Columbo Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armada Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Sweet! So you support my idea of a downtown congestion charge to pay for more transit in the transit starved south of Fraser? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 ha, what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 I love the idea of extending the Skytrian. When I say to spend money on densification projects, I mean things like this. I would have infinitely preferred that TransLink had used their money to extend the Skytrain south rather than build this bridge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Columbo Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Except that it's the province expanding the highway not translink. Also, tolling the bridge without adding capacity would be suicidal. There's a reason translink has a funding problem it's impossible for them to collect enough taxation to satisfy all their desire.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Except that it's the province expanding the highway not translink. Also, tolling the bridge without adding capacity would be suicidal. There's a reason translink has a funding problem it's impossible for them to collect enough taxation to satisfy all their desire. And even if they had say double their money I still doubt we would have meaningful transit alternatives south of fraser because all their priorities are north of the river. If they had the three billion it's costing for highway one they would have used it to build skytrain to UBC and the south of fraser residents would be paying for it. It's the same story over and over...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Fine whatever, then the province should give Translink money to extend Skytrain rather than spend it on the bridge. Same difference. Again, I'm not blaming the residents south of the Fraser for how badly planned those cities are... but it's impossible to have reasonable transit down there. People are too spread out, businesses too scarce, large urban hubs virtually inexistant. To give everyone south of the Fraser reasonable access to transit would mean to run hundreds of extra buses which would constantly have 5 or 10 people on them. It's not sustainable. I wish someone would give Translink the money to make it sustainable, but until that happens, there's nothing to be done. And maybe south-Fraser residents partly subsidize north-Fraser transit, but at the same time, north-Fraser people are breathing in all the pollution from south-Fraser drivers, where car use per capita is enormously higher compared to the north. Let's call it even. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Someone sounds bitter that their transit needs aren't being met. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Paying huge amounts of gas taxes coupled with the soon to be traffic/tolling nightmare to come with zero hope of having any alternatives short of up and moving (which would then simply create a tolling/traffic nightmare in the other direction for the gf) tend to do that to people. Knowing that the situation tax/toll wise will only get worse combined with knowing that there will never be any meaningful improvements to transit to at least provide a reasonable alternative only makes it worse. Once the tolls go in and people see the mess you can bet I won't be the only one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Personally - as someone who lives in the Tri-Cities. Our transit system is a joke. I can drive to work in 15-20 minutes; but if I take transit, I have to take the bus that is 90 minutes before I start work... otherwise I can't get there on time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamhuis Hipcheck Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 One more reason to not go to Surrey.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Well at least you don't have bridges to cross or tolls to look forward to. But it's not just the south of fraser residents that are going to suffer. Already New West is chocked with traffic trying to get to the Putello and Queensburough bridges. At least now they quiet down after rush hour. After the toll goes in why would you not simply go the other way (everywhere but north Langley has an other way to take and everyone already knows it as the back up plan for when the Port Mann has an accident or whatever) and save the money unless the otherway is severly congested? There's traffic reports on the radio non stop to guide the decision. There's a simply exeriment to see what will happen once the Port Mann tolls go in. Just see how much traffic is diverted to the other bridges every time there's an accident on the Port Mann. Let me tell you, it's NOT pretty. New West and North Delta are going to be near 24-7 swarmed with traffic dodging the tolls. Book it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 One more reason to not go to Surrey.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 I moved from Surrey to the Tri-Cities to avoid the tolls as best I could. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armada Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 I could get over the tolls they are actually the least of my concerns. In the morning when I can go up 152 with ease and then zip over the bridge it will be worth the three bucks. But in the afternoon? Already it's not exactly fast to come back the other way even with the extra lane as 152 is a LOT busier in the afternoon and going 80+ blocks of it isn't exactly fun. Which is why in the afternoon I go through the equally annoying (but shorter) New West to get to the Queensbourough/91/99 corridor. Once the tolls go in I will have two choices. Pay the toll again and take the just as bad if not more (what with a much huger bridge to feed it) 152 south. Or get in line with the toll dodgers in the soon to be gridlock known as New West and then knows how crazy the Alex Fraser is going to be. It's already so crazy I drive all the way through Surrey to avoid it in the morning. Combine that with zero promise of express bus service (which is especially irritating when you work and live next to regional transit depots that for some reason are only connected via downtown) in the near future and you get pissed off. Make no mistake, I am keen to move to the other side of the river but that would simply transfer to toll cost to the gf. And before anyone asks, make no mistake, there's no jobs for me south of the river, and none for her north. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
لني Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Why do I have to suffer because a bunch of cheapos don't want to pay 3 bucks. New West is already the most congested city since every road is a one lane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armada Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 You could always move. Amirite? NIMBY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 We needed a new bridge. The money should come from the people that use the bridge. Why should people who never use it have to foot the bill the same as somebody who crosses over 5 times a week? When I need to use the bridge I will have zero issue with paying the toll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 We needed a new bridge. The money should come from the people that use the bridge. Why should people who never use it have to foot the bill the same as somebody who crosses over 5 times a week? When I need to use the bridge I will have zero issue with paying the toll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Incidentilly seems there must be some sort of milestone they just met because there must have been at least 100 workers on the west end of the bridge all lined up as if for a photo op this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.