The Official Transit Thread

[Common sense]

The same reason why gas taxes should go towards transit. Less environmentally friendly transportation choices should be deterred, not encouraged.

You might have a case for those who walk or bike to/from the airport, in which case maybe they should jack up the parking, taxi and car rental fees.

Gas taxes go toward benefiting a much bigger group, that is, ALL the people who use any service provided by Translink.

With this "pollution fee" you're trying to propose, it's a bad policy in that it only helps such a small group of travelers trying to get to point A (YVR). Meanwhile, everyone else has to pay for their usage of that system. It'd be much easier simply keeping the AddFare in effect and retaining the status quo.

You're also suggesting that the "pollution fee" is a means of punishment for those who decide to drive/taxi to YVR. This sort of punitive tax only works in areas of high concentration (ie: bottlenecks like bridges and tunnels, downtown Vancouver). Even then, you need high numbers of commuters that go to those areas of high concentration in order for that tax to succeed.

[Buggernut]

Gas taxes go toward benefiting a much bigger group, that is, ALL the people who use any service provided by Translink.

With this "pollution fee" you're trying to propose, it's a bad policy in that it only helps such a small group of travelers trying to get to point A (YVR). Meanwhile, everyone else has to pay for their usage of that system. It'd be much easier simply keeping the AddFare in effect and retaining the status quo.

You're also suggesting that the "pollution fee" is a means of punishment for those who decide to drive/taxi to YVR. This sort of punitive tax only works in areas of high concentration (ie: bottlenecks like bridges and tunnels, downtown Vancouver). Even then, you need high numbers of commuters that go to those areas of high concentration in order for that tax to succeed.

Traffic on Grant McConachie way practically pollutes to the same pool of air as the Oak Street Bridge or any other high traffic area.

If the traffic is high enough to justify building the Canada Line there in the first place, then the same principle should apply as the high concentration areas that you speak of. Those who choose not to use it should be penalized.

[ThePointblank]

Making a surcharge for the airport, or making it zone three, is a pretty bad idea. We WANT people to use the train to get to the airport, not to discourage them.

There are far better and equitable ways of getting additional funding than this.

Basically, I see this as a cave in to another special interest group, in this case cab drivers.

Actually, having a additional surcharge for rapid transit to the airport is not unusual. For example, in San Francisco, the BART has an $4 airport surcharge if you want to get to San Francisco International Airport. New Jersey Transit has an airport access fee to get to Newark International Airport.

[inane]

I couldn't agree with this more. It should extend up arbutus and through to Stanley Park as proposed on the city plan. This is the kind of thing the city needs.

http://www.vancouversun.com/hope+False+Creek+streetcars+stick+around/2423956/story.html

One important project this year can trigger the kind of redevelopment that will shape sustainable urbanism and real livability in more than one Vancouver neighbourhood.

This one single project can clearly demonstrate a commitment to return to a time in Vancouver when public transit set the pattern for an urban fabric that made it easy for everyone to live in distinct neighbourhoods that are complete neighbourhoods and have easy access to jobs, services and recreation without having to drive a car.

This one project can be pointed to as a true Olympic legacy left behind after the Winter Games--a legacy that could be a powerful form-maker for Vancouver's future growth. In fact, the promise of this project is being dangled right in front of Vancouverites, in a way teasing us all during the upcoming Olympics.

I am talking about the Olympic Line -- Vancouver's 2010 demonstration modern streetcar line showcasing for two months the potential to one day reintroduce the streetcar to Vancouver's streets.

That one day could be soon if the city continues to take the lead and plan creatively to keep the streetcar running after the Olympic demonstration and quickly expand it by a few kilometres.

Interestingly, the Olympic Line doesn't involve TransLink, the region's cash-strapped, but all powerful transportation authority. Instead, it's an innovative joint venture between the City of Vancouver, Bombardier Transportation and the federal government's Granville Island.

Beginning in a couple of weeks and through to March 21, the Olympic Line demonstration streetcar project will run between the entrance to Granville Island and the new Canada Line Olympic Village Station at West Second and Cambie. As part of its partnership, Bombardier, a world leader in urban transit technology and a respected Canadian-born company, is providing two of its ultramodern Flexity-brand streetcars on loan from Belgium's Brussels Transport Company. The city invested $8.5 million to upgrade the 1.8-kilometre portion of Downtown Historic Railway line on which the two low-floor streetcars will run. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp., Granville Island's administrator, provided an addition $500,000 to the project.

This project demonstrates that a streetcar, operating at grade on existing rights-of-way, is a relatively inexpensive form of public transit, especially when compared to tens of millions of dollars per kilometre it costs to build the neighbourhood-unfriendly elevated or subway SkyTrain.

The partnership between the city, Bombardier and Granville Island that made this project happen serves as an example of the kind of innovative partnership that can be forged to bypass the typical politically complicated mega-project structures that seem to take forever to get a project off the ground.

With very little effort and relatively few dollars, the Olympic Line could become permanent and expanded to achieve multiple objectives.

First, by extending the line east through the city's Southeast False Creek lands--through the heart of the Olympic Village development--across Main Street and less than another 2.5 kilometres east to the Clark Drive Sky-Train Station, this streetcar line can effectively link all three main rail transit lines: the Canada Line, the Millennium Line and, through the Commercial and Broadway Station, the Expo Line.

Crossing Main Street means providing transit access to the False Creek flats, one of the city's largest tracts of land ripe for redevelopment, and the logical area for a new form of expanded downtown.

Planners have long fretted over the threat of losing this once-industrial district to another single-use residential neighbourhood. They know any sustainable city needs a service and light industrial district close to its downtown. They also know that the central business district eventually needs room to grow to maintain downtown jobs and those jobs need to be close to inner-city housing.

With neighbourhood-scale transit access that links the area to the region's transit backbone, the False Creek flats could be transformed into an urban district that takes its cues from all that is good and has been good in the past in Vancouver.

The Vancouver of the distant past saw richly diverse mixed-use neighbourhoods originally form around key streetcar lines. The False Creek flats could become a district rich with a mix of light industrial, processing, service-commercial, retail, residential and recreational uses. The form of development could take its cue not from the highrises of the downtown peninsula, but from the midrise density of Southeast False Creek with European-style narrow streets in a grid pattern that provides form to a neighbourhood easily served by a linear at-grade streetcar line.

With a streetcar line effectively linking the three rail transit lines that bisect Vancouver and tying together a number of key bus lines, the justification for increased density around Vancouver's transit stations and key transit intersection becomes even clearer. This holds the promise of the city moving toward a form of ecodensity that will provide the kind of housing supply needed to keep housing prices from continuing to skyrocket.

Finally, a permanent streetcar line terminating at Granville Island provides further justification for a continued public reinvestment in the island and its aging facilities. Granville Island is now more than 30 years old. Significant dollars need to be spent to maintain and renew the heavily used public place. By making it easier to access the Island, especially without the car, there will be a renewed focus on this world-renowned urban jewel.

Let's hope, before the Olympics are over, a few bright minds sit down and figure out how to keep the Olympic Line running and realize the promise of the first phase of a real streetcar project to enhance Vancouver's future urbanism.

Bob Ransford is a public affairs consultant with CounterPoint Communications Inc. He is a former real estate developer who specializes in urban land use issues. E-mail:

ransford@counterpoint.ca

[trek]

I couldn't agree with this more. It should extend up arbutus and through to Stanley Park as proposed on the city plan. This is the kind of thing the city needs.

http://www.vancouver...3956/story.html

Amazingly I agree with inane. I especially like the idea of improving access to the industrial areas near the Olympic village as well as linking Clark Drive Skytrain with the Canada Line.

[TheKlatter26]

I'm sorry if this has been covered already But does anyone know what the skytrain schedule will look like during the Games? Will it be running 24/7 or what will be the cut-off times and resume times?

Any help would be appreciated. Me and a bunch of friends are attending the games and will be counting on the skytrain as our mean source of transportation.

Thanks.

[trek]

I'm sorry if this has been covered already But does anyone know what the skytrain schedule will look like during the Games? Will it be running 24/7 or what will be the cut-off times and resume times?

Any help would be appreciated. Me and a bunch of friends are attending the games and will be counting on the skytrain as our mean source of transportation.

Thanks.

Last train for SkyTrain is 2:15 am, Canada Line is 1:15am.

http://www.translink.ca/en/Utilities/2010-Games/February-2010-Extended-Services.aspx.

[Columbo]

Nice scam, eastbound only. And just in time for the Olympics. Guess they need to cash in when they can.

And why not? I have no problem with rich tourists helping to pay for our transit system. If they can pay thousands of dollars to travel here, get a hotel, and buy tickets to events, they can afford another $5 to support our city's "green" infrastructure.

[ThePointblank]

And why not? I have no problem with rich tourists helping to pay for our transit system. If they can pay thousands of dollars to travel here, get a hotel, and buy tickets to events, they can afford another $5 to support our city's "green" infrastructure.

And it is cheaper than taking the taxi, and faster than the bus. Win-win situation.

[Opmac]

And it is cheaper than taking the taxi, and faster than the bus. Win-win situation.

blue.dragon258 did some math.

Really depends.

Let's say family of 4 (2 adults, 2 concession) carrying luggage wants to go d/t.

That'll be 8.75 (2-zone and RAV fee) + 8.75 + 7.50 (2-zone concession and RAV fee) + 7.50 = $32.50

For a taxi ride, it's approx $30.00 (http://www.yellowcabonline.com/taxi_fares.html). To err on the safe side, lets go for $37.50.

That's only a $5 difference. The added benefit is that you go from your hotel doorsteps to the departure level all without having to lug around luggage!

Might be cheaper for single and couple traveling, but not a whole family.

[ronthecivil]

Why don't they just instead slap on an additional $5 to the airport usage fee instead? That way, they'll all pay for it, whether they take the train or a taxi or limo instead.

Charging different fees for the same service kind of leaves a bad taste in tourists' mouths, no? Kind of like merchants that charge a higher price for tourists than to locals.

Well, for one, that would hardly help to keep the taxi industry happy.

[ronthecivil]

Well, this is clearly a method of leeching $$ off the tourists who think paying $3.75 + $5 to get downtown from YVR is considered a "good deal."

I say take a taxi...it'll probably be faster, what with the luggage and everything.

I thought we wanted to encourage tourism. That's a good way to make a first impression, gouge them nearly nine bucks to take TRANSIT from the airport.

Of course, they could take a cab and get a bad first impression that way as well. When I was living in Cali when I would fly up and take a cab the guy in the cab would ask me how to get where I was going. God forbid I was a tourist. How the hell would you expect your average person coming from the airport to know the way. Strikes me as a way to test to see if it's a tourist so you can gouge them.

If we liked tourism, we would't gouge them the moment they step off the airplane.

[ronthecivil]

The same reason why gas taxes should go towards transit. Less environmentally friendly transportation choices should be deterred, not encouraged.

You might have a case for those who walk or bike to/from the airport, in which case maybe they should jack up the parking, taxi and car rental fees.

Well, they do. Problem is, all the people that drive (aka the majority) might be upset to see their tax dollars being sucked away to fund something they don't use. If they don't see any benefit to themselves they are not going to like it in the least.

[ahzdeen]

I thought we wanted to encourage tourism. That's a good way to make a first impression, gouge them nearly nine bucks to take TRANSIT from the airport.

Of course, they could take a cab and get a bad first impression that way as well. When I was living in Cali when I would fly up and take a cab the guy in the cab would ask me how to get where I was going. God forbid I was a tourist. How the hell would you expect your average person coming from the airport to know the way. Strikes me as a way to test to see if it's a tourist so you can gouge them.

If we liked tourism, we would't gouge them the moment they step off the airplane.

Or maybe that's the reason we like tourism.

[ronthecivil]

I couldn't agree with this more. It should extend up arbutus and through to Stanley Park as proposed on the city plan. This is the kind of thing the city needs.

http://www.vancouversun.com/hope+False+Creek+streetcars+stick+around/2423956/story.html

This should be the kind of thing tranlink (if they had money) should be jumping all over. Making a third leg that goes to the west end along the water would provide another link to that very dense neighbourhood. Make the central node at main street station and build a roundhouse type facility so you could basically have three lines (west end to VCC via main, granville island to west end via main, and granville island to VCC via main) that would make a very large upgrade in connectivity to the region. And since the lines would primarily follow the shoreline of false creek and the rail right of way, there would be very little crossing conflict. I would expect this kind of project to have a very high cost benefit ratio.

Only thing I don't like about it is the train would conflict with peds going to the beach, which is a significant traffic flow.

[ronthecivil]

Or maybe that's the reason we like tourism.

I am fairly sure they will spend plenty of money on accomidation, dining, and attractions. Funny thing about those things, you can still get the money out of them while leaving them with a good impression. Word of mouth advertising is cheap and effective and doing things to encourage it in a positive light strike me as a good idea.

[Buzzinator]

Quick question: Anyone know the model name/no. of those yellow buses? (the ones that the 492, 496, etc. used)

Edited January 12, 2010 by Buzzinator

[Common sense]

Quick question: Anyone know the model name/no. of those yellow buses? (the ones that the 492, 496, etc. used)

Orion V

Their numbers for CMBC were the R9200s.

Edited January 12, 2010 by blue.dragon258

[luongoisdaman]

Does anyone know if food/drink is allowed on the Canada Line?

And what the heck is the YVR AddFare thing?

[Common sense]

Does anyone know if food/drink is allowed on the Canada Line?

And what the heck is the YVR AddFare thing?

Food and drink is allowed, so long as you don't make a major mess of it. You spill it, you clean it. It's like your bedroom.

The YVR addfare thing is an additional $5 for passengers taking the RAV from YVR, Sea Island, or Templeton to Bridgeport. Say for example, you're going from YVR to Waterfront. The cost will be $8.75 ($3.75 for an adult 2-zone as well as the $5 add-on). Same thing for YVR to Richmond. It'll be $7.75 ($2.75 for adult one-zone and $5 add-on).

This AddFare only applies when you're buying tickets at YVR, Sea Island, or Templeton. You don't have to pay if you have a Upass, faresaver, month-pass, Olympic bus pass, etc.