This is actually pretty funny skywalker!

(1)YVR has even been voted one of the world's top airports;

Yep! By Conde Nast Traveller. You might want to check with Polish and Chinese immigrants and/or visitors.

(2) BC Ferries was placed under a similar governance structure and customer service in many areas are light years ahead of what they were before.

For sure! Have you tried picking someone up at a BC Ferry lately? Been harrassed by people who enforce the new short-term parking regulations? Arrived 29 minutes before sailing when you've PAID for a reservation?
Tried to find a place where a parent with some luggage and a couple of kids can sit for a while?

I didn't think so!
(3) Translink - ?????

I can't wait.

speaking of BC ferries

Pisses me off that they've put TVs in the kids' play area. Morons.

Just a thought

Why not a truly democratic elected Board, with every municipality in the 'Metro region' have one TransLink position open to public elections. Here we would have democratically elected people, accountable to the taxpayer to sit on the board.

What democratic? In BC? you got to be kidding, not in the land of corruption and corporate give-a-ways.

Thanks for that Astrochimp

Do you suppose he ran that by the capo di tutti capi before he said it?

Probably they thought it might not be reported back here in the BEST PLACE ON EARTH – best that is except for our system of governance apparently.

It’ll be pleasant to bring that little nugget forward in the run up to May 2009.

How stupid do these people actually think the BC public is?

I wonder what nuggets will float back across the Pacific after their current trip - perhaps Campbell decided to leave the Falconator at home for a reason eh?

Is Lara Dauphinee along for the ride this time as well?

Then again....

Not all aspects of the Chinese system are without merit:

The former head of China's State Food and Drug Administration, Zheng Xiaoyu, has been executed for corruption, the state-run Xinhua news agency reports.

All we have to do is add blithering incompetence to the list of offences worthy of capital punishment.

Want good public transit

Want really good public transit, you have to include the public in consultations and I can assure everyone BC Transit and TransLink have never honestly consulted with the public. The result: a regional ridership of 12% to 13% on the transit system a number which has stagnated for at least 15 years!

This is why Falcon and the TransLink Board can run roughshod over the public, 83% of the population don't use transit and don't care.

SkyTrain good? Sure its up in the air and it doesn't infringe on my driving. Looks nifty too, just like the comic books.

RAV a P-3? Sure, if Campbell says so, it must be. Anyways P-3's are good. Why then foreign banks ran away from this deal? Why did Campbell have to rob the public sector pension plans and funnel the money through SNC/Lavalin to fund the deal?

Are subways good? Sure subways make a city world class, don't they?

As long as people avoid our public transit system in droves, the government will do anything it wants with it.

Now TransLink MK.2 will be a home for political friends and forgettable politicians, collecting a stipend to parrot what Campbell and Falcon wants.

Here's an idea

Put someone who actually rides transit on the board... and kill the car allowance too. What a joke!

Social Credit

I can't imagine the current pack of avaricious, short-sighted idiots going anywhere near such an obviously pinko term as "Social Credit". They should call their party "The Buddy System" because you better be one of their buddies if you want to suck the teat of the system... and it acronyms rather nicely too, with a rather dandy description of what they've been feeding us for a while now: B.S.

Haha, I slay me.

Which one?

Grump, can you provide an example of a trolley bus route that does not have the ridership to sustain it? Is it the 16?

16 Renfrew,that is

16 Renfrew,that is... 16 Arbutus would make it a loaded question.

Trolley buses

The problem with trolley bus routes is that one must trolley buses all the time or you loose the cost advantage of operating trolley buses. As well, trolley buses should be operated somewhat like LRT, with larger distance between bustops.

TransLink doesn't do this at all and just operates trolley buses as a 'more expensive' bus line.

Trolley buses are cost effective on heavily used routes or on stiff gradients.

Vancouver sees no advantage with trolleys, yet there is so much opportunity to get a big bang, with our current system.

Broadway is a good example: Get rid of the B-Line buses and operate artic. trolleys, with stops every 400 to 500 metres along the route. Not only would you get a service comparable with the current B-Line service, a faster service would be available to all!

Funny, you should mention Arbutus; in 2001 I compared headways of the Arbutus bus route and the Cambie St. route. Cambie St.'s service was only slightly more than Arbutus. Peak hour service was less than 500 persons per hour per direction more than Arbutus!

What this told me that transit demand on Arbutus and Cambie were basically the same and no where near the volume that would sustain a subway. Even LRT would be a long shot unless one could cut costs to the minimum. With the Arbutus corridor in tact and th ability to pick it up for scrap value meant that we could built a basic LRT service to Richmond, as far as Steveston on the cheap.

All dust in the wind, because with our now $2.4 billion RAV line, every conceivable bus route will be cascaded onto RAV to try to increase ridership. It will fail because most people will find that taking the car will be easier and more convenient.

As for bus routes, South Delta & Ladner have 4 bus routes that operate empty all day long!

Trolleys

I thought that trolleys were more environmentally friendly than diesel buses. At least emissions-wise, though I'm not sure which is 'cheaper'. I do know that when I lived in Kits, the 10, 4, 7 and 16 were always full leaving downtown during 'rush hour'

And what's with this "6) Operates the bus service as a social service" as a bad thing? Isn't public transprortation a social service operated for the greater good of society?

I'm not sure that the Rav line will fail (other than being too 'small'); I live near the M line and I would *never* consider driving downtown to work again, even at $99/month it's much cheaper than driving, I could not park anywhere downtown near that cheaply, and a 25 minute trainride, even with the transfer at Commerical, is a lot less stressfullf than the drive would be. 1/2 hour from my door near Brentwood Mall to Burrard station, can't beat that in a car!

I also find the SkyTrain to be more dependable than the buses, even with the occasionable hiccup. SkytTrain virtually always shows up within a minute of my arrival on the platform at Burrard, yet today I waited 10 minutes in the freezing cold at Burrard&Georgia while several 98's and 400 series buses passed by until 5 local Burrard services finally showed up (A 2, a pair of 22s, a 32, and a 44, all in a row)

As a former long-time

As a former long-time resident of Kitsilano, I often wondered how a Calgary/Edmonton/(San Jose Portand Denver) LRT would have run though my neighborhood. South of 16th Ave, the Row was pretty much independent of the 'hood, with cross streets only at 16th, 25th, 33rd, 41st, 49th, etc)

However, *north* of 16th ave, there are cross streets (and lanes) every block, all the way to 6th were it turns east and crosses Maple and Cypress see http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&q=&ie=UTF8&ll=49.26331,-123.150451&spn=0.006917,0.019956&t=k&z=16&om=1

Two options there, either provide level crossings (with the 'ding ding ding' of the crossing bells every 5 minutes), or shutting off access for the residents to Arbutus.... all things considered the latter would probably be preferable

That being said, it would be nice if the heriatge streetcar that (other than this year) runs along 1st Ave could run all the way to Kerrisdale, a la the Edmonton Heritage streetcar that runs from downtown across the High Level Bridge to the historic Strathcona district.... damn that Starbucks.

And comparing the two routes , discounting the technology used, you've got to admit that Cambie has more intermediate destinations than Arbutus. Cambie has City Hall, VGH, Oakridge, and Langara College within its immediate catchment area. What does Arbutus have, the Kerrisdale Arena?

Dave2
Langara class of '86

No Dave, you got it wrong

Part 1

"And what's with this "6) Operates the bus service as a social service" as a bad thing? Isn't public transportation a social service operated for the greater good of society?"

Study, after study in Europe found, that if you run a transit system as a 'social service' and not as a transit system, ridership stagnated. Well pretty much the same thing has happened here.

Dave, I would wager you take the bus already, so you comments are skewed in that direction. With RAV, in Richmond. if people do not like or want to take a bus, why would they take a bus and transfer to RAV? They won't. RAV is predicted to "take 100,000 cars of the road." Well it isn't, just think of that number, only about 9,000 cars coming up the 99 in the morning peak hours. where are the other 91,000 coming from? Failure, yes.

"However, *north* of 16th ave, there are cross streets (and lanes) every block, all the way to 6th were it turns east and crosses Maple and Cypress"

Of course, if you are talking about 'Arbutus', with LRT, there would be some minor road and lane closures, but don't light your hair on fire, the City of Vancouver has done this before in the West End and now in the rest of the city. Things never stay the same forever.

"either provide level crossings (with the 'ding ding ding' of the crossing bells every 5 minutes)"

Here we have one of Glen Leicester's major myths (and the rest of the SkyTrain lobby) about LRT. Please remember major streets such as " 16th, 25th, 33rd, 41st, 49th, etc" would be tops or stations and the "ding, ding, ding" train crossing signals would not be used. Here is how it would work.....a LRT 'train' would approach the station or stop (a LRT station would be a platform 350mm high with minimal shelter and a fare machine not a ponderous metro station like SkyTrain) it would stop to load/unload passengers, after a dwell time of 15 to 20 seconds a signal from the LRT 'train" would activate the signal light to red for auto traffic and green for the LRV and on the LRT goes. No classic train crossing signal with arms and bell. There is no difference for a 'red' light for cars at Arbutus and 49th or Granville at 49th.

Part 2

"And comparing the two routes , discounting the technology used, you've got to admit that Cambie has more intermediate destinations than Arbutus. Cambie has City Hall, VGH, Oakridge, and Langara College"

This 'old saw' is certainly a joke, why did these people not use the trolley bus to all these estimations before? Why? there was no DEMAND for these destinations. Why didn't TransLink run a B-Line service, shadowing the RAV Line? Because it would show there wasn't a DEMAND for this service. With stations so far apart, I doubt RAV will attract
much new ridership, there will be no station between 25th and Broadway. In fact, today there is far greater density of population along the 'Arbutus' Corridor, than along Cambie
St., which gives rise to one of Bill-43's nasty little secrets, as it overrides city zoning and will allow massive 30 or 40 story high rises near RAV stations. Mmmmm let's see, a quick look at the tax register should show that this aforementioned property is owned by
good friends of the Premier and other players in the RAV story. Who owns Oakridge
shopping centre? Isn't it the same outfit said to be involved with RAV? Eco-density folks,
here the real story, Sullivan's Eco-Density is nothing more than softening up the Vancouver taxpayer for major high-rise development and high rises are not eco-friendly!

"What does Arbutus have, the Kerrisdale Arena?"

Arbutus has greater population density, but it also has the stores on West Boulevard, and on Broadway, that being said, the major destination would be downtown Vancouver as with RAV, but with LRT, we can build all the way to Steveston for the cost of RAV to Westminster highway!

The fix is in with Bill-43, just wait and see.

Airport train

Further to the Arbutus/Cambie discussion, is the RAV an airport to downtown rail-line, or a commuter train? Because if it's the latter, last I checked, nobody lives at the airport, and as Grumpy has noted, there's plenty of folks living in Steveston.

If it's the former... for a family of four with baggage, after the cost of 4-two zone fares coupled with the hassle of a train that may or may not go anywhere near my destination, a limo or taxi from YVR seems the more sensible choice. When I get off a plane I want to get home asap... waiting for a train to take me to Broadway so I can lug my crap aboard an overcrowded 99 or 9 bus is a big negatory good buddy.

If we really wanted a train for actual transit users to get to their jobs, the RAV (sorry, I won't buy the Canada line white-wash) would run down Main Street and address the chronic overcrowding on that route. I'm with Grumpy... the RAV is all about eco-densifying where the decision-makers DON'T live... but do own property.

Enjoy your toney enclave and S.O.V. Lexus ride to work jerks. I expect those old wood frame mansions will burn just fine once the great unwashed get sick of the "do as I say not as I do" approach to life foisted upon us by politicians and capitalists. Like a beer, beans, and bratwurst lunch, history repeats (itself).

As far as I can see.......

....YVR has paid for it's RAV extension, but with it comes:
1) Free travel on Sea Island
2) A premium fare to downtown Vancouver

What this means is that a fare from the airport to Vancouver will be 3 zone rate + a premium. This means the fare will be in excess of $6 per person (I have heard a rumor that it maybe as high as $7.50). I predict that taxi's will charge a 'flat rate ($10 maybe)' from the airport to Broadway. Limos may operate more as a 'jitney' service, only traveling when more than 4 people board. Of course taxi or Limo give door to door service.

Stump, this one is for you. By accident last year I stumbled across the Olympic skating rink and guess what, it was on the CPR rights-of-way. Now if LRT was used, TransLink could have built a short extension to service the facility. TransLink would look like a winner. But no, with RAV, an extension would cost way too much money, so the Olympic facility is well over a kilometer from a RAV station.

One of the few winners in the RAV/Canada line is the airport because for an investment of $250 million, they get a $2.4 billion rapid transit subway to Vancouver so people can still continue calling it a 'world class' airport.

Grumpy

I'm shocked that there will not be a staion at 16th & Cambie. Seems like there certainly should be one between King Ed & Broadway. Those disrupted shopkeepers are going to miss all that trafic too!

By the way;

Grumpy

Oakridge is owned by the Quebec Government. Ivanhoe Cambridge is a principal subsidiary of the Caisse de depot du Québec.

I think you'll find

That Ivanhoe Cambridge is a co-owner of Oakridege Grumpy; sharing the beans with the Ontario Municipal Employees Pension Group Realty Arm - a little outfit called OMERS.

Elected, washing their hands of elected responsibility

Quote: Luke Skywalker,

Secondly, BC Ferries was placed under a similar governance structure and customer service in many areas are light years ahead of what they were before.

Yah, a major fire,grounding,and sinking since this model was brought in is no big deal,eh? but that panelling is cool,and look Starbucks!, hmmm, "mortgage payment" or trip to Victoria? nice to see your priorities in place there Luke, I guess you are "light years" adhead of the rest of us.

I knew that

That's why the Caisse is the only financial institution that would invest any money into the scheme. How about 49th and Cambie, one giant of an owner.

Speed! The airport would not put any money into RAV (one less P in a P-3) unless travel time was under 27 minutes from airport to the downtown terminal station.

Yet speed isn't a prime factor in attracting ridership to transit, it's the overall ambiance of a transit system (Hass-Klau 2001). What attracts ridership is ease of use; ease of ticketing; no transferring from one mode to the next. RAV fails two and ticketing is a wait and see thing.

The one bit that Falcon & Campbell; the TransLink Board and bureaucracy fail to understand is that metro, especially light metro, fails to attract the motorist from the car. This is why one never hears TransLink talk of modal shift.

It is modal shift, not ridership numbers that are important. What we have with our present transit system is more and more discounted passes (U-Pass) being used not just two times a day but 5 or 6 times a day. How many rides does SkyTrain calculate daily? According to TransLink 230,000; but they also state about 100,000 people use SkyTrain. But wait. this figure could be as low as 80,000 if one calculates error in ridership calculation (TransLink is a guesstimate) and multiple rides by pass users.

Why is this important? According to the bumf, RAV is to take 100,000 cars off the road, which means a daily ridership of at least 245,000 passengers a day (100,000 car drivers in and 100,000 car drivers out & current B-Line ridership) As one can see, this figure is nonsense as it surpasses SkyTrain's ridership numbers.

Like everything else about RAV, complete falsehoods and another major reason why for Bill 43; to mire RAV in the realm of non disclosure by being a semi private affair.

I knew that

That's why the Caisse is the only financial institution that would invest any money into the scheme. How about 49th and Cambie, one giant of an owner.

Speed! The airport would not put any money into RAV (one less P in a P-3) unless travel time was under 27 minutes from airport to the downtown terminal station.

Yet speed isn't a prime factor in attracting ridership to transit, it's the overall ambiance of a transit system (Hass-Klau 2001). What attracts ridership is ease of use; ease of ticketing; no transferring from one mode to the next. RAV fails two and ticketing is a wait and see thing.

The one bit that Falcon & Campbell; the TransLink Board and bureaucracy fail to understand is that metro, especially light metro, fails to attract the motorist from the car. This is why one never hears TransLink talk of modal shift.

It is modal shift, not ridership numbers that are important. What we have with our present transit system is more and more discounted passes (U-Pass) being used not just two times a day but 5 or 6 times a day. How many rides does SkyTrain calculate daily? According to TransLink 230,000; but they also state about 100,000 people use SkyTrain. But wait. this figure could be as low as 80,000 if one calculates error in ridership calculation (TransLink is a guesstimate) and multiple rides by pass users.

Why is this important? According to the bumf, RAV is to take 100,000 cars off the road, which means a daily ridership of at least 245,000 passengers a day (100,000 car drivers in and 100,000 car drivers out & current B-Line ridership) As one can see, this figure is nonsense as it surpasses SkyTrain's ridership numbers.

Like everything else about RAV, complete falsehoods and another major reason why for Bill 43; to mire RAV in the realm of non disclosure by being a semi private affair.

Chudnovky's Delusions

TransLink might have issues, responded the NDP's David Chudnovsky, MLA for Vancouver-Kensington, but all that "bickering" as Polak called it is democracy in motion. "Those folks found a way, despite the fact that they came from a whole number of municipalities," he said, "to figure out a transportation plan for the Lower Mainland."

Since Chudnovsky is known to be utterly humourless this can't be a joke. Rather, it must be part of his quite serious contribution to political immaturity and correctness that is so extreme as to constitute delusional thinking.

For any person to say that Translink came up with a plan worthy of the name is not an arguable opinion. It's a completely false, utterly ludicrous statement.

The only thing that can put Translink onto a firm foundation is the same thing that would put Metro Vancouver's policing and land use planning onto a firm foundation. The Premier of British Columbia must have the balls to do what Premier Mike Harris did in Ontario, force amalgamation of the Metro area and have done with the matter. Only then can we have rational public administration at the local level.

But you must agree that.............

Falcon's TransLink Mk. 2 will be even worse than TransLink Mk.1

In Germany, it was found that when the public truly had a real say on local transit issues, ridership spiraled. There is absolutely no public input with TransLink at all. It's all Monty Pyhtonish, "now there is you transit, now use it."
"But it doesn't go to where i want to go."
"No matter"
"But it costs too much."
"Then cheat you silly bugger.'
"But, but, but....."
"Bloody well take a car then"