Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771
Actually, no.
I know we love taking sides and picking food fights on here but none of the above is even correct.
|
Says who? YOU???? Who the hell are you???
Quote:
|
The basis for the 145's truncation to Production Way was to be its conversion to a B-Line service (and while it wasn't branded as one, this has been pretty much achieved in practice). The truncation was not done for ridership inflation purposes - it was done so that the frequency of the entire 145 route could be increased, just as is done for other routes today as a result of very limited resources. The change in fact helped accomodate an additional 5500 annual service hours to the overall route, despite the shortening, not a reduction that would be expected from just shortening the route.
|
You have got to be naive to say the 145 route change wasn't for Skytrain ridership purposes. If its not, then why count those students transferring from local routes at Lougheed to ride that one short segment to Production?
Quote:
|
Does it — for people on the 555? Maybe a little more - and I'm a South of Fraser guy, I would sympathize with these people. But the fact is, the 145's shorter terminus at production way is the reason that it's running every, say, 3 minutes and not every 4 minutes at peak times. And that's critical for everyone who has used this route, today and over the past 13 years, witnessing and experiencing the line-ups at Production just to head up the hill to SFU. It means that riders who are taking the Millennium Line from points across the system (as in, longer than 1 stop) have room to get on board the 145 and are kept on transit rather than discouraged from using it. Tell me, why is this supposed to be a bad thing? Can we really say we're losing as a result of this decision?
|
If one measley minute is all you are worried about (not surprised), then a passenger would prefer to take lesser transfers boarding from Lougheed rather than going up and down one short Skytrain stop just to get to SFU. Lougheed is the perfect transfer point for the area since it is a natural hub both technically (i.e. Skytrain station, switches, bus loop, new highway connection), commercially (the mall, residences, etc) and regionally (look at a map) so I don't know why anyone wouldn't agree to that other than someone who thinks Translink is perfect in everything that they do even when its not.
Quote:
|
BTW as a final poke at the major holes in the above post, I would think that anyone wanting to travel from PoMo and North Coquitlam (97 B-Line and other local buses) would transfer at Como Lake to the #143 if they wanted to go to SFU on a school day.
|
What if you don't want to go to SFU on a school day? That means your screwed right? And if school days are the criteria for providing good service such as the 143 for the 97B-Line riders, what is the justification of a line all the way to UBC?
Quote:
|
Even the "SkyTrain to nowhere" nickname we're all familiar with is silly and senseless, having been given by a pessimistic writer who thought that the final 11 stations (after Sapperton and Braid) would never be opened, and who insisted that the Millennium Line's final price tag would be $4 billion (which was based on nothing in the actual article and made absolutely no sense - anyone wanting to keep track of the Millennium Line's debt costs/servicing progress can just look at the annually released statements from RTP 2000 which are available online by PDF!).
|
I would take that "pessimistic" writer over an overly biased one issue kid any day of the week. If you want to look so knowledgable, including subjective words like "pessimistic" which is clearly opinion and has no basis whatsoever other than he does not agree with you, is never a proper way to present a supposedly fact based comment.
Quote:
|
Now stop your political embargo and complaining. No one was trying to artificially inflate the M-Line's ridership and while it fell short it wasn't even a "flop" by any means. The initial expectations were to have 75,000 boarding passengers by 2006. The line reached 70,000 in 2007. That's behind, but it's not far away and doesn't indicate a major failure of any sort.
|
The fact that it failed to reach the 75,000 show that the line did "fail" to meet projections. When you don't reach an expectation, its a fail, hence a "flop". And missing 5,000 a day for over a year...that kinda adds up, hence that fail is kinda major. Then again, costs of failure doesn't matter to you as long as its Skytrain, right?
Now stop your Skytrain cheerleading with selective data! You are just being like Malcolm and are not helping your cause or your precious Translink! Besides, the only people that believes you are the ones that want Skytrain regardless of costs (though they want
someone else to always pay for it) or the merits of other systems. Fortunately, we have a premier who entrusts future additional Translink funding sources to the people, and that ain't bad...
Prev
Linear Mode
