Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[GlassCity]

As much as I want transit to improve, I don't know if we can just keep raising taxes. I'm not saying I have any better ideas, but it's not like we'll raise taxes and all of a sudden transit's not an issue anymore. We'll end up trying to raise them again, then again until what? At some point they're gonna have to figure something else out.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

As much as I want transit to improve, I don't know if we can just keep raising taxes. I'm not saying I have any better ideas, but it's not like we'll raise taxes and all of a sudden transit's not an issue anymore. We'll end up trying to raise them again, then again until what? At some point they're gonna have to figure something else out.

Income taxes are very low here in BC, which I love. Unfortunately the general public has no economic knowledge to speak of, and reacts hysterically to any proposed consumption tax increase.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Income taxes are very low here in BC, which I love. Unfortunately the general public has no economic knowledge to speak of, and reacts hysterically to any proposed consumption tax increase.

I wouldn't know as I don't work full time. It's not that I disagree with raising taxes a little bit, especially if as you say ours are low, I just don't see it as a sustainable funding stream because once they run out of money again, then they'll just raise taxes again, and eventually we won't have low income taxes.

[city-dweller]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I wouldn't know as I don't work full time. It's not that I disagree with raising taxes a little bit, especially if as you say ours are low, I just don't see it as a sustainable funding stream because once they run out of money again, then they'll just raise taxes again, and eventually we won't have low income taxes.

There is no free lunch. When we want new bridges, buses and rapid transit it comes from taxes, tolls, or fees.

Either:

1. You can either create a long-term funding model that covers operating expenses and prepares for large capital projects including the foreseen added operational costs. You would divide the funds into two funds operations and a transportation improvement fund (TIF). The region then puts a ranked list of major and minor project over the next ten years and the cost to proceed, i.e. the cost to fund the tif.
   
   or
2. 
   You can constantly come back for more funding as costs outstrip funding and fight over which mode and which city gets improvements first, i.e. the current model.

[roleypolinde]

Looks like there's going to be a sea change at Translink, for better or for worse:

Changes could be coming soon to TransLink governance
Bus drivers’ union hopeful for more elected reps
Jason Howe January 28, 2014 12:50 pm

VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) – More power over TransLink is at the top of Metro Vancouver mayors’ wishlist, and we just might hear something about that soon.

The mayors have been advised something is in the works, and the union for bus drivers has now also been told the same.

“It’s not going to be revolutionary, but it’s going to be something the Mayors Council will be happy with,” says Nathan Woods of Unifor local 111. “So, we’re hopeful it is putting more elected reps on that board.”

Woods has met with Transportation Minister Todd Stone and says while he’s not privy to details, he’s hopeful the system will improve. “Let’s hope that out of this governance comes accountability and some funding.

He feels transit funding should be a priority.

“[The minister] did tell us that he agrees that the service levels of transit right now are in dire need of attention. He’s made a commitment not to let it implode.”

The ministry would only confirm for now that Stone is putting together a governance proposal.

[GMasterAres]

I say it over and over again like a broken record, they are taxing the wrong stuff that's the problem. When you are taxing gas and cars to fund a transit system meant to get people driving less cars and using less gas, you are ultimately killing your own funding source!

And as has been mentioned, with gas mileage going up nearly exponentially and continuing to do so, those same people driving today are using less and less gas to drive the same distances. Heck look at the latest sports cars being released. These are _sports cars_ and many are rated at 26-32mpg on the highway.

Even my car which gets about 26 on highway, with the new SFPR, has meant more highway driving for me on my daily commute which has directly equaled less gas I have to buy per month. It's shaved a good $75 off my monthly gas bill, all gas I am no longer buying and tax to translink I am no longer paying.

It is _stupid_ to use gas tax and car tax period to fund transit. Transit should have a fully independent funding source like a specific transit tax or a property tax levy that can actually pay for what they need, not just 0.2 cents for every dollar. If we want service, we should pay for service.

Gas tax then should be diverted to road infrastructure directly. Our problem in our society is taxes paying for completely unrelated things. It gets confusing, messy, out of control, and allows the government to be a bunch of asses to the general public because you have no idea where anything is coming from and going to. Taxation will happen. I'd much rather live in a society where we had X tax for health care, Y tax for education, Z tax for transit, A tax for police, B tax for sewage sanitation, etc. etc. Yes the list would be far longer, but then the government could go:

OK health care is having some issues and needs more money, so we are bumping up the X health care tax by 0.5%. And that X health care tax goes to ONLY health care nothing else. No general revenue. Right now they up our tax by 1% and say it will go to fund A, B, X, and Y, and ultimately do we know if they do? Probably not, it more often goes to pay C, D, M, and P.

But I'm sure in 6 more months I'll say the above again and we'll still be nowhere more forward on the issue of transit funding. It's not difficult. We just don't have politicians that actually want to do anything or a population that knows or cares enough ultimately to force them to.

[Mac Write]

Then get off your 🞵🞵🞵 (so to speak) and run for office, or start a group to inform the public etc.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by Mac Write

Then get off your 🞵🞵🞵 (so to speak) and run for office, or start a group to inform the public etc.

Agreed. A lot of people diss Malcolm Johnson but at least he started a group and make his views known in public. Same with Darryl and paradigm who actually ran for office (and even I spoke during the public meetings and got published a few times back in the day). But its so easy to just rant off in the forums but actually don't engage the decision makers.

[nname]

2014 Service Optimization

49 - Remove the diversion to 54th Ave
116 - Extend service along North Fraser Way
404 - Discontinue Ladner portion of route
606/608 - Convert to shuttle and discontinue Ladner - Bridgeport portion (I think this is the third time they tried this?)
C9 - Convert to hourly off-peak
C15 - Discontinue Deep Cove portion
C43/C44 - Convert to hourly off-peak
C50/C51/C52/C53 - Convert to hourly off-peak
C93 - Convert to hourly off-peak
C96 - Convert to peak-only service

Improvements for:
Fraser (502/503?), Scott/72th (319), 41st Ave (41), 49th Ave (49), Broadway (9/99), Hastings (135?), Como Lake (143), Marine Drive (239?)


I'm surprised they didn't touch any of the C80s routes...

[bardak]

Originally Posted by nname

2014 Service Optimization

49 - Remove the diversion to 54th Ave
116 - Extend service along North Fraser Way
404 - Discontinue Ladner portion of route
606/608 - Convert to shuttle and discontinue Ladner - Bridgeport portion (I think this is the third time they tried this?)
C9 - Convert to hourly off-peak
C15 - Discontinue Deep Cove portion
C43/C44 - Convert to hourly off-peak
C50/C51/C52/C53 - Convert to hourly off-peak
C93 - Convert to hourly off-peak
C96 - Convert to peak-only service

Improvements for:
Fraser (502/503?), Scott/72th (319), 41st Ave (41), 49th Ave (49), Broadway (9/99), Hastings (135?), Como Lake (143), Marine Drive (239?)


I'm surprised they didn't touch any of the C80s routes...

As someone who lives in South delta I'll give some of my feedback on the service changes.

• 404: Not surprised to see this happen. I live within walking distance to catch the 404 and I almost never used it. Even when going to Ironwood I would use the 601 and get off at steveston highway since the 404 left the loop a good 5 minutes after 601.
• 606/608: I'm surprised that they are keeping the loop routes instead of extending the c86 and c88 hours. It would be more simple in the long run and might help prop up the business case for those routes.

One last note is that I would have hoped to see some of the service put back into the 601 and increasing the 15 minute service hours to 6am-11am and 2pm to 7pm. Although I would really like to see them use articulated buses during the peak and get rid of the short turns at ladner exchange. I hope that would save enough money for all day 15 minute service.

Also I would expect that they would have cut the c80 routes to 60 minute headways like they did with a bunch of the other community shuttles.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by nname

49 - Remove the diversion to 54th Ave

I wonder how that's going to affect Champlain Mall?

This probably makes a lot of sense now that 49 is such a major east/west route. The 26 bus still serves Champlain Mall and connects the area with Skytrain, although it doesn't run as often.

[Tetsuo]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I wonder how that's going to affect Champlain Mall?

This probably makes a lot of sense now that 49 is such a major east/west route. The 26 bus still serves Champlain Mall and connects the area with Skytrain, although it doesn't run as often.

I don't think it will affect the place that much. I've taken the 49 Express that avoids that portion and you only get one or two people scrambling to get off. Champlain Square is more of a shopping centre focused to people who live near by to get groceries and run errands, akin to HighGate in Burnaby.

Most people using the 49 that live in the area get off at 54th and Kerr only to transfer to the 26, the rerouting means that more people will just transfer buses at 49th and Kerr.

Its a good reroute as you would often see buses bunch up with eachother during the diversion route, sometimes with 3 articulated 49 buses in a row.

[tybuilding]

Get on Board BC. Are having an informal information night/chat/networking session at Central City brewpub on Thursday at 7 and they're really trying to make connections with people who are concerned about transit in Surrey.

The Facebook invite link is:


https://www.facebook.com/events/400492870085581/?notif_t=plan_user_invited

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by tybuilding

Get on Board BC. Are having an informal information night/chat/networking session at Central City brewpub on Thursday at 7 and they're really trying to make connections with people who are concerned about transit in Surrey.

The Facebook invite link is:


https://www.facebook.com/events/400492870085581/?notif_t=plan_user_invited

Cool! I'm glad people are getting together and trying to organize to get our transit issues resolved. Hopefully this group can make a difference.

[Millennium2002]

Originally Posted by Tetsuo

I don't think it will affect the place that much. I've taken the 49 Express that avoids that portion and you only get one or two people scrambling to get off. Champlain Square is more of a shopping centre focused to people who live near by to get groceries and run errands, akin to HighGate in Burnaby.

Most people using the 49 that live in the area get off at 54th and Kerr only to transfer to the 26, the rerouting means that more people will just transfer buses at 49th and Kerr.

Its a good reroute as you would often see buses bunch up with eachother during the diversion route, sometimes with 3 articulated 49 buses in a row.

A bunch of people scrambling to get off the express is fine, but...

On the normal route, I normally see at least two people get on and off the bus at the Kerr and 54th corner. Usually it's more like half a dozen people on and off per bus, on average.

Given this, I'm more skeptical about how this route cut will serve people better in that area, given the infrequency of the only other route passing by (the 26).

[xd_1771]

One person I know has brought up an apparently large senior demographic on 54th, as well as an elementary school. Given that, I think it'd seem reasonable to allocate some sort of extra community shuttle service or an improvement to the 26... but as it is, the 49 detour is just asinine.

I think it's a significant deterrent to ridership let alone a service inefficiency. I know I personally like to avoid the 49, not really because of the overcrowding, but because of the significant travel time penalty. I time a 430 or C5/100, or catch the 41/43 or 410 instead to get to the Canada Line/Richmond.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

One person I know has brought up an apparently large senior demographic on 54th, as well as an elementary school. Given that, I think it'd seem reasonable to allocate some sort of extra community shuttle service or an improvement to the 26... but as it is, the 49 detour is just asinine.

Translink is holding an open house to discuss the changes. If there's significant hardship, perhaps one solution would be to run both local and "B-Line" express service, with only the local route making the diversion.

I'm in that grey area between 55 and 65 where I'm never sure if I'd be considered a "senior" or not. I go to Champlain Mall a fair bit, but I always ride my bicycle so these changes don't really affect me. Although I did hop on a 49th bus at 54th & Tyne with my bike once when I had a flat. If the diversion wasn't there it wouldn't have been a big deal for me to walk to 49th.

A little off topic, but even though the ubiquitous bike racks on the buses don't appear to get used that much, they really do encourage cycling a lot more than the evidence suggests. Back in the days before I became an all-weather cyclist there were many trips I made in marginal weather based on the ability to hop onto a bus if things got bad. I never had to do it, but those are trips I wouldn't have made without the ability to use the bus if necessary.

[DKaz]

I have to walk 1.2km to catch the 502 from my house, you don't hear me complaining.

Oh wait, I guess I officially have.

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by DKaz

I have to walk 1.2km to catch the 502 from my house, you don't hear me complaining.

Oh wait, I guess I officially have.

Hence why many in Surrey opt to drive....

[Gordon]

are these routes in Surrey poorly designed what causes such distances from stops. Wehn along w4th ave in VAncouver you can 3 stops in a 4 block stretch?