Common sense Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 The alternative to go down Granville instead of Cambie should be available regardless. Agreed. Call me spoiled, but all arterial bridges and tunnels (Granville, Oak, Knight, Queensbourgh, Alex Fraser, Massey...) should have at least one bus running on it at any give time, even if it's 1/2 an hour frequency... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Columbo Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Wait, there isn't going to be a bus going down Granville street in 2009? I mean I understand if they get rid of the 98 B-line, but not to have any bus at all seems rather dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Wait, there isn't going to be a bus going down Granville street in 2009? I mean I understand if they get rid of the 98 B-line, but not to have any bus at all seems rather dumb. I'm sure the #10 will remain. We're just talking about the possibility of buses going to Richmond via Arthur Laing. I agree that there should be at least one bus route crossing every bridge in Metro Vancouver (except for Port Mann, due to that bridge being a nightmare). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Columbo Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 I'm sure the #10 will remain. Oh good. Yeah that makes a lot of sense, it would be ridiculous not to have a regular bus along Granville. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeGillis58 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Wait, there isn't going to be a bus going down Granville street in 2009? I mean I understand if they get rid of the 98 B-line, but not to have any bus at all seems rather dumb. No please don't get rid of the 98 B-Line. The Canada Line does not help the residents West of Granville Street who want to get to Richmond. It would be a pain in the neck for somebody living on Granville St. to bus to Cambie St. to catch a skytrain to Richmond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtzfan Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 QFT. There is a petition going around to keep the 491 and 496 buses, and to keep Granville connected to Richmond somehow. It started two weeks ago, and it already has around 10 pages full of signatures. BuckyHermit, I want to sign for that. Can you post the link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 BuckyHermit, I want to sign for that. Can you post the link? It's a paper petition, not an electronic one. If you want to sign it, PM me and I can tell you which morning 491 bus to take. I'm on the same bus as the person organizing the petition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted November 16, 2008 Author Share Posted November 16, 2008 (edited) No please don't get rid of the 98 B-Line. The Canada Line does not help the residents West of Granville Street who want to get to Richmond. It would be a pain in the neck for somebody living on Granville St. to bus to Cambie St. to catch a skytrain to Richmond. Getting rid of the 98 when the Canada Line goes online is a good idea - in fact, it's the whole point of building the Canada Line as it's the 98's replacement.....I mean, that's 40,000 riders right there that could mostly be transplanted onto the Canada Line. And whether you like it or not, it will happen - those 98 B-Line buses will be utilized for the new Hastings and 41st Avenue B-Lines. The B-Line acts as precursor for rapid transit rail in this region. You can't have everything - it's all about using your resources in the most efficient way. Edited November 16, 2008 by nitronuts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 (edited) A peak hour express bus down Granville might be something to consider though. Similar to the 32, but with more trips. Edited November 16, 2008 by BuckyHermit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Getting rid of the 98 when the Canada Line goes online is a good idea - in fact, it's the whole point of building the Canada Line as it's the 98's replacement.....I mean, that's 40,000 riders right there that could mostly be transplanted onto the Canada Line. And whether you like it or not, it will happen - those 98 B-Line buses will be utilized for the new Hastings and 41st Avenue B-Lines. They could run regular non-articulated buses as both the #10 and 98's replacement. Combine those routes and relegate it to non-B-Line status, for those in Richmond who need to go down Granville and vice versa, without the need for multiple transfers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted November 16, 2008 Author Share Posted November 16, 2008 (edited) They could run regular non-articulated buses as both the #10 and 98's replacement. Combine those routes and relegate it to non-B-Line status, for those in Richmond who need to go down Granville and vice versa, without the need for multiple transfers. Perhaps we'll see something like that for the future, but I highly doubt it. Translink is going to be in a huge financial hole if it keeps up with its capital infrastructure spending plan with annual deficits as much as $500-million if they don't find additional revenues. On top of that, the Canada Line is mightily expensive to operate. Had the province built it as a public project as an extension of SkyTrain, there could have been massive cost savings to construction costs and operational costs. In fact, $1.85-billion for SkyTrain built by Bombardier and an annual operational cost of ~$20-million utilizing the same SkyTrain rolling stock, maintenance facilities, staff, administrative resources, command centre, operations and maintenance centre, etc. It's for Translink's own benefit to pack the Canada Line trains like sardine cans, so any alternate north-south Vancouver-Richmond bus route simply won't do for the forseeable future. Edited November 16, 2008 by nitronuts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Perhaps we'll see something like that for the future, but I highly doubt it. Translink is going to be in a huge financial hole if it keeps up with its capital infrastructure spending plan with annual deficits as much as $500-million if they don't find additional revenues. On top of that, the Canada Line is mightily expensive to operate. Had the province built it as a public project as an extension of SkyTrain, there could have been massive cost savings to construction costs and operational costs. In fact, $1.85-billion for SkyTrain built by Bombardier and an annual operational cost of ~$20-million utilizing the same SkyTrain rolling stock, maintenance facilities, staff, administrative resources, command centre, operations and maintenance centre, etc. It's for Translink's own benefit to pack the Canada Line trains like sardine cans, so any alternate north-south Vancouver-Richmond bus route simply won't do for the forseeable future. Typical TransLink. Sooner or later, this is going to cause someone to take the MoreBusesNow idea and turn it into a MoreTrainsNow campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GonnaWin Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 (edited) Typical TransLink. Sooner or later, this is going to cause someone to take the MoreBusesNow idea and turn it into a MoreTrainsNow campaign. Well the alternative is that taxpayers have to pay IntransitBC boatloads of money. I'm fine with making sure the Canada Line becomes at least as well used as the other lines we have. P.S. I want more buses too, but the MBN people should really be giving the bus manufacturer crap. They're just dealing with so many orders right now they can't keep up. Edited November 16, 2008 by GonnaWin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted November 16, 2008 Author Share Posted November 16, 2008 Typical TransLink. Sooner or later, this is going to cause someone to take the MoreBusesNow idea and turn it into a MoreTrainsNow campaign. Well they don't have much of a choice, the actions of others have resulted in huge future tabs for Translink: blame it on the province for pushing a private-public project and for limiting public funding, blame it on the Cambie residents and businesses for pushing unnecessary tunneling. The Canada Line, with more trains purchased in the future for a higher frequency, should be fine to cope with the loads. Its ultimate capacity is the same as what the Expo Line works with today, and that's quite a bit. I'm more worried about station platform crowding, as there really isn't that much room to move around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted November 16, 2008 Author Share Posted November 16, 2008 Well the alternative is that taxpayers have to pay IntransitBC boatloads of money. I'm fine with making sure the Canada Line becomes at least as well used as the other lines we have. P.S. I want more buses too, but the MBN people should really be giving the bus manufacturer crap. They're just dealing with so many orders right now they can't keep up. Agreed.....but I'm pretty sure we'll be able to meet ridership projections for the Canada Line. The Expo Line, according to the last estimates three years ago, carries 180,000 passengers a day and the Millennium Line with 75,000 passengers last year. I'd imagine the numbers today to be around 200,000 for the Expo Line and 80,000+ for the M-Line. The Canada Line is projected to carry 100,000 daily. As for the bus orders, god I hope Translink ditches Manitoba's New Flyer as the diesel bus supplier.....their buses fall apart in 6 months from poor screws and an overly powerful engine causing too much vibrations. They should really stick with Quebec's Nova Bus for the diesels.....I wonder if they make articulates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeGillis58 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 One thing that bugs me about the MK II trains is that their too short when they operate at 2-car. Why can't Translink operate all MK IIs at 4-car sets? Especially on weekends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeGillis58 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Could someone please explain what type of SkyTrain is this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePointblank Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 One thing that bugs me about the MK II trains is that their too short when they operate at 2-car. Why can't Translink operate all MK IIs at 4-car sets? Especially on weekends. Not enough trains to do that all the time; a number of them need to be down at any given time for maintenance and other stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Could someone please explain what type of SkyTrain is this? One that reminds me of "Aliens." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyislife4 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 One that reminds me of "Aliens." That was the concept train they were going to use for the M-Line SkyTrain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now