brings the R2 extension out to 2027. Ideally the R2 extension (and existing R2 route) is progressively improved to BRT standards over the next 5 years, and ridership materializes from relatively low ridership on the 222.

My (pessimist/realist) prediction is that NIMBYs in Burnaby and the North Shore will fight tooth and nail to keep their street parking from becoming a bus lane. Drivers cause a political uproar with any attempt to reallocate space on the Second Narrows. And, ridership on the extended R2 is low relative to the King George corridor which overtakes it as BRT priority #1 and we don't really see a full BRT to the North Shore until the 2040s with ridership being consistently too low to justify a Skytrain.

Well there's zero street parking along the majority of the route on the North Shore segment. The problem is unless you turn a lot of the main feeder roads (Marine Drive etc) into one lane roads it's hard to see where you find a way to have dedicated lanes along the entire route in both directions. If anything an R2 extended to Metrotown will just create massive service gaps with buses stuck on the Second Narrows.

Personally I think dedicated bus lanes on the bridge is probably a low priority versus all the other chokepoints for a R2/BRT route. It's pretty much free flowing all the time minus accidents and trucks who want to go 30km/h on the bridge.

[xd_1771]

Since there are 60 cars in the first generation Mark II batch, 12 new 5-car sets could be created by combining the trains into longer walk-through sets. I suppose the study may or may not look at the costs/feasibility, but as this has been done at our sister system in KL Malaysia, it's tempting to see if we could do it, which would increase capacity and move the E/M system towards a uniform train length.

(For reference what I'm referring to is the Prasarana-led refurbishment that saw several of the original 2-car trains from 1998 spliced, diced, and "married" to form 4-car sets)

[ecbin]

Originally Posted by mcj

Honestly, if this is really all it takes to solve the budget issue we should have done this yesterday. Almost ridiculous how marginal these increases are, that ~$100M per year from the Province shouldn't even be necessary. As a homeowner I'd rather see a permanent solution that involves a much larger property tax increase component to it and scrap the reliance on the Provincial government for operating funds that could be directed to capital improvements instead.

Yeah, like Christ Almighty, make it a 5% increase so it's a $100/household. People would barely notice.

I wonder how much of the new funding is covered by the property tax increase itself.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by ecbin

Yeah, like Christ Almighty, make it a 5% increase so it's a $100/household. People would barely notice.

I wonder how much of the new funding is covered by the property tax increase itself.

What is the Proposed Change to Property Tax in the 2025 Investment Plan?
This Plan proposes to make two changes to TransLink’s property tax revenue, in addition to the
continuation of 2024 tax levels approved in the 2024 Investment Plan:
• In 2025, TransLink is proposing to raise an additional $44 million in property tax revenue (an
increase of eight per cent ).
• In 2027, an additional increase of $160 million in property revenue (an increase of 22 per cent).
In 2025, the impact of the $44 million equates to $20 for the median-value residential property in the
region ($909,000 property value). This increase represents approximately a 0.5 per cent rise in the total
median-value residential property tax bill for 2025 compared to what they would have paid otherwise.
TransLink’s total property tax revenues grow by 4.15 per cent annually, plus an amount based on
Annual Development Growth.

The structural deficit was around $600 million.

https://www.translink.ca/-/media/transli...025-investment-plan-discussion-guide.pdf

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by ecbin

Yeah, like Christ Almighty, make it a 5% increase so it's a $100/household. People would barely notice.

I wonder how much of the new funding is covered by the property tax increase itself.

People do notice.

One of my dear relatives has seen their Vancouver property value go from 1.2 mil to 4.5 mil in 15 years. They have gone through multiple tenants with yearly rental income going from near 15k to 33k in that span. Despite their increasing property taxes, they are collecting more $$ per year, outpacing inflation and have seen their home values go up. Yet these jokesters are always out there in the community clamouring for a break from increasing property taxes trying to say they are old and don't have enough income to withstand any further increases!

It's insane to see how supressed property tax rates are on homes worth that much in the region. There's a huge missed opportunity to better fund services.