Metro Vancouver Transportation & Transit Plebiscite

[Gordon]

Was there not some discussion talk of interlining the#2 & the #22 ? they are still 2 separate rouutes.

[nname]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

What changes are they proposing? I'm only able to find the ones for 2014, where they truncated the 404 from Ladner to Riverport...which kinda screwed my commute over.

Not in detailed as I mostly reading from a map and many may be missed:

- Routing change to 2, 22 (trying to merge again?)
- Routing change to 15, 50 (merge?)
- Improvement to 25, 33, 43
- Reduction on 17, C19
- Routing change for 106
- Vehicle conversion for 128
- Discontinue off-peak 130 extension to North Van
- Improvement to 143
- Reduction on 153, 157
- Improvement to 230 to run every 30min from 9pm to midnight
- Convert 246 to shuttle on weekends
- Discontinue 259 and merge into C12
- Improvement to 319
- Move 320 to 60th, 168th (instead of 176th, Fraser), and to Willowbrook
- Improvement to 335 (already implemented?)
- Move 341 to Hwy 10 (instead of 64th Avenue)
- Routing change for 394
- Extend 395 to Langley (already implemented)
- Improvement to 401, C94
- Vehicle conversion of 531 and move terminus to Langley (instead of Willowbrook)
- Routing change to 501, 502, 595
- New route to Yorkson, Willoughby on 208th
- Reduction on 603
- Routing change for 701, C43
- Improvement to 791
- Improvement to N19
- Improvement to N35 (already implemented?)

[GlassCity]

^Wow that's a lot, thanks for posting!

[DKaz]

I think there needs to be a bus route on 208 St. from Carvolth to Langley Centre. Lots of new development on that corridor -- condos and townhouses.

[dharper]

Originally Posted by DKaz

I think there needs to be a bus route on 208 St. from Carvolth to Langley Centre. Lots of new development on that corridor -- condos and townhouses.

I think Translink will resist transit on 208th because Langley refuses to let Translink dedicate it as a truck route.
More spite,than logic.

[go_leafs_go02]

Originally Posted by dharper

I think Translink will resist transit on 208th because Langley refuses to let Translink dedicate it as a truck route.
More spite,than logic.

Nope, it's coming...probably next year.

[paulsparrow]

Originally Posted by Klazu

I really don't understand anyone that commutes with car having voted 'No'. I am lucky enough not having to commute by car, but this week I have been out with car during the rush hour and it is ridiculous how congested our main aertials are being! North Shore bridges are a gong show, both Massey Tunnel and Alex Fraser Bridge are crawling and even the new 8-lane Highway 1 is full of cars and regularly experiences constantly stopping traffic!(

Simple. I've lived here 15 years in Surrey and worked either in Vancouver, Burnaby or now New West. During my skytrain years they raised the parking at Scott Road from like .75 to 3.00 a day and service was horrible with waits of up to 5 trains before you could get on.

Then my other years driving the cities/translink have done absolutely nothing to improve my vehicle commute. So I ask why would I approve a board to tax me more (and believe me once started it will be a LOT more in years to come) when they have done nothing for me.

If what you are trying to say is why don't we vote Yes and have the money go to transit so that we get out of our cars and into transit then you need to:

• Make it affordable - costs more than driving a car
• Make it convienent. Having to walk 10 mins and then wait 15 mins for a bus then walk another 10 mins at the other end isn't convienent
• Make it timely. When it take 50-100% longer than driving it just doesn't make sense

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by paulsparrow

Simple. I've lived here 15 years in Surrey and worked either in Vancouver, Burnaby or now New West. During my skytrain years they raised the parking at Scott Road from like .75 to 3.00 a day and service was horrible with waits of up to 5 trains before you could get on.

Then my other years driving the cities/translink have done absolutely nothing to improve my vehicle commute. So I ask why would I approve a board to tax me more (and believe me once started it will be a LOT more in years to come) when they have done nothing for me.

If what you are trying to say is why don't we vote Yes and have the money go to transit so that we get out of our cars and into transit then you need to:

• Make it affordable - costs more than driving a car
• Make it convienent. Having to walk 10 mins and then wait 15 mins for a bus then walk another 10 mins at the other end isn't convienent
• Make it timely. When it take 50-100% longer than driving it just doesn't make sense

Your entire argument is "transit isn't good enough, and because of that I don't want to pay to improve it." Think about how illogical that is. That's like saying that your town's school system isn't very good, so you should stop funding it. Nothing is going to get better without the money to make it possible.

Also, about that list...
Make it affordable: Transit is significantly cheaper than cars. Also, lowering fares, and therefore revenue, kinda cuts into your next two points.
Make it convenient: Not possible without additional investment into the system. How are they supposed to pay for improvements?
Make it timely: Transit by its design and purpose will often be slower than driving (have to stop every couple hundred metres, routes often indirect). But you're right, it can be much faster, but again it needs additional resources to be able to do that.

You, like many other people, have unrealistic expectations of public transportation: you want it to be fast, convenient and reliable, but you think it should also happen without extra taxes. And these issues you bring up (having to walk to a bus, having to wait for a bus etc...) are inherent in all public transit systems, not just TransLink. If our transit system was all you want it to be (affordable, convenient and timely) you'd be saying that we don't NEED to improve it because it's already perfect. And you'd be right! But that doesn't just happen magically. If you want lower fares and lower taxes, the transit service would reflect that.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by paulsparrow

If what you are trying to say is why don't we vote Yes and have the money go to transit so that we get out of our cars and into transit then you need to:

• Make it affordable - costs more than driving a car
• Make it convienent. Having to walk 10 mins and then wait 15 mins for a bus then walk another 10 mins at the other end isn't convienent
• Make it timely. When it take 50-100% longer than driving it just doesn't make sense

1. Taking transit is already cheaper than owning and driving a car.
2. With a 'yes' vote, this comes closer to reality, with an increase in the area serviced by the Frequent Transit Network. With a 'no' vote, this gets more difficult for TransLink to deliver.
3. See #2.

By voting 'no' you actively voted against the change you want to see come about.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by paulsparrow

Simple. I've lived here 15 years in Surrey and worked either in Vancouver, Burnaby or now New West. ...

Whoa stop right there. If you hated the commute so much, why didn't you just get a job in Surrey?

See this is the perception problem that Surrey can't get over. People do not want to work in Surrey, nor do they want to live in Surrey unless they can't afford not to.

Surrey can't attract businesses, because Surrey can't seem grasp the fact that the City of Surrey is a sprawling mess that there is nowhere to setup a business for employees to get to that could actually get there. That's why everyone went to Surrey Central. That's where the Skytrain is.


Eventually housing prices are going to reach a crunch point where people can not afford to live in Vancouver, Burnaby, etc and businesses will have to move because nobody will want to commute from Mission and Abbotsford.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Kisai

Whoa stop right there. If you hated the commute so much, why didn't you just get a job in Surrey?

See this is the perception problem that Surrey can't get over. People do not want to work in Surrey, nor do they want to live in Surrey unless they can't afford not to.

Whoa stop right there! A lot of people work in Surrey. Also everyone living there doesn't hate it and want to move at the first possible chance. That debate has already happened on here and been shot down.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Whoa stop right there! A lot of people work in Surrey. Also everyone living there doesn't hate it and want to move at the first possible chance. That debate has already happened on here and been shot down.

The point I'm making is that "If your complaint is with the commute, then the problem is either where you live or where you work."

The two most illogical things people do in Metro Vancouver must be either paying more than 25% of your income into housing, and spending more than a half hour in commuting. If anyone is doing either, they need to reconsider their priorities if that job, or where they choose to live is worth the hassle and expense.

The perception is that people are being pushed out of Vancouver's housing market by whatever (Chinese "investors", condo developers, etc) and then being forced to move to Surrey because people want to own a patch of grass rather than live in a glass and concrete box.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Kisai

The point I'm making is that "If your complaint is with the commute, then the problem is either where you live or where you work."

The two most illogical things people do in Metro Vancouver must be either paying more than 25% of your income into housing, and spending more than a half hour in commuting. If anyone is doing either, they need to reconsider their priorities if that job, or where they choose to live is worth the hassle and expense.

The perception is that people are being pushed out of Vancouver's housing market by whatever (Chinese "investors", condo developers, etc) and then being forced to move to Surrey because people want to own a patch of grass rather than live in a glass and concrete box.

It's really not that simple. Not everyone gets to choose from a large variety of places when they pick a job, and if you do there are many more factors involved than just geography. And while I agree that there is attainable housing closer to Vancouver if people get over their unwillingness to live in attached housing, I again don't believe that option is for everyone either. We need to provide people with choice.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

It's really not that simple. Not everyone gets to choose from a large variety of places when they pick a job, and if you do there are many more factors involved than just geography. And while I agree that there is attainable housing closer to Vancouver if people get over their unwillingness to live in attached housing, I again don't believe that option is for everyone either. We need to provide people with choice.

No, attached housing is not for everyone. But if you want it, you'll have to make a sacrifice. That comes in the form of money and/or distance from the downtown core.

Personally, I hate commuting, and I don't think many people value the true cost of their time and transportation (vehicles in particular). I choose to live close to work, and it's not cheap. I also made a conscious choice to change jobs that included an even shorter commute. I also like the lifestyle of where I live.

[Pinion]

WorkSafe BC is moving from Lower Lonsdale to Tri-Cities. They won't say why officially, but did say they have trouble attracting employees there. They're about a 10 minute walk from the seabus, so better than most of the north shore, but still the distant edge of the universe for most people due to poor transit/bridge connections.

My north shore employer has similar issues. I'm requesting vacation for the first time ever and they have no idea how to fill my position, despite hundreds of employees scattered throughout town. And the only reason I work there is so I wouldn't have to cross the inlet every day. Commute times are suffocating my area.

[memememe76]

No, attached housing is not for everyone. But if you want it, you'll have to make a sacrifice. That comes in the form of money and/or distance from the downtown core.

I don't know why people make Surrey and the Fraser Valley out as being a sea of single family homes. There are a ton of townhome developments. As a condo dweller in Surrey, I don't know where all these affordable condos are in Vancouver.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Pinion

WorkSafe BC is moving from Lower Lonsdale to Tri-Cities. They won't say why officially, but did say they have trouble attracting employees there. They're about a 10 minute walk from the seabus, so better than most of the north shore, but still the distant edge of the universe for most people due to poor transit/bridge connections.

My employer moved from downtown Vancouver to North Vancouver very close to Lonsdale Quay, so my commuting switched to SeaBus as well as Skytrain. I loved the ride - I got a terrific view over the city on the Skytrain and a very pleasant mini-cruise on the Seabus. And when I started to learn Japanese I used the commute time to practice with my Kanji flashcards, something I probably wouldn't have had time to do otherwise.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Pinion

WorkSafe BC is moving from Lower Lonsdale to Tri-Cities. They won't say why officially, but did say they have trouble attracting employees there. They're about a 10 minute walk from the seabus, so better than most of the north shore, but still the distant edge of the universe for most people due to poor transit/bridge connections.

My north shore employer has similar issues. I'm requesting vacation for the first time ever and they have no idea how to fill my position, despite hundreds of employees scattered throughout town. And the only reason I work there is so I wouldn't have to cross the inlet every day. Commute times are suffocating my area.

How big is the presence there? To my knowledge their big HQ is in Richmond.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by memememe76

I don't know why people make Surrey and the Fraser Valley out as being a sea of single family homes. There are a ton of townhome developments. As a condo dweller in Surrey, I don't know where all these affordable condos are in Vancouver.

Uh, come on man. As far as the lower mainland goes, it is a sea of single family homes.

Even the City of Vancouver is overwhelming zoned as SFH if you want to get picky.

[rxp]

Originally Posted by nname

Not in detailed as I mostly reading from a map and many may be missed:

- Routing change to 2, 22 (trying to merge again?)
- Routing change to 15, 50 (merge?)
- Improvement to 25, 33, 43
- Reduction on 17, C19
- Routing change for 106
- Vehicle conversion for 128
- Discontinue off-peak 130 extension to North Van
- Improvement to 143
- Reduction on 153, 157
- Improvement to 230 to run every 30min from 9pm to midnight
- Convert 246 to shuttle on weekends
- Discontinue 259 and merge into C12
- Improvement to 319
- Move 320 to 60th, 168th (instead of 176th, Fraser), and to Willowbrook
- Improvement to 335 (already implemented?)
- Move 341 to Hwy 10 (instead of 64th Avenue)
- Routing change for 394
- Extend 395 to Langley (already implemented)
- Improvement to 401, C94
- Vehicle conversion of 531 and move terminus to Langley (instead of Willowbrook)
- Routing change to 501, 502, 595
- New route to Yorkson, Willoughby on 208th
- Reduction on 603
- Routing change for 701, C43
- Improvement to 791
- Improvement to N19
- Improvement to N35 (already implemented?)

where is this posted? is there more detailed list available?