Watts steps down from TransLink position

[Waders]

Originally Posted by The_Henry_Man

I think the best solution right now is to have the Provincial government take back the responsibility of Translink, and absorb it into BC Transit, .

My opinion is Translink should be absorbed back into Ministry of Transportation.
Also provinical government should have more influence and power on land usage planning. Land usage and transportation planning are closely related.

[geoff's two cents]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

But translink did do something big for SoF, the bus expansion. For those who don't take the bus in SoF, this really was like night and day. Buses came more frequently in the AM and had ~ quarter hour service mid-day. This doesn't seem like much, esp to vancouverites but bus service was abysmal prior to this. Unfortunately, this isn't as sexy as rail service and often goes unreported.

Good things though - I take the 501, 375 and 345 off and on, and I am seeing ridership growing. we are changing culture in SoF. I think a B-line would be a realistic near-term goal for SOF to get. If people talk about putting LRT in SoF without changing culture, without building ridership by bus routes, that's just foolhardy. unfortunatley, buses don't make good photo ops.

Good points, and thanks for posting. Agreed: Bus service, though not anywhere near Vancouver levels, is actually a viable way of getting around most of Surrey/Langley now, which is a situation vastly different from that of 10 years ago. This is testament, I think, to smart planning on Watt's part, as well as the activist role played by Translink.

[Xerx]

Fassbender new chair of TransLink mayors council
PeterFassbender-web.jpg
Langley City Mayor Peter Fassbender is now chair of the Mayors' Council on Regional Transportation.
File

Email Print Letter to Editor Share
Text
By Jeff Nagel - BC Local News

Published: February 03, 2010 2:00 PM
Updated: February 03, 2010 2:29 PM

0 Comments

Langley City Mayor Peter Fassbender now heads the region's mayors council on transportation after a surprise vote Wednesday that stoked accusations the handover was unfairly orchestrated by the outgoing chair.

Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts stepped aside and nominated Fassbender to take over.

The Langley City mayor, previously vice-chair of the council that controls TransLink's purse strings, then defeated Port Moody Mayor Joe Trasolini in the ensuing election for chair.

It was inappropriate for Watts to spring her departure on the other mayors with no advance warning or time to marshall support, charged Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan.

"It gives a very unfair advantage if Mr. Fassbender knew you were leaving," he told Watts before the vote. "It makes it impossible for anyone else to run against him and have a chance."

Watts offered to defer the election if the board desired, but no such motion was made.

Trasolini and Corrigan had both voted in October against jacking fares and taxes by $130 million, increases now taking effect to staunch the red ink flowing from TransLink. They favoured a drastic cuts scenario to force the province to offer more funding to assure construction of the Evergreen Line.

Fassbender pledged to "work together" with the province while preserving the mayors' united front in negotiations with Victoria.

The mayors must "hold the government's feet to the fire" and not allow the province to marginalize them through divide-and-conquer tactics, he said.

Fassbender said it would be a mistake if the province radically overhauls TransLink's structure again.

But he said more modest proposals may make sense, such as putting provincial government reps on the mayors council to improve discussions.

"The province needs to join us. I think there's a willingness on their part to look at it," Fassbender said.

He promised not to focus on south of the Fraser issues, but represent the entire region, calling the Evergreen Line a key priority.

Trasolini was elected vice-chair, defeating Coquitlam Mayor Richard Stewart, and said a balance is needed between aggressively confronting the province and "playing dead."

He said there's no time to waste in resuming talks because new legislation governing TransLink could be crafted soon.

TransLink CEO Ian Jarvis said it's still conceivable a new funding supplement could be crafted, providing TransLink more money to fund additional projects, such as the Evergreen Line.

The provincial government is on schedule with preliminary design work for the rapid transit route to Port Moody and Coquitlam.

"The elephant in the room is the funding," Jarvis said, adding new cash sources are needed for TransLink to commit to its $400-million share of Evergreen capital costs.

Options on the table last year included an annual vehicle levy averaging $122 per year and there's also been increased talk of regional tolling or road pricing.

Sources previously floated by TransLink – including a share of the property transfer tax or a new charge on cargo containers moving through ports – were rejected by the province.

Transportation minister Shirley Bond has so far only suggested the mayors increase TransLink property taxes, an idea they reject.

Jeff Nagel, http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/83487197.html

[officedweller]

Nice

[mezzanine]

The Langley City mayor,... then defeated Port Moody Mayor Joe Trasolini in the ensuing election for chair.

Trasolini and Corrigan had both voted in October against jacking fares and taxes by $130 million, increases now taking effect to staunch the red ink flowing from TransLink. They favoured a drastic cuts scenario to force the province to offer more funding to assure construction of the Evergreen Line.

...and in the ensuing melee, skeleton transitional funding provided by the province prevents some (most?) bus cuts from resuming regular service....

[lightrail]

Originally Posted by VanCvl

TransLink has a disfunctional governance model (in both the new and old format) because the provincial government never wanted to give up their power. The structure could have worked if provincial seats were appointed to the board.

The problem with the TransLink now is that their CEO quit, the chair of the Mayor's council quit, and questions are still being raised about how taxpayer's money is being spent without any public input.

Another problem that doesn't get much publicity is the SOF folks feel like they have been paying into the system but haven't seen much back for transit service. I guess time will tell where the province wants to take this.

I lost any respect I had for Translink when they sat around for 4 months during a bus strike, claiming there's nothing they can do because the drivers donw't work for Translink, just Coast Mountain Bus Company - fully owned by Translink of course.

Completely useless.

[paradigm4]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

And this service isn't cheap, it is the reason the comptroller general stated was reponsible for translink's structureal debt.

Martin Crilly, the Transportation Commissioner, pointed out rising capital expenditures that never used to exist (TransLink's 1/3), and the huge debt payments on both the Canada Line and Golden Ears Bridge. Couple this with massive expansion plans and no means of funding them and tada - structural deficit.

Minor bus expansion South of the Fraser surely had an impact on money. It was not however the cause of the deficit and contributed far less to any financial problems than the issues stated above.

[paradigm4]

Originally Posted by racc

TransLink has provide a lot of money for roads South of the Fraser including the Golden Ears Bridge and the Fraser Highway widening. TransLink paid for around $160 million for the land, project management and other costs that will not be cover by tolls. Even worse, especially with lower than expected traffic levels, it will be years before tolls cover the operating and financing costs on the bridge. Don't forget either, that the first rapid transit line was build to, you guessed it, Surrey. Don't be surprised if you add it all up, that people South of the Fraser are getting their moneys worth from TL.

Not per capita. Not even close.

Since the 90's, what has Vancouver gotten? Oh right, 3 SkyTrain lines, two B-Lines, brand new trolleys, a whack load of articulated buses, and a ton of route expansion. That doesn't include road upgrades.

A Fraser Hwy expansion and bridge meant to pay for itself through tolls - doesn't sound fair to me.

[Whalleyboy]

and there not even doing paying the whole bill for fraser hwy
surrey's had to fork out its share too

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by paradigm4

Martin Crilly, the Transportation Commissioner, pointed out rising capital expenditures that never used to exist (TransLink's 1/3), and the huge debt payments on both the Canada Line and Golden Ears Bridge. Couple this with massive expansion plans and no means of funding them and tada - structural deficit.

Minor bus expansion South of the Fraser surely had an impact on money. It was not however the cause of the deficit and contributed far less to any financial problems than the issues stated above.

bus expansion was not minor, they turned over the entire fleet and added frequency. the cost of the new trolleybuses themselves cost more than TL's payments for the Golden Ears Bridge in 2005. ($273 mil vs 166 mil)

http://www.transitpolice.bc.ca/~/med...%20Report.ashx (page 15 of pdf)

From Martin Crilly himself:

"This expansion of service has reduced the productivity of the
bus network, with each increment of service costing more and
carrying fewer riders, while fares increase. There is now available
capacity—that is empty seats—on much, but not all, of the
bus network which can accommodate future growth in ridership.
...
The pace of wage growth strongly affects
TransLink’s total costs and is possibly understated in the Plan."

The budget risk for the C-line and GEB is for future revenue growth having variability, but not operational/capital costs. High budget risks include wage and fuel inflation, = structural debt as bus operational costs rise accordingly.

the most significant risk factors are: wage inflation, fuel
tax revenues, senior government funding, Canada Line
and Golden Ears Bridge revenues, and interest rates;

http://www.translinkcommission.org/C...enYearPlan.pdf

yes, victoria has to step up, but IMO translink did a good job with project planning (GEB payments from TL are kept low in the first 5 years) and clouds the water when ppl like zwei start putting their spin on the report. And it draws attention away from the large but unnoticed investment in the bus system that is crucial to SOF, but still not having funding from a lack of local and provincial will.

[Vonny]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

But translink did do something big for SoF, the bus expansion. For those who don't take the bus in SoF, this really was like night and day. Buses came more frequently in the AM and had ~ quarter hour service mid-day. This doesn't seem like much, esp to vancouverites but bus service was abysmal prior to this. Unfortunately, this isn't as sexy as rail service and often goes unreported.
...

Agree, but eventually all this improvement lack of visibility:
we are still in the preconceived idea there is only sparse service beyond Vancouver, but there is ton of bus servicing Ladner loop for example...

but the service is not readable enough, and different bus route schedule not well interlined.

it was the point that I was trying to address in one of my post: bring more visibility to enhanced service.


So it was is eventually missing at Translink, proper branding to change the perception of the suburbanite

Originally Posted by paradigm4

Not per capita. Not even close.

Since the 90's, what has Vancouver gotten? Oh right, 3 SkyTrain lines, two B-Lines, brand new trolleys, a whack load of articulated buses, and a ton of route expansion. That doesn't include road upgrades.

A Fraser Hwy expansion and bridge meant to pay for itself through tolls - doesn't sound fair to me.

do you means, skytrain is not servicing the suburbs? One could argue they are more useful to the suburbanite than the Vancouverite.

regrading, the whole thing: it is very probable that Translink break even in Vancouver, and in fact all the tax payer money is funneled toward suburbs, more noticeably SoF to support transit there. Too bad Translink doesn't publish figure by bus route or area: whiner could have very bad surprise.

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by paradigm4

Not per capita. Not even close.

Since the 90's, what has Vancouver gotten? Oh right, 3 SkyTrain lines, two B-Lines, brand new trolleys, a whack load of articulated buses, and a ton of route expansion. That doesn't include road upgrades.

A Fraser Hwy expansion and bridge meant to pay for itself through tolls - doesn't sound fair to me.

In all fairness, expo predated TL, and translink was created ~1999, at the same time victoria started m-line construction (and paid for all of it). At that time, highway coaches were also started to serve south surrey/ladner, as with the SOF regular bus expansion.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by DKaz

I'm pretty sure the BC Liberals are going to fully fund the Evergreen Line, it's in their best political interests to do so. Maybe in 2013 they can do an early partial opening to Burquitlam in time for the election campaign.

I'm expecting that to happen. That is a standard political thing to do. Have signs of the construction going on during the election. Notice how you could see the start of construction for Hwy1/PMB during the last election. Every party in the past has done and every party in the future will do it.

As for translinks problems no matter what one person does. There will always be someone else trying to stop you. No matter how much of an idiot you think that person is. It would seem to me the biggest problem is it is too political or too much of case of watching out for ones own self interest. Which in some cases may not be in the best interest of the whole.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by Whalleyboy

It would be nice to see translink break it self into two groups one for north one for south of the Fraser this way the money comes in from the areas they are looking after. This way people south of the Fraser wouldnt feel there just giving up there money to Vancouver and would have no one but themselfs to blame if there isnt enough money. At translink current rate and them cutting off the b-line i could see SoF kicking them out soon. I remember seeing some of the people on the 2040 plan thing i think it was yelling out for where is better service SoF
I for one would actually support kicking them out right now after they cut the B-line.

I don't think you'd want two different groups. Reason being if that happened I'd highly suggest that the group controlling the Burrard Peninsula Cities enact a toll for anyone who drives into that region. May not be fair but someone has to pay to drive on the roads.

Originally Posted by paradigm4

Not per capita. Not even close.

Since the 90's, what has Vancouver gotten? Oh right, 3 SkyTrain lines, two B-Lines, brand new trolleys, a whack load of articulated buses, and a ton of route expansion. That doesn't include road upgrades.

A Fraser Hwy expansion and bridge meant to pay for itself through tolls - doesn't sound fair to me.

I only know of two lines. The first one came before the 90's

As for the bus expansion. It was needed. Considering the buses where full and even after all that they are still full.

I'm not against SoF getting better transit as it is needed. And I think the best way to start would be some B-line routes. Get something fast and frequent that people can rely on and see what happens. If a route shows massive growth and ridership then look into either putting an LRT line or extending skytrain if possible.

[nname]

Originally Posted by Vonny

Agree, but eventually all this improvement lack of visibility:
we are still in the preconceived idea there is only sparse service beyond Vancouver, but there is ton of bus servicing Ladner loop for example...

but the service is not readable enough, and different bus route schedule not well interlined.

it was the point that I was trying to address in one of my post: bring more visibility to enhanced service.


So it was is eventually missing at Translink, proper branding to change the perception of the suburbanite



do you means, skytrain is not servicing the suburbs? One could argue they are more useful to the suburbanite than the Vancouverite.

regrading, the whole thing: it is very probable that Translink break even in Vancouver, and in fact all the tax payer money is funneled toward suburbs, more noticeably SoF to support transit there. Too bad Translink doesn't publish figure by bus route or area: whiner could have very bad surprise.

Comparison of bus service in different region

Vancouver/UEL
Routes: 1-84, 99, 100, C19-C23; E(40%x4), M(50%x4), C(50%x2), S(50%x4)
Weekday service hours: 4566[B] + 1563[R] (+20% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 9.71
Service hour per thousand rider: 16.7

Burnaby/New West
Routes: 101-136, 144, 145, 154, 155, C1-C7; E(40%x4), M(50%x4)
Weekday service hours: 1491[B] + 1293[R] (+53% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 9.98
Service hour per thousand rider: 24.8

Northeast Sector
Routes: 97, 143, 151-153, 156-190, C24-C40; W(40%x5)
Weekday service hours: 975[B] + 49[R] (+13% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 4.89
Service hour per thousand rider: 38.5

Northshore
Routes: 210-292, C10-C15; S(50%x4)
Weekday service hours: 1023[B] + 51[R] (+30% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 5.87
Service hour per thousand rider: 34.4

Richmond
Routes: 401-480, C90-C99; C(50%x2)
Weekday service hours: 933[B] + 219[R] (+39% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 6.16
Service hour per thousand rider: 39.9

South of Fraser
Routes: 301-395, 501-640, C50-C89; E(20%x4)
Weekday service hours: 2119[B] + 279[R] (+45% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 3.57
Service hour per thousand rider: 40.1

Ridge Meadows
Routes: 701, 791, C41-C49; W(40%x5)
Weekday service hours: 281[B] + 49[R] (+35% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 3.33
Service hour per thousand rider: 85.7

Note: The ridership data was before Canada Line and service hour was after, which pretty much screws up Richmond's data... SkyTrain's hour is counted by cars (hence the huge increase in Burnaby's number).. So, notice the SoF's increase in service hour, and also the service hour per rider... Vancouver's bus on average is 2.5 times more crowded than SoF's buses....

[nickinacan]

Originally Posted by cabotp

I don't think you'd want two different groups. Reason being if that happened I'd highly suggest that the group controlling the Burrard Peninsula Cities enact a toll for anyone who drives into that region. May not be fair but someone has to pay to drive on the roads.



I only know of two lines. The first one came before the 90's

As for the bus expansion. It was needed. Considering the buses where full and even after all that they are still full.

I'm not against SoF getting better transit as it is needed. And I think the best way to start would be some B-line routes. Get something fast and frequent that people can rely on and see what happens. If a route shows massive growth and ridership then look into either putting an LRT line or extending skytrain if possible.

It all comes down to the chicken and the egg thing again. But since Translink is cash strapped, it will definitely be the chicken before the egg. But you are right, they should use a B-Line system to develop the ridership, then switch over to LRT/Skytrain. It is ridiculously costly to have Skytrain with no ridership to support it (I am looking at you Millennium Line!).

The biggest problem for the South of the Fraser that drives people back into their cars isn't the frequency of the service (although that is a big part of it), but rather the fact that it takes a long time to get anywhere. I live in Surrey and work in North Vancouver. For me to drive, it takes about 1 hour and 15 minutes. For me to take transit, it takes me 2 hours and 30 minutes. I have made the attempt to take transit and it didn't work out too well.

The problem is way too many transfer points. They should really start looking at interconnectability between the major employment and entertainment centres. If I want to go from Cloverdale to Surrey Central (320 during rush hour), why should I have to sit on a bus that goes from Cloverdale to Fleetwood, Fleetwood to Guildford, and then Guildford to Surrey Central? This alone is about 50 minutes. This same trip by car is only 15 minutes. This is why ridership is so low. It isn't that hard to understand.

[Gordon]

It sounds like one of the problems South of Fraser( Surrey) may be the design of the route system. Surrey it's self covers a large goegraphical area so it would make sense if they had some limited stop express routes like the 84 or 32 for service between some of the areas mentioned above & the skytrain stations thus removing some of the time consuming transfers.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by nickinacan

It all comes down to the chicken and the egg thing again. But since Translink is cash strapped, it will definitely be the chicken before the egg. But you are right, they should use a B-Line system to develop the ridership, then switch over to LRT/Skytrain. It is ridiculously costly to have Skytrain with no ridership to support it (I am looking at you Millennium Line!).

The biggest problem for the South of the Fraser that drives people back into their cars isn't the frequency of the service (although that is a big part of it), but rather the fact that it takes a long time to get anywhere. I live in Surrey and work in North Vancouver. For me to drive, it takes about 1 hour and 15 minutes. For me to take transit, it takes me 2 hours and 30 minutes. I have made the attempt to take transit and it didn't work out too well.

The problem is way too many transfer points. They should really start looking at interconnectability between the major employment and entertainment centres. If I want to go from Cloverdale to Surrey Central (320 during rush hour), why should I have to sit on a bus that goes from Cloverdale to Fleetwood, Fleetwood to Guildford, and then Guildford to Surrey Central? This alone is about 50 minutes. This same trip by car is only 15 minutes. This is why ridership is so low. It isn't that hard to understand.

Unfortunately transit will invariably always be slower than car. Although if your trip is only be skytrain (ie something that is grade separated) then you most likely will be faster by transit.

The fact that a some or a lot of the routes SoF run in a zig zag type of pattern. As opposed to to a stick to one road and go back and forth on that road like they do in Vancouver.

One advantage that Vancouver does have is the fact that almost every route ends up crossing or ending at either Downtown, Broadway Corridor or UBC. So every route is invariably going to be busy because they all go to major destinations

[Whalleyboy]

Originally Posted by Gordon

It sounds like one of the problems South of Fraser( Surrey) may be the design of the route system. Surrey it's self covers a large goegraphical area so it would make sense if they had some limited stop express routes like the 84 or 32 for service between some of the areas mentioned above & the skytrain stations thus removing some of the time consuming transfers.

the b-line was one of the limited stop routes we need in surrey. thus why i am pissed

[Vonny]

Originally Posted by nname

Comparison of bus service in different region

Vancouver/UEL
Routes: 1-84, 99, 100, C19-C23; E(40%x4), M(50%x4), C(50%x2), S(50%x4)
Weekday service hours: 4566[B] + 1563[R] (+20% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 9.71
Service hour per thousand rider: 16.7

Burnaby/New West
Routes: 101-136, 144, 145, 154, 155, C1-C7; E(40%x4), M(50%x4)
Weekday service hours: 1491[B] + 1293[R] (+53% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 9.98
Service hour per thousand rider: 24.8

Northeast Sector
Routes: 97, 143, 151-153, 156-190, C24-C40; W(40%x5)
Weekday service hours: 975[B] + 49[R] (+13% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 4.89
Service hour per thousand rider: 38.5

Northshore
Routes: 210-292, C10-C15; S(50%x4)
Weekday service hours: 1023[B] + 51[R] (+30% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 5.87
Service hour per thousand rider: 34.4

Richmond
Routes: 401-480, C90-C99; C(50%x2)
Weekday service hours: 933[B] + 219[R] (+39% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 6.16
Service hour per thousand rider: 39.9

South of Fraser
Routes: 301-395, 501-640, C50-C89; E(20%x4)
Weekday service hours: 2119[B] + 279[R] (+45% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 3.57
Service hour per thousand rider: 40.1

Ridge Meadows
Routes: 701, 791, C41-C49; W(40%x5)
Weekday service hours: 281[B] + 49[R] (+35% from 2006)
Service hour per thousand pop: 3.33
Service hour per thousand rider: 85.7

Note: The ridership data was before Canada Line and service hour was after, which pretty much screws up Richmond's data... SkyTrain's hour is counted by cars (hence the huge increase in Burnaby's number).. So, notice the SoF's increase in service hour, and also the service hour per rider... Vancouver's bus on average is 2.5 times more crowded than SoF's buses....

this is very interesting information: may we know the source of it?