|
|
Post by Retrovision on Jun 27, 2007 17:01:00 GMT -8
( From:www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/06/27/bc-bus.html) I think the kicker to this story, the insult to injury, is that it will soon cost $5 to get from, for example, Tsawwassen Terminal to Downtown Vancouver weekdays before 6:30pm, and yet the millions of dollars worth of new automated fareboxes installed on every bus in the fleet earlier this decade do not take bills. Go figure, I guess.  |
|
|
|
Post by Balfour on Jun 27, 2007 19:45:27 GMT -8
I've heard other cities in Europe have a congestion charge for vehicles entering downtown, perhaps we need something like that to improve the transit here, instead of fare increases. It would get people to use transit thus lowering the fares.
|
|
|
|
Post by BrianWilliams on Jun 27, 2007 20:39:42 GMT -8
Sure to be a VERY unpopular idea here, but one I support:
Highway tolls.
Automated toll collection (E-Pass) is an efficient system widely used in Europe and some parts of North America. A tiny chip on your car is read as you pass a collection station, and you are billed monthly.
Tolling can be adjusted to be a congestion charge: high-volume routes at peak hours cost more, creating an incentive to live closer to work and use other modes of travel.
An obvious downside in the short term might be an increase in "rat-running" drivers dodging thru neighbourhoods to avoid charges.
Maybe no worse than now: we've already had to barricade so many streets to deter rat-runners. My city of New Westminster and neighbouring Burnaby is a maze of detours and barriers on small streets.
Add tolls to a really aggressive program of bus-only lanes, rail transit (including fast streetcars) and a truck-only highway or two, and we might calm some of our commuter frenzy.
I don't agree with BRU's protests: the modest fare increase is not a budget-buster for most riders. Students and families on welfare have concession fares or free passes already. DO use the revenue increase to improve service, though, and demonstrate that is where it is going.
Some of BRU's argument: that impoverished, mentally-ill and homeless people are hurt most, doesn't work for me.
We have failed to provide care for marginal people, and we had better address that through services that are beyond the scope of Translink's mandate. In fact, the escalating incivility on city busses by unstable people has forced the Fare Paid Zone concept, with a very high cost in enforcement by BC Transit Police.
That's a social problem we have ignored for too long.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Jun 28, 2007 16:10:15 GMT -8
I've heard other cities in Europe have a congestion charge for vehicles entering downtown, perhaps we need something like that to improve the transit here, instead of fare increases. It would get people to use transit thus lowering the fares. |
|
|
|
Post by kylefossett on Jun 28, 2007 16:18:51 GMT -8
fare hikes. gotta pay for all those new buses and skytrain cars some how
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Jun 28, 2007 16:55:59 GMT -8
And who pays a surcharge for travelling on our roads? Not many.
|
|
|
|
Post by Balfour on Jun 28, 2007 17:33:50 GMT -8
Another thing to consider is to get rid of stupid zone system we have here. None of the other major cities in Canada have it. Getting rid of zones would also reduce the risk of passenger/driver confrontations on the bus.
|
|
|
|
Post by BrianWilliams on Jun 29, 2007 19:45:31 GMT -8
"And who pays a surcharge for travelling on our roads? ..."
I agree with misterA. It's time for tolls.
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jul 9, 2007 10:42:49 GMT -8
The Tyee online paper is running a series of articles on the merits of "free transit". thetyee.ca/Views/Some of you might be interested in reading these.... |
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jul 19, 2007 22:52:08 GMT -8
www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2007/07/19/ttc-cuts.htmlOur fares are going up - at least we're getting something for it. In Toronto, their fares are going up and they're shutting down bus routes, closing down part of the subway, laying workers off, and canceling planned improvements. I can't believe this is happening in a major city in Canada today. When I was in Toronto last year, I was impressed with their excellent public transit system, even if it was a bit confusing! I'm sure this isn't the end of the story. What better opportunity for the federal government to dump a nice big pre-election gift right into the middle of where they need votes the most!
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Jul 23, 2007 14:56:56 GMT -8
www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2007/07/19/ttc-cuts.htmlOur fares are going up - at least we're getting something for it. In Toronto, their fares are going up and they're shutting down bus routes, closing down part of the subway, laying workers off, and canceling planned improvements. I can't believe this is happening in a major city in Canada today. When I was in Toronto last year, I was impressed with their excellent public transit system, even if it was a bit confusing! I'm sure this isn't the end of the story. What better opportunity for the federal government to dump a nice big pre-election gift right into the middle of where they need votes the most! Unfortunately this all could have been prevented years ago if Ontario provincial governments with right-leaning roots akin to our so-called, more like SoCred, BC 'Liberal' Party had not so drastically cut public transit all around Ontario over the last couple decades. But then again maybe they acheived their goal by doing so and giving such a potential pre-election gift to their cronies now holding the reins of power in Ottawa. |
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Jul 23, 2007 17:14:58 GMT -8
There is a feeling that the cuts won't happen. The sense is that it is grandstanding by the City to get more money out of Queen's Park or the Feds. A fare increase may happen but not by the $.25 they were threatening. I wish they would get their heads out of where the sun doesn't shine and use smart transit cards like the Metro in DC or even in NYC. However I would like to see a zone system where the further you travel the more you pay. I loved hopping the Metro in DC and going a few stops and paying $.50 or something like that.
The city is still overbloated - I believe there is too much admin and not enough doing. Hence when the Mayor couldn't get his way and raise some taxes they needed to chop somewhere. So out of the blue the TTC was told it had to chop a huge amount from its budget just when some agressive expansion was being talked about.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Jul 23, 2007 21:48:23 GMT -8
Your TTC cuts, pnwtraveler, remind me of ours earlier in the decade, with our version hopefully not looking like yours in a few years. Though Vancouverites who have to rely on specific routes actually know it or even care it seems, the fact is that most of our systems' cutbacks from so many years ago haven't yet been reinstated or compensated for in almost any way, with some of these routes being cut back even further as recently as April.
Most symbolic of this neglect for transit funding by the current provincial government, and telling of they're methods of making a bad name for the NDP, is the former #318 bus. Much of the hope for a better system behind the change of control from the province to local governments of then BC Transit, now Translink, was invested in one massive injection of cash to the system focussing first on cross-town (suburb to suburb) services that all systems around North America are known for lacking from their inception. This cash infusion was to revitalize the the entire transit network, which the lack-of it, I'm told by a reliable source, putting us behind by atleast 5 years which is now proving to be a conservative estimate, was to come from a vehicle-levy. The #318 was one of these few and therefore so-essential cross-town routes, going from Ladner to Scott Road at 72nd Ave., one of only two such routes connecting North Delta and eastern points with anywhere west, south of the Fraser River. As part of the cuts that the voters condemned through their voting down the vehicle levy, the #318's service hours were recuded greatly, ending service at 6pm instead of well ofter 9pm. You would think that as with any similar need service would still end up slowly increase over the years after such a devastating blow, but as with the stagnant growth of routes under similar cutbacks the route has been further and further diminished. A few years ago this route was 'CS-ized', made into a Community Shuttle route serviced by smaller 'mini-buses' (cut-away Ford vans as buses), having service hours not being reinstated as the savings might logically dictate (though a small handful of peak hour trips were added), and even this year it's been cut-back even further; with all these reductions you would assume that there's only potential for growth, but you'd be wrong. In April of this year all trips are now diverted by way of Boundary Bay Airport, about 2km longer route in either direction, not only making this a less convenient route for people using the route for its own stops - the airport used to be served by only by an appropriate number of trips for the volume, a handful every day - but it also makes already extremely difficult quick connections for tranferring to the 'Express Coach' route to White Rock and South Surrey impossible, forcing further delays on average between 1/2 and 1 hour for this route. But no, they aren't trying to discourage transit-use, never.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jul 24, 2007 0:05:33 GMT -8
I don't know enough about the specific example of the #318 to comment on that... but generally large portions of the suburbs are simply not suitable for public transit, except for (in some cases) the community shuttle buses Graham has mentioned. People move out there so they can afford a big house and a nice backyard on a quiet street. The suburb lifestyle was made possible by the personal automobile and it can only be sustained by the personal automobile. In most cases, you can't have a quarter-acre lot as well as a good bus service.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Jul 24, 2007 2:54:42 GMT -8
The suburb lifestyle was made possible by the personal automobile and it can only be sustained by the personal automobile. I won't argue there, but don't most people today who listen to most scientists on matters of sustainability, no matter their political affiliation, consider that an argument against sprawl, urban and otherwise, and all the now-icontrovertible negatives that are implied by choosing such a lifestyle, whether you feel morally obliged to offset these impacts or not? (unless you are actually arguing against sprawl) In most cases, you can't have a quarter-acre lot as well as a good bus service. No one on this side of the fence has claimed that and few with sound arguments in-favour of sustainability have ever argued that. |
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jul 24, 2007 18:27:51 GMT -8
Yeah, I'm just saying that people want to live in a way where they get a back yard, quiet neighbourhood, and big house... but they also complain they don't get their fair share of transit. I'm absolutely in favor of stopping urban sprawl and increasing density in places.. as has happened in Burnaby and New Westminster.. and parts of Coquitlam and Port Coquitlam (in anticipation of the Evergreen Line). I don't know Surrey that well, other than friends and relatives that all live in "suburban" neighbourhoods.
Increasing density is the key to sustainable urban growth. Having people live close to shopping, work, recreation, etc. I guess one could argue that public transportation should come first, to encourage it... and that would be a valid argument. There seems to be a willingness, however, for planners in some of the suburbs to continue turning farmland into subdivisions
|
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Jul 24, 2007 21:05:08 GMT -8
is the former #318 bus. ... was invested in one massive injection of cash to the system focussing first on cross-town (suburb to suburb) services that all systems around North America are known for lacking ... The #318 was one of these few and therefore so-essential cross-town routes, going from Ladner to Scott Road at 72nd Ave., one of only two such routes connecting North Delta and eastern points with anywhere west, south of the Fraser River. As part of the cuts that the voters condemned through their voting down the vehicle levy, the #318's service hours were recuded greatly, ending service at 6pm instead of well ofter 9pm. You would think that as with any similar need service would still end up slowly increase over the years after such a devastating blow, but as with the stagnant growth of routes under similar cutbacks the route has been further and further diminished. A few years ago this route was ' CS-ized', made into a Community Shuttle route serviced by smaller 'mini-buses' (cut-away Ford vans as buses), having service hours not being reinstated as the savings might logically dictate (though a small handful of peak hour trips were added), and even this year it's been cut-back even further; with all these reductions you would assume that there's only potential for growth, but you'd be wrong. In April of this year all trips are now diverted by way of Boundary Bay Airport, about 2km longer route in either direction, not only making this a less convenient route for people using the route for its own stops - the airport used to be served by only by an appropriate number of trips for the volume, a handful every day - but it also makes already extremely difficult quick connections for tranferring to the 'Express Coach' route to White Rock and South Surrey impossible, forcing further delays on average between 1/2 and 1 hour for this route. But no, they aren't trying to discourage transit-use, never. I lived in Tsa for several years. Before the #318, there was the "extended #319" in which about one out of every 4 trips routed to Ladner instead of terminating at Scottsdale. Then we had the #318 extension, and now the C76. The problem is, that although there was usage of this route at certain times (AM peak, but usually only FROM Ladner) and early PM peak (TO Ladner), this route is not very cost efficient. Trust me, I took it for years when I lived in Tsawwassen and worked in Surrey ... I am not one to lightly say "let's abandon it" That said, more times than NOT, there were no more than 5 people on this bus! There are other options, none of which are quite as direct. You can take the #301 from Scottsdale into Richmond and hook up with a #404 or #620. You can also hit the #640 outta Scott Road for a tour of River Road to Ladner. The problem is, that none of these help the people that are in Newton. You have to go up Scott to get to the train, or route via Richmond and an extra transfer (and zone!). The #640 provides decent service, but you need to do the #319 up Scott. If there would be a decent way to draw more ridership to the route, so that it had some revenue, instead of the per passenger operating costs being the second HIGHEST in the entire system, then there would be a case for the route. There is the expansion going on at ZBB, and hopefully that will become the "mini-YXX" that the developers hope. If this is the case, then all trips should route thru ZBB to provide decent connections. Anyways, those are my two cents worth! |
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Jul 25, 2007 1:10:48 GMT -8
I could (and might later) go further, but I've always been with my close relative who was involved with the BC Transit board for the area up until its powers were handed over to Translink - so I'm a little biased too - who believes in the idea of build it and they will come. I've been a regular transit user, having never owned a vehicle, for a good decade now and have had reasons to travel all around the region throughout this period, including aboard the #318 regularly for schooling for a while in recent years, so I'm not just speculating here, but althought the #640 (River Road service compared to the #318's Hwy 10 / Ladner Trunk service, for those uninformed) is a relatively decent alternative to the former #318, etc., (now C76), I've literally lost track of the number of people that I've seen trying to make the connection to White Rock at the interchange with Hwy. 99; if it weren't for this I'd defer to needing to focus available limited funding on the #640, but this is a constant issue that I see come up, one that could really turn a new rider off of transit in a significant way.
In order for travellers to easily make this connection, even before the route diversion to Boundary Bay Airport recently eliminated any semblance of a reasonably timed connection east or west to/from South Surrey / White Rock and points west including the ferry terminal by the Hwy. 10 ex-#318 route and saving major travel time and tranfers compared to other routings, the next closest option in distance and time is to literally go north into Richmond and transfer at Steveston Hwy., including a half Kilometre walk to cross over Hwy. 99. At peak hours (deemed as most service hours except for weekends) this also represents a surcharge for crossing a zone boundary of $1 per trip.
My trouble with the treatment of this route has absolutely nothing to do with the smaller vehicle size I should clarify, I have vivid memories from over the years of how few people can be found on one single trip of this route. We don't have the vehicle levy in our favour so we can't afford luxuries like elbow room for the comfort of it despite how attractive that is to potential riders who are still on the fence. My real problem is with the treatment of this route more and more as a local-use only route, with no forethought for regional connections. This is where my build it and they will come attitude comes in: Even with our current limited resources the planners at translink have gone beyond stripping-away capacity on this route, which I've advocated since losing deserved funding earlier this decade, they've given priority to our sleepy hollow of an airport the same as what needs to be given to the regional then local routes (in that order) long before any such periphery locations can get the same attention, in order to build-up the demand to justify this kind of change in the first place, and at the expence of our most-important regional (vs. local) bus network to boot.
These kinds of moves to me are plain and simply putting the horse before the wagon in my view.
|
|
