Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[GeeCee]

The majority of the people voting in the poll have narrowly voted to increase funding, despite the fact that the no additional funding is winning.

[DKaz]

And the majority of the people who voted in the poll have narrowly voted for a left wing part of some sort in Canada, despite the fact that the Conservatives won...

I know this was probably a hard decision as the local government probably wanted the provincial and federal government to step up but hey we gotta do what we gotta do. Perhaps instead of a 15% tax credit on transit, they should scrap that and give 15% to transit agencies.

[mr.x]

Mayors hike fares, gas tax to keep TransLink on life support

By Jeff Nagel - BC Local News

Published: October 23, 2009 1:00 PM
Updated: October 23, 2009 1:03 PM

Get ready to pay more at the pump.

Metro Vancouver mayors agreed Friday to jack the region's gas tax by another three cents a litre and raise transit fares to deliver an extra $130 million a year for TransLink and avert deep bus service cuts.

While some mayors wanted to freeze funding to force the province into negotiations to refinance TransLink – effectively triggering a crisis and holding passengers hostage – they were outvoted 17-3 (or 98 to 16 votes weighted by population) by others who called the strategy irresponsible.

Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts, chair of the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation, said the drastic cuts scenario would have punish transit riders.

"I don't think it's responsible to throw up our hands, say okay cut the system to shreds and force the provincial government into a corner," Watts said.

"It's a bitter pill to swallow," Watts said, adding much now hinges on the provincial government listening to TransLink's needs.

Vancouver Coun. Geoff Meggs said he couldn't face long lines of students waiting in the rain for buses and tell them he's forcing cuts on their behalf and that the mayors will fight "to the last drop of their blood."

The stop-gap 10-year-plan provides no scope for expansion, and no ability to finance the operation or construction of new rapid transit extensions, including the Evergreen Line to Coquitlam.

But no one intends the "funding stabilization" option approved by the mayors to prevail for the full 10 years.

Mayors, the appointed TransLink board and TransLink officials all agree the livability of the region, its commitment to fight climate change and the province's transit expansion promises all depend on negotiating a new funding framework with Victoria to finance a much more ambitious and costly plan.

TransLink's favoured $450-million annual supplement proposal would have delivered much more, financed by a $122 a year vehicle levy and an extra $175 million in new sources the province would need to approve, presumed to include road pricing or regional tolling.

Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan, Port Moody Mayor Joe Trasolini and New Westminster Coun. Jonathan Cote voted against the motion to pass the $130-million supplement and begin fresh talks with the province aimed at crafting a new plan to replace it within six to nine months.

Corrigan said the mayors should have joined him and called the province's bluff.

"This is a non-decision," Corrigan said. "It simply takes the provincial government off the hook and puts us probably another decade behind in making improvements to the system."

Trasolini tried but failed to table the vote until after the province's pending Comptroller General's office review of TransLink is unveiled.

He voted against the plan, saying it failed to provide funding for the Evergreen Line.

"Clearly $130 million doesn't do anything at all for my region," he said.

Corrigan, Delta Mayor Lois Jackson, Pitt Meadows Mayor Don McLean and Bowen Island Coun. Peter Frinton voted with Trasolini to table the decision, but were defeated by others who noted the drastic cuts scenario would then prevail, according to TransLink's legislation.

Also frustrated was Richmond Mayor Malcolm Brodie, predicting TransLink will be in much the same position a year from now.

The provincial government has maintained it may still be possible to build and run the $1.4-billion Evergreen Line.

Transportation minister Shirley Bond this week told mayors they could raise property taxes to provide more for TransLink – an option the cities reject.



TRANSLINK'S FUNDING STABILIZATION PLAN

Extra $130 million a year funded by:

- Fuel tax increase of three cents per litre. Would generate $65 million.

- Fare hikes of five to seven per cent in 2010 and 2013 (on top of two per cent annual hikes for inflation). Discounted prepaid tickets and passes would immediately jump 10 per cent next year. Worth $30 million more.

- Balance was to be funded by higher sales tax on pay parking, but that's no longer possible due to B.C.'s shift to an HST. Province has said it will make up this portion of the funding gap.

Plan delivers:

- Service frozen at 2009 levels, new services for Olympics, including third SeaBus, removed after Games.

- Seven extra West Coast Express cars to lengthen trains.

- 48 new SkyTrain cars arriving will go into service, option to buy 24 more won't be exercised.

- No new rapid transit lines.

- Only minimal repairs on many fronts.

- Roads funding essentially frozen.

- Cycling funding cut in half to $3 million per year.

- Pattullo replacement, smart cards and gates, and SeaBus replacements.

- Five per cent cut to TransLink administration

[WarrenC12]

So Trasolini, who wants Evergreen, doesn't want to pay for it?

They are forcing the province into this, which is fine, but Corrigan and Joe are both idiots.

[Whalleyboy]

i'm glad to see pattullo is still on the list

i say they should just scrap the cycling part for now
and a bigger cut to translink administration

[officedweller]

Why don't they cut service to the municipalities that voted against it?

[twoNeurons]

Trasolini voted against it because, if you read the article, he was in favor of cutting the funding and forcing the Province to step in.

Once they announce they're cutting funding, the Province would be forced to step in and either make up the shortfall from General revenue or give Translink some power to raise capital.

Of course, since we're not in the middle of any election...

It appears Trasolini wasn't against funding, he was against giving the province an easy out.

That's the problem... Translink is tasked with providing transportation to the economic centre of the province but are hamstrung by not having the legal means to pursue funding to deliver it. They can't operate in a deficit, so they really can't do ANYTHING big without provincial support.

At least that's I think it all works.

[Stingray2004]

I'm still of the belief that the focus of Translink should be on transit - not major/regional highway infrastrucure such as the $800 million Golden Ears Bridge and $1 billion Pattullo Bridge project - they should have been/be under BC MoT's jurisdiction.

And the $100 million(?) fare gate proposition should also be put on the backburner.

That should free up more resources for Translink to focus on transit as well as Translink's funding portion for the Evergreen Line.

[DKaz]

Is part of the funding shortfall related to the recession?

[DKaz]

The $270m plan would've seen another 52 skytrain cars in addition to our current order of 48 which would've seen enough 4-car MKIIs and 6-car MKIs with 9 sets to spare or provide a very modest increase in service. Overhaul of Skytrain electrical and controls system, Expo Line capacity upgrades, wasn't the BC Government paying for all that?? 160 additional buses,

The $450m plan would've seen (all in addition to the $270m plan) an additional 38 skytrain (man without C-cars where the heck do you put all those trains??), $3.8 billion earmarked for rapid transit expansion including for the Evergreen Line. 6 additional WCE cars and an additional locomotive, presumedly to negotiate a 6th trip in, Albion WCE Station, 300 additional buses, 10 minute seabus frequency, 250 buses reinvested to other new services I presume because of expanded rapid transit services.

Sigh. Where do we find an additional $140m to $330m?

[mr.x]

^ i'm going to point towards the provincial government.


I think the first funding model of Translink, right after the agency was created, would work much better. Have Translink be responsible for operating costs, and with the provincial government responsible for capital construction costs (and it'll be the provincial gov'ts duty to rally up federal funding to reduce their share).

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by mr.x

Have Translink be responsible for operating costs, and with the provincial government responsible for capital construction costs (and it'll be the provincial gov'ts duty to rally up federal funding to reduce their share).

Yup.

[Metro-One]

For me the funniest part is the provincial governemnt announced thier "15 billion dollar" transit expansion plan, which includes all of the goodies listed above, but then wanted Translink to essentially pay for it all!

Does anyone else see the problem with this? The provicinial government made it sound like they were the ones in charge and therefore the ones to pay the 15 billion dollar bill, but they were more of less just putting words in Translink's mouth.

Without the capitol cost from the province (or feds), how are all these expansion suppose to happen?

To me it is become more and ore clear that that was simply done to buy votes. I am personally holding the province to this promise, everything from the new Evergreen Line, to the Expo expansions to a new Albion station on the WCE. These were all their promises, and these are all expansive capitol projects that are understandably out of Translink's reach with their current limitations.

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by mr.x

I think the first funding model of Translink, right after the agency was created, would work much better. Have Translink be responsible for operating costs, and with the provincial government responsible for capital construction costs (and it'll be the provincial gov'ts duty to rally up federal funding to reduce their share).

I'll drink to that. I'm going to be super happy if the BC Government says "ok, Translink does not have to contribute anything to the Evergreen Line or the UBC Extension, we provide the infrastructure, you operate and provide upgrades as necessary".

The BC Government should still pay the tab for Expo Line improvements as promised.

[AlexYVR]

Originally Posted by Whalleyboy

i'm glad to see pattullo is still on the list

i say they should just scrap the cycling part for now
and a bigger cut to translink administration

It's so cheap, so effective, and spreads so much good will in the city. I know it's less of an option for suburbanites but the bike lanes are bad enough as it is - cutting funding is already going to make it worse for so many people and killing it entirely for a measly 3 mil would create havoc, not to mention having to deal more with critical mass. There's a reason that smiley face is called 'hell'.

[wrenegade]

Do the Seabuses really need replacement? I don't think I've ever heard of them having issues. Actually, I don't think I've ever heard of them undergoing much maintenance. Aren't these things tanks? Why are we replacing them? Spend the money someplace else!

[WaxItYourself]

Originally Posted by mr.x

^ so what's going to happen to Evergreen?


I really wish Corrigan would just disappear from the public realm.

Well the Provincial Government has said that it must be built. Hopefully they can provide the money to build it themselves but I doubt they will.

[DKaz]

Top: New West Coast Express GO2 smart card
Middle: New magnetic-stripe-less ticket (for parking, extensions, bicycles)
Bottom: Old West Coast Express pass, soon to be replaced by magnetic-stripe ticket.

[nname]

Originally Posted by awvan

Do the Seabuses really need replacement? I don't think I've ever heard of them having issues. Actually, I don't think I've ever heard of them undergoing much maintenance. Aren't these things tanks? Why are we replacing them? Spend the money someplace else!

The average useful life for ferry worldwide is about 30~35 years, unless it had undergone extensive maintenance. The two SeaBuses will be 34 years old by the end of this year, so there are a much higher risk of an accident if they kept them in service.

[deasine]

New hybrid buses are now in service!

Side profile: see the 'hump'?

TransLink has rolled out it’s fleet of new Nova hybrid buses. According to the Buzzer Blog, Jhenifer Pabillano reports that seventeen of the total one hundred and forty one hybrid buses has arrived in Vancouver, with the rest expected to arrive within the next three months.

The front of the bus looks pretty much like every Nova bus. From the side profile, aside from the ‘hump’ near the back of the bus, it’s still quite similar to the regular Novas, as shown in the above photo from the Buzzer Blog. It’s the back of the bus where things look quite different.



Back of the Nova

Reminds me something from back to the future. What are your thoughts?
(via Buzzer Blog)

Edit: Also, be sure to view David Lam’s collection of photos from the Trans-Continental Photo Gallery.

From Route604.com