Weber's Playoff Beard

oh wait... The line not only serves Vancouver but connects people who transfer from the skytrain coming from Burnaby, Surrey, New West and Richmond, and soon Coquitlam and Port Moody.

It's really not worth the money if you compare the time it will take for a LRT train to go down Broadway compared to 99Bline. The times are quite similar. If UBC is willing to contribute a substantial amount of funding, I don't think they'll be a problem having RRT all the way to UBC. RRT to UBC would definitely be built if Translink had unlimited funds. Even if they don't build all the way to UBC, it's still a step in the right direction in connecting and improving the transit network. http://www.translink.ca/en/Be-Part-of-the-Plan/Rapid-Transit-Projects/UBC-Line-Rapid-Transit-Study/Alternative-Designs.aspx Nevertheless, biarticulated buses will never ever happen down Broadway unless all the lanes are designated for BUSES only, but that won't ever happen until the day Skytrain runs through every street in Vancouver or we are able to teleport... from say Surrey to UBC in the blink of an eye... Everyone knows it's going to be RRT, just whether it's going to be a combo or all the way to UBC.

How about get the councillors to learn to drive a biarticulated bus.. and then make them drive down Broadway during rush hour... or how about from an automobile driver's perspective. Have them trail a bi articulated bus during rush hour down Broadway. It'll be hell. Imagine if the bus changed lanes on the already cramped Broadway streets. I'll tell you what's a long term solution Tim Louis, RRT under Broadway. Any combo involving RRT also works. Frees up all those bline buses to serve other areas.

Problem with best bus is it doesn't work long term. In 20 years, when even more people use the service, you'll be running buses every minute or more. Also, if RRT is built, they won't be looking at doing anything to improve transit on Broadway. Whereas with best bus, they'll have to revisit this issue in the future and who knows how long that'll take?

I'm sure some of the posters who post in this thread might be on this other forum that extensively covers infrastructure in Vancouver. They discussed this and it has to do with maximizing the time between trains. The forum that talks about this is probably googleable.. (if that's a word)

I didn't change the meaning of what I quoted above, I just shortened it to the quoted parts that I'm replying to. Since you guys insist on linking anything related to removing Eklund as a source to this thread, let's discuss Eklund. I think the first thing that needs to happen is to revise/edit the 2nd post in this thread, the outdated post by bieksa3- on why Eklund is still a credible source. Does Eklund still have credible writers? How can a rumour filled blog by Eklund be "credible" when it's wrong 99% of the time. There's a difference between a "credible source" and a rumour. I personally wouldn't label someone who posts rumours 24/7 as a "source". People like Darren Dreger no longer believe he is credible. Explanation needs to be improved. Saying some "people" don't mind it is like saying, "some people don't mind the Bloc Quebecois to win the election" It doesn't say much. It's not possible to conclude that the majority of people don't mind Eklund's sources. Just because people post and view the threads, doesn't make him credible. At the end of the day, the argument should be over whether he is a credible source or not. It shouldn't be about whether people like him or not, or the amount of views or popularity he has. We are arguing whether he is a credible "source". Posting rumours doesn't make someone "credible". He has made some correct trade predictions, but whether he is "credible" is up for debate. The mods have all the power, but even though it may be repetitive, at least try to answer the questions instead of directing people to this thread without any explanation.

There's no need for sarcasm. I was responding to you who suggested that the express bus run all day. I didn't suggest that, you did. Obviously we're never going to agree on how Translink should spend their money, but we can agree that Translink has lots of projects and improvements they could be doing if they had the funding. And I rather not start the "how we should fund Translink" debate again.

The 43 express bus doesn't even run all day...

Peter Dinklage is so good in his role as Tyrion Lannister.. his acting is so captivating.

Yep I agree. Similar to how the 480 runs down 41st Ave and turns at Granville, so in other words, someone could take that instead of waiting for a 41 or 49 bus. I understand what you're saying. Problem is, all the bus routes are busy and I'm not here to argue whether or not something is considered "bline" or not. That doesn't matter. What matters is that we can the right infrastructure to move people around the city of Vancouver and its suburbs both efficiently and effectively. I have no problem with expanding into Surrey, the problem is, you're suggesting we add even more buses to the 99Bline route. They're running every 2 minutes at peak times and the buses are still all full. Do you recommend they order more buses so they run every minute? UBC is an educational institution that will be there for years to come. The student population is getting bigger and bigger. The skytrain line will provide service to UBC for many many years. The buses can then be placed elsewhere, say Surrey... I'm pretty sure Translink has already planned for a skytrain to UBC by bored tunnel. There's just no funding and they need to go over the specifics. Please don't ever suggest cut and cover near busy parts of the city ever again.

There is no bline on 41st avenue. There's an express bus. Pass ups if departing from Joyce station start at Main Street. So people on Main Street don't get to get on half the time. 480 from Richmond is another route to UBC but it's a long trip. Every bus route is busy and that's expected, but the demand is there, but not enough buses. Why do you insist on expanding outwards when essential service can't even be maintained and the demand is definitely there. If translink had enough funding, this shouldn't even be a problem. UBC, extension in Surrey, and whatever south of fraser stuff you want should be all built.

If they are extending the skytrain west, it'll be going all the way to UBC. That's the plan and that's what they are trying to budget for. That will be the terminus station and where many rush hour users will be arriving/departing from. They aren't going to be doing it in segments. The line is long overdue. Just take a 99 bus any time of the day and you'll understand.

That doesn't work for 99 bline.. it's always busy. Leaving earlier doesn't help since people have have classes 30 mins earlier will be on those buses.

You had too much to drink. Please go to bed.

sexy

You're not alone. During rush hour, the 99, 43, 41, 49, 25, 44, 84.. sometimes 33, 480 pretty much every bus that goes to UBC in the morning is full and late. But 99 is just ridiculous. 2 minutes between buses is still not enough. In order to move people on Broadway effeiciently, a UBC line is going to be built, no doubt about it, it's just when... 5 years? 10 years? 15 years?

I use the 41 a lot and I think it can wait. It's only in the morning and in the afternoon/evening when the 60 ft buses that come every 5-10 mins still aren't enough. The rest of the time, there's enough room on the 40 ft buses to sit. I don't know about the sfu 135 enough to comment about it. In regards to the Broadway skytrain extension, when do you think the project will break ground?

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Mayors+split+hikes+property+taxes+Friday+vote+nears/5502424/story.html#ixzz1ZxldAKrd Thanks Diane Watts... her decisions make sense, whereas Delta and Burnaby and Richmond.. WTF. You got your skytrain lines, now you don't want to fund other Translink projects... what a joke.

How else do you get anything in "real time" without a wireless network connection? You can't... I wish they had an offline version.

Well they're trying to use the "T" as a symbol. People will know what is is. Symbols are everywhere. They make everything simpler. i.e. A railroad sign is easier than say a sign that literally says "Railroad". or a no smoking symbol. or a recycling symbol. We don't literally need a sign that has the words Bus Stop. IF people can relate a symbol to a bus stop, it leaves more space for other stuff to be put on the sign. Plus, right now, they are kind of ugly... a bigger "T" symbol means I can see a sign from 2 blocks away.

Btw, don't light a match or use a lighter near a house after a big earthquake. Or your house may explode from natural gas collecting in your home.

Mostly because people prefer to walk 5 blocks to a McDonalds in Manhatten instead of driving. Or in HK and most major cities in China, their public transit system covers a very large area. And getting a driver's license is much harder in HK and China... so a lot of people don't have their license.

That summarizes the last few pages of this thread.. I ran out of points to argue about so let's talk about something else... From wikipedia: Good to hear! From wikipedia: I hear COV hired some people to plan out the route after they finished consultation with members of the public. Oh and too bad Translink doesn't have money, otherwise they could've changed the 43 Express UBC bus to 91 Bline and the 135 SFU express to 95 bline a few years ago. Blines make things so much more efficient.. except if it's running on Broadway because that's way over capacity. And the Compass cards. Can't wait to try them out.. but I'm more excited about them introducing a distance based system in the future. We can finally catch up to the rest of the world. This 90 min fare thing is terrible and just doesn't cut it. The turnstiles, I'm not willing to start that argument again... Can't wait. So exciting to see so many new things happening to our transit system!

Well Translink wants increased use. With the Upass, they get increased usage by students. Like I said, increased use is a good thing. That's why Translink continues to fund it. And you say well whether they fund it or not, people will still be taking transit to school. They may but they won't be taking transit when they go other places, say the mall, fitness centre, grocery store, library, etc. Translink wants students to use transit more often so that it can become a part of their lifestyle in the future. That's why Translink has no problem funding it. Then you may ask, why not subsidize all people who are between 18-22 years old whether or not they are attending a post secondary institution. That is because it is less likely that these people would be using transit as often, as they aren't guaranteed to take min 10 trips per week. Which means less likely to buy a monthly pass, which means upass doesn't benefit them, so they don't bother subsidizing it. If they felt that it would benefit people ages 18-22 who don't go to school, they may even subsidize those that buy monthly passes.

Funding the upass program looks priddy pale to me.