|
Post by lmtengs on Feb 17, 2011 17:10:18 GMT -8
And I still say the Golden Ears Bridge is one giant white elephant. And I still say that's very close-minded of you. I've actually decided that it's good to add tolls to new major bridges and roads, as it encourages people to stop driving and take mass-transit instead. Sure, I know our transit in MetroVan isn't really adequate for everyone to travel it, but if more people who actually CAN travel it start to, then they'll be making more money for expansions into other areas, opening up transit opportunities to more people, and then the cycle repeats. Where is your proof behind this? I challenge you to walk onto the bridge someday this week and sit there for 30 minutes counting semi-trucks that drive by, and logging their province (or country) of registry. I'd bet you that there are more BC-registered trucks than any other.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Feb 17, 2011 17:44:50 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Feb 17, 2011 17:48:13 GMT -8
I don't know, but I DO know that if you haven't payed it by the time you have to renew your insurance, they'll tell you then, and if you owe more than 25$, then they won't let you renew your insurance until you pay up. If your car is registered in a province or country other than BC, then you don't need to pay.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Feb 17, 2011 18:05:06 GMT -8
Oh I did not know that. It was an AB plate
|
|
|
Post by kittcar2000 on Feb 18, 2011 14:59:48 GMT -8
Just read in the Langley Advance that taxpayer's are now going to have to make up for the shortfall. Due to low usage of the bridge. The paper also said translink still has not sold the Albion ferries. Canadian Viking I read it somewhere on the internate about out of province semi's mostly using the Golden Ears Bridge. But you do bring up an interesting challenge in reguards to checking out the bridge traffic.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Mar 16, 2011 15:15:02 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on May 28, 2011 19:17:32 GMT -8
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on May 29, 2011 10:58:03 GMT -8
That's sad they should of just kept them running or at least one of them running. Who wants to take a stupid toll bridge anyways!
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on May 29, 2011 11:16:49 GMT -8
Who wants to take a stupid toll bridge anyways! A lot of people, me included. To get to Tsawwassen or anywhere south of the Fraser, it would mean either bearing the Mary Hill Bypass and the Port Mann Bridge to cross the Fraser, detouring all the way around the Mission-Abbotsford Bridge, or pacing up and down the Albion Ferry line up for an hour and a half to cross a body of water that I can now cross in a minute and 30 seconds. Also, many Langley residents work in Maple Ridge, and vice versa, so their commutes have been shortened by more than half too. My school's band teacher lives in Langley, and her commute was often an hour and a half coming from Langley, and some days she would get fed up with the lines and detour all the way to the Abbotsford-Mission Bridge and drive around. When the lines were really bad, she'd be late for the 7am classes, up to half an hour late once. Of course from a ferry-geek or a tourist's perspective, it would have been awesome to keep a boat going, but it just wasn't feasible. I can safely speak for pretty much everybody that lives in the communities on both sides of the river when I say this: That bridge is a lifesaver.
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on May 29, 2011 13:35:26 GMT -8
My original confusion on this was the real logic of saying the bridge was replacing the Albion ferries, when in reality it was several miles down stream and not even within sight of the ferry crossing. Really the only reason to consider it as a direct replacement is that the bridge is actually located at the place people want to go. The ferries went to Fort Langley, while the bridge clearly does not. I guess everybody in Maple Ridge really does want to get to Walnut Grove and Port Kells where the bridge is. It must be true because that is where the bridge was built. It also may be the most expensive thirty seconds of the day, for how long it costs to actually be on the bridge.
I also don't disagree with the idea of a toll bridge when it is managed properly but, seeing as how BC loves a dictatorship and excessive costs added to everything, the toll, in the amounts being levied right now, is not a toll to help maintain the bridge, but a penalty against users for using it. I have heard many logical fallacies used as justification for the amount of the toll, as if the governments involved expect people to simply shrug off the extra cost just like we're supposed to do with gas, and food, and energy prices without worry. There is a difference between a toll that generates revenue because it can be afforded by users in large enough numbers that it offsets the need to raise the toll.
If a toll is nothing more than a penalty to the users, and the users that do use the bridge get threatened with an increase because, to no fault of their own, not enough vehicles are using the bridge, than the entire rationale behind tolling the bridge falls apart. They are no longer paying for the cost of the bridge, but for the costs stemming out of the owner-operator of the bridge and the governing bodies responsible not planning their finances properly and not admitting this until after the fact when they can't repay their loans and guarantees, and then believing that it is completely acceptable to pass the price for their negligence on to the user.
Translink has already realized this, as noted in the article I posted above about the toll revenues falling short. They can never admit it might be due to mismanagement or shortsighted financing, so of course, blame the users for not doing what the numbers state that they should do. They are simply confident that, when the Port Mann opens with its own hefty toll, then everything will even out (because people won't be able to escape the toll), and the Golden Ears will finally see an increase in users. I also wouldn't think that the rationale of using a toll on a bridge being so far fetched and far away, because from the rumblings going on in the CRD, don't be shocked if they simply decide the new Johnson Street Bridge could well do with a toll of its own before the end.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on May 29, 2011 14:02:20 GMT -8
My original confusion on this was the real logic of saying the bridge was replacing the Albion ferries, when in reality it was several miles down stream and not even within sight of the ferry crossing. Really the only reason to consider it as a direct replacement is that the bridge is actually located at the place people want to go. The ferries went to Fort Langley, while the bridge clearly does not. I guess everybody in Maple Ridge really does want to get to Walnut Grove and Port Kells where the bridge is. It must be true because that is where the bridge was built. The bridge was always meant to be a replacement to the ferries. The BC Minister of Highways at the time (I want to say that it was Gaglardi, would I be right?) even said so at the opening of the ferry. It was sort of an interim solution until they could build a bridge to replace it.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,171
|
Post by Neil on May 29, 2011 20:32:26 GMT -8
f a toll is nothing more than a penalty to the users, and the users that do use the bridge get threatened with an increase because, to no fault of their own, not enough vehicles are using the bridge, than the entire rationale behind tolling the bridge falls apart. They are no longer paying for the cost of the bridge, but for the costs stemming out of the owner-operator of the bridge and the governing bodies responsible not planning their finances properly and not admitting this until after the fact when they can't repay their loans and guarantees, and then believing that it is completely acceptable to pass the price for their negligence on to the user. Translink has already realized this, as noted in the article I posted above about the toll revenues falling short. They can never admit it might be due to mismanagement or shortsighted financing, so of course, blame the users for not doing what the numbers state that they should do. I'm not surprised that traffic and revenue from the bridge aren't exactly as forecast. It's not as if it was replacing an existing bridge; this was a new connection, taking the place of a completely inadequate ferry service, and it would have been remarkable if they'd gotten the numbers bang on. The Canada Line has proved it's forecasts wrong, but I don't suppose anyone's complaining about that, since it's exceeded projections. The bridge is covering about 40% of it's annual operating and debt servicing costs in tolls. That figure will rise with increased traffic. With the rate of growth in that part of metro Vancouver, it won't be long before these early criticisms will be moot. We don't have a lot of experience with toll roads in these parts, so it's not surprising there's been some resistance to the Golden Ears toll. Eventually, I think there will have to be some rationalisation of the concept of covering capital costs, because it seems unfair that residents south of the Fraser are nailed for the costs of their connections, while others, notably those who use the fantastically expensive Sea to Sky, aren't. But then, inconsistency in our transportation network is nothing new, as shown by ferry users covering twice the percentage of operating costs that transit users do.
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Dec 28, 2011 23:23:32 GMT -8
The Albion Ferries were spotted being towed down the Fraser River today, by the tugboat, Harken 6. www.flickr.com/photos/rog45/6589890083/in/photostream/Destination is currently unknown. They couldn't have gone far, because the Harken 6 is tied up at the mouth of the Pitt River. My guess is maybe to the Amix scrapyard?
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Dec 29, 2011 14:52:10 GMT -8
The Albion Ferries were spotted being towed down the Fraser River today, by the tugboat, Harken 6. www.flickr.com/photos/rog45/6589890083/in/photostream/Destination is currently unknown. They couldn't have gone far, because the Harken 6 is tied up at the mouth of the Pitt River. My guess is maybe to the Amix scrapyard? I will take a look down there today and report back...
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Dec 29, 2011 15:16:43 GMT -8
News1130 now reporting on Twitter that they have been sold to a BC company for 1.1 million. Deal closes tomorrow.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,171
|
Post by Neil on Dec 29, 2011 19:37:56 GMT -8
I wonder what use the new owner would have for them. No opportunities for accommodation for forestry crews, unless trailers were stowed aboard. I'm guessing some kind of work barge, although half a million dollars each for a 155' platform seems rather steep.
I think Translink can count themselves fortunate to offload these vessels for more than scrap value.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Dec 29, 2011 20:58:16 GMT -8
This is exciting, especially it being a BC company.
There has been some through-the-grapevine rumours that Graham Mowatt, one of the former Captains, was wanting to purchase them and run the Albion Ferry privately, but that was awhile ago, so I doubt that this is his venture.
If BCF had bought them, I think we'd have heard more in the news.
So unless the Ministry of Transport bought them for the inland ferries, then I'm stumped.
Afterthought: Maybe Prince Rupert, for their Airport ferry?
Second afterthought: Or maybe they aren't to be used as ferries at all. Fish farm, logging camp, etc?
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,171
|
Post by Neil on Dec 29, 2011 23:48:33 GMT -8
There has been some through-the-grapevine rumours that Graham Mowatt, one of the former Captains, was wanting to purchase them and run the Albion Ferry privately, but that was awhile ago, so I doubt that this is his venture. That's so silly it doesn't even qualify as a rumour, unless by 'grapevine' you mean the kind of thing that someone comes up with after imbibibing too much fruit of the grapevine. If BCF had bought them, I think we'd have heard more in the news. So unless the Ministry of Transport bought them for the inland ferries, then I'm stumped. Afterthought: Maybe Prince Rupert, for their Airport ferry? Second afterthought: Or maybe they aren't to be used as ferries at all. Fish farm, logging camp, etc? There's no use for these boats as ferries anywhere on the coast. Their end will probably be much more humble. For the sake of continuity, shouldn't we be continuing this discussion here, and not in a redundant second thread?
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Dec 29, 2011 23:55:58 GMT -8
There has been some through-the-grapevine rumours that Graham Mowatt, one of the former Captains, was wanting to purchase them and run the Albion Ferry privately, but that was awhile ago, so I doubt that this is his venture. That's so silly it doesn't even qualify as a rumour, unless by 'grapevine' you mean the kind of thing that someone comes up with after imbibibing too much fruit of the grapevine. 'Heard it through the grapevine' as in he told me to my face, then I heard it a couple more times down the road. But I agree with you, there's no way any kind of profit could be made in that venture. For the sake of continuity, shouldn't we be continuing this discussion here, and not in a redundant second thread? I had seen it there first, and replied before I read the conversation in this here thread. But yea, I think moderators can move posts, so feel free, guys!
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,171
|
Post by Neil on Dec 30, 2011 0:13:38 GMT -8
That's so silly it doesn't even qualify as a rumour, unless by 'grapevine' you mean the kind of thing that someone comes up with after imbibibing too much fruit of the grapevine. 'Heard it through the grapevine' as in he told me to my face, then I heard it a couple more times down the road. Either he thought you were a very impressionable young chap, or he had just been reading Ihab Shaker's as yet unpublished memoir, 'How To Make a Million In the Ferry Business'...
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Dec 30, 2011 0:25:22 GMT -8
'Heard it through the grapevine' as in he told me to my face, then I heard it a couple more times down the road. Either he thought you were a very impressionable young chap, or he had just been reading Ihab Shaker's as yet unpublished memoir, 'How To Make a Million In the Ferry Business'... So I wasn't the only person who immediately though of good ol' Ihab... Two great minds think alike! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 30, 2011 6:45:13 GMT -8
For the sake of continuity, shouldn't we be continuing this discussion here, and not in a redundant second thread? I had seen it there first, and replied before I read the conversation in this here thread. But yea, I think moderators can move posts, so feel free, guys! That sneaky Mr. Keenleyside was the culprit. And the stealthy Scott did the fix. I'm just embarrassed that I didn't notice.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,171
|
Post by Neil on Dec 30, 2011 11:16:33 GMT -8
[That sneaky Mr. Keenleyside was the culprit. And the stealthy Scott did the fix. I'm just embarrassed that I didn't notice. I only spoke up when after several hours it was apparent that the Good Thread Shepherd was otherwise engaged, and his flock was roaming untended.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Dec 30, 2011 13:39:23 GMT -8
Chris, I did a check for them at Amix yesterday afternoon and they were not there. I did a second drive-by on the Surrey side as well as New West, Annacis Island and Port Royal/Queensborough, but no prevail.
Any other ideas? They are somewhere on the Fraser. I'm on the hunt...
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Dec 30, 2011 22:59:29 GMT -8
Chris, I did a check for them at Amix yesterday afternoon and they were not there. I did a second drive-by on the Surrey side as well as New West, Annacis Island and Port Royal/Queensborough, but no prevail. Any other ideas? They are somewhere on the Fraser. I'm on the hunt... Sorry, at first I automatically assumed they were destined for the scrap heap. Pkeenleyside's post from CKNW states that the Ferries have been bought by "Tidal Towing", a division of Harken Towing. The tugboat that towed both of the Ferries was the "Harken 6". So my next speculation is that could they be tied up at "Tidal Towings" base? According to Siitech, the "Harken 6" is tied up with another cluster of tugboats, such as "Granny Hutch", "Harken 5", etc. This is right where the Pitt River meets the Fraser River, along the Mary Hill Bypass.
|
|