New seabus contract goes to Dutch company over Vancouver-based Allied

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

The biggest issue with changing the Seabus schedule is that virtually the entire North Vancouver bus system operates on a "pulse" schedule that's synchronized, directly or indirectly, with Seabus arrivals and departures. Increasing Seabus frequency to run every 10 minutes would mean that most of the key North Vancouver route frequencies would also have to be increased as well. The effect of going from 15 minute to 10 minute Seabus frequencies means that the entire transit budget for North Vancouver would have to increase by close to 50%.

Whew!! Didn't realize it would be so costly and complex. Thank you for that explanation

[Rico]

Actually I have dealt with plenty of requests for proposals that have points for local components awarded, usually 10 to 20% of the total.

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by Jebby

This. Protectionism doesn't work and only harms your own economy in the long run.

+1. This is from Robert at the Buzzer blog:

I can tell you that Victoria Shipyards (Seaspan) who built our other SeaBuses were asked to place a bid. Unfortunately, they declined.

Please also understand that finding the right builder for our transit is important to get right and can often include international companies. Both the latest versions of the SkyTrain and Canada Line were manufactured outside of Canada.

As mentioned, TransLink does not have firm long term funding and is under some significant challenges providing our current level of service for a system that is being used by more people than ever before. We’ve been audited by the Province and our commissioner recently and been asked to examine every expense we make in order to provide the best value to tax payers and provide the best service possible to the people of Metro Vancouver.
....
One of our evaluation criteria is to get the best value for money. Damen not only provided the best price, they also demonstrated that they that among the bids, Damon provided the most expertise when it comes to producing this vessel. They will also produce a vessel which will have the least impact on the environment compared to the other bid. The financial savings we’ll get with Damon, as opposed to the other BC bid, will provide us with money that can be put back into transit which will benefit the people of Metro Vancouver. In fact, as it stands, it will provide enough money to buy four buses.

http://buzzer.translink.ca/index.php...abus/#comments

We can include 'local' content as part of the bidding process, but it has to be done in a transparent-as-possible process. (How much local content? How do you define local?). One also has to recognize there may be financial costs involved with that and we would have to be willing to accept that.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

The biggest issue with changing the Seabus schedule is that virtually the entire North Vancouver bus system operates on a "pulse" schedule that's synchronized, directly or indirectly, with Seabus arrivals and departures. Increasing Seabus frequency to run every 10 minutes would mean that most of the key North Vancouver route frequencies would also have to be increased as well. The effect of going from 15 minute to 10 minute Seabus frequencies means that the entire transit budget for North Vancouver would have to increase by close to 50%.

This assumes the bus arrivals sync with the seabus already, which they're supposed to but rarely do. It's infuriating. I can't count the number of times my wife and I sprinted to the seabus only to watch it pulling away. We work right beside waterfront station, live near Lonsdale Quay, and yet have to be out the door at least 50 minutes before work time. By car it is 15-25 minutes to downtown.

10 minute intervals would only mean less time waiting for the next one. Each bus would be more evenly loaded.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Pinion

10 minute intervals would only mean less time waiting for the next one. Each bus would be more evenly loaded.

True, but without also increasing bus frequencies it would mean that half of the transfers at Lonsdale Quay, in both directions, will be guaranteed a longer wait than what the system should be capable of today. If a fix is needed most people might be better served if they could improve scheduling reliability rather than increasing the Seabus frequency.

Easier said than done, of course.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

Government agencies should provide the maximum level of service possible for the minimum amount of money. The taxpayer should expect nothing less.

Companies should not expect to receive preferential treatment when bidding for contracts, because that provides no incentive to be competitive. It's a recipe for laziness and corruption. If a local company knew it always would have an inherent advantage, then bids would just keep going up. Why limit your bid to $2 million over your competitor, why not $4 million, $8 million?

When a country has as much coastline as Canada, some industries such as shipbuilding, should be considered strategic. When there is not enough work in the pipeline skills are lost.

It's no worse than governments spending millions on infrastructure for a transportation mode a figurative handful use.

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by whatnext

When a country has as much coastline as Canada, some industries such as shipbuilding, should be considered strategic. When there is not enough work in the pipeline skills are lost.

Well then, thank goodness there is the naval vessel contract already in place to keep that strategic industry afloat, which is worth 1000 times as much money as this SeaBus contract.

[Joat]

Is this new seabus gonna look anything like the Burrard Pacific Breeze/new one?

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by Joat

Is this new seabus gonna look anything like the Burrard Pacific Breeze/new one?

Who knows but hopefully they get the sightlines back to how they were on the old models. Not being able to see the downtown skyline/north shore very well while travelling took away the one good thing about the seabus.

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by Joat

Is this new seabus gonna look anything like the Burrard Pacific Breeze/new one?

http://buzzer.translink.ca/index.php...-a-new-seabus/:
"The new SeaBus will be based on the design of the Burrard Breeze, but it will be updated to improve efficiency and operations. Part of those improvements are in air quality emissions."

[DKaz]

Too bad Seaspan declined.

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by Pinion

Who knows but hopefully they get the sightlines back to how they were on the old models. Not being able to see the downtown skyline/north shore very well while travelling took away the one good thing about the seabus.

In the above link is the following remark by Robert Willis - Buzzer Editor:

I’ve heard about the windows before and have been told the new vessel will not have these same windows.

[officedweller]

Hopefully the new windows will allow you to see out while seated.

Now all they need is an outside deck! (like the Halifax seabus)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Halifax_ferry.JPG

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

True, but without also increasing bus frequencies it would mean that half of the transfers at Lonsdale Quay, in both directions, will be guaranteed a longer wait than what the system should be capable of today. If a fix is needed most people might be better served if they could improve scheduling reliability rather than increasing the Seabus frequency.

Easier said than done, of course.

I think the overall benefits of 10 minute sailings are far better than the overall inefficiencies of forcing buses to 15-minute frequencies.

With 10-minute frequencies, you could run some buses every 12 minutes, some buses every 20, depending on what the route requires. Once you get to 10-minute frequencies, waiting is far more tolerable. Your average wait time overall would be 4 to 5 minutes.

Bus service, I'm convinced, would improve overall on Vancouver's North Shore when you are not tied to 15-minute frequencies.

[wrenegade]

I'm still pissed they called the first one the Pacific Breeze. Ugh.

[jozero]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

I think the overall benefits of 10 minute sailings are far better than the overall inefficiencies of forcing buses to 15-minute frequencies.

With 10-minute frequencies, you could run some buses every 12 minutes, some buses every 20, depending on what the route requires. Once you get to 10-minute frequencies, waiting is far more tolerable. Your average wait time overall would be 4 to 5 minutes.

Bus service, I'm convinced, would improve overall on Vancouver's North Shore when you are not tied to 15-minute frequencies.

It would be interesting knowing how many people who get off the seabus immediately go catch a bus. Increasing the sailings to 10 minutes would help those catching a bus to go to the Quay to catch the seabus (you dont need to time it exactly (which doesnt work anyways), at most youd wait 10 minutes). It would also help the tremendous amount of people who get off the seabus and walk or bike to their homes in Lower Lonsdale, catch a ride, take a taxi, or stay around the Quay.

Scheduling would only effect one flow, people getting off the seabus to catch a bus, and the worst that would happen is they would have to wait longer.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by jozero

It would be interesting knowing how many people who get off the seabus immediately go catch a bus.

Most of them - I'd say around 60 to 70%.

Increasing the sailings to 10 minutes would help those catching a bus to go to the Quay to catch the seabus (you dont need to time it exactly (which doesnt work anyways)

The existing schedule is designed so that both the buses and the Seabus arrive at Lonsdale Quay and depart from it about the same time, and both have a long enough layover to allow transfers. When things are working the way they should, there's essentially no wait.

Having the Seabus run at a different schedule makes it more likely to increase the average wait times.

[nname]

I think right now TransLink's priority is to:
1. Extend the 15-min service to 9pm on weekdays (done)
2. Increase service to 15-min on Sunday (they were going ahead with it last April, but reverted the change in Fall - check Apr schedule for clues)
3. Extend the 15-min evening service to make the it part of FTN (originally scheduled for Summer 2013)

Making it 10-min during peak service is not a priority until the 3 items above is done...

[jozero]

Originally Posted by nname

I think right now TransLink's priority is to:
1. Extend the 15-min service to 9pm on weekdays (done)
2. Increase service to 15-min on Sunday (they were going ahead with it last April, but reverted the change in Fall - check Apr schedule for clues)
3. Extend the 15-min evening service to make the it part of FTN (originally scheduled for Summer 2013)

Making it 10-min during peak service is not a priority until the 3 items above is done...

The 15min service to 9pm is exciting news. Sorry if I missed something, what do you mean by "done" ? Its going to happen some time soon ?

The Sunday increase would also be welcome.

Do you mind explaining the 3rd point ?

aberdeen5698
Most of them - I'd say around 60 to 70%.

Is that an official stat or a guess ?

[Tfreder]

Originally Posted by jozero

Do you mind explaining the 3rd point ?

As of right now, the seabus is not part of translink's FTN (Frequent Transit Network). To be part of the FTN, a route or corridor must have frequencies equal to/better than 15 minutes between 6am-9pm on weekdays, 7am-9pm on saturdays, and 8am-9pm on sundays. http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and...t-Network.aspx

I honestly don't really care that the new seabus won't be built by a Canadian company. The $2 million in savings speaks for itself.