Friday, September 4, 2009

Home, Arthur...and make your best time

Make drivers pay up: transit report

Road tolls, higher vehicle fees and even increases to insurance are among commissioner's recommendations

The key to this story lies in the fact revealed very near the end.

Vancouver has lower overall use of its system than Toronto and Montreal, so revenue from riders doesn't cover as much of the operating cost – one reason the Vancouver system has to be subsidized so heavily by taxes.

Let's keep this simple.

When Transclunk makes riding its toys a reasonable, safe and pleasant experience, I'll be there.

You make people pay to get on your little cabooses and stop letting addicts and drunks on for free on the laughable "honor system" and have enough security to allow for some civil behaviour on your buses, and I'll be there.

Until then, you can tax and toll and fee me till you're blue.

I'm going to stick with my barely polluting 1993 450 km-to-the-tank Mazda 3 and count the six bicycles going over the Burrard Bridge any day.


Anonymous said...

I believe we would be better served by private transit systems.
Britain privatized their transit in the 80's. Their fares today are comparable to Vancouver without all the subsidies.
Do you think a private company would have built the $2 billion Canada Line, or instead have chosen an affordable light rail system which could pay for itself in the first year?

Anonymous said...

I've heard Translink will be installing turnstiles in Skytrain stations. A good thing I think. I also noted with interest the suggestion that, to make the system less expensive overall with lower debt, light rail should have been considered over expensive Skytrain technology. This has been one of your positions for some time. I like the Skytrain system, but think it's also time to look for alternatives.

Craig Y.

Anonymous said...

The 'Eye' just read this -

- from the Rail for the Valley boys and girls.

Makes sense, The "Golden rule; that if you build metro on routes that do not have the ridership to sustain them, costly subsidies must be paid. When costly subsidies are paid, there is less money available to be invested in the transit system."

Hmmmm, makes sense.

Don't worry Davis, I'm right behind you in my 'Belchfire 8' as it always gets me where I want to go, through rain, snow, and sleet.

Last time the 'Eye' took SkyTrain, the "Eye' was sprayed by a can a beer from a type I wouldn't want to meet in a dark alley. No security, no one cares.

The 'Eye' doesn't take transit anymore.

Mike Macdonald said...

Have you blogged the ALC link to Tranlink much?

My brother in Law is Matt Laity whom had his farm brutally expropriated for the Abernathy connector, so a lot of this “hits home”. I watched founding farms have roads cut through them for about $30,000 an acre; fair market value according to Tranlink, since the land is in the middle of the farm.

False Value aside, the ALC is supposed to be protecting farmland; a simple mandate they seem to ignore.

They are always so willing to ignore their mandate in trade for a catch phrase like “net benefit” or “Future Benefits”. They allow money-funds to be set up, claiming the money will have more benefit to us in the future than the ALR land...these are all items not in their mandate (which is ONLY to protect farm land).

Out in the nut-farm named Langley where I live the Mayor and Council are now questioning each other publicly; only proving they are so dysfunctional they couldn’t organize an anarchy party.

We have an ALC commissioner that motioned to accept the ALR exclusion for an overpass the rural part of Langley doesn’t want.

This ALC commissioner has a big BCLP past and the BCLP wants the overpass to make sure the rail corridor is forever.

This same ALC commissioner sponsored Councillor Batemans election campaign, and to no surprise Bateman voted for the overpass insisting we all want it while ignoring protest after protest from some of Langley’s most prominent families.

Did I mention Councillor Jordan Bateman is also the president of the Langley BC Liberal riding association?

Then two or three other councilors, also big BCLP members, support the overpass even after initial ALC reports say it will “…adversely impact agricultural land…”.

All these Councilors campaigned in BCLP style stating clearly they intended to protect agricultural land…

Now, Mayor Green goes as a citizen to request the ALC not approve the ALR exclusion for concrete.

The Councilors above, without the mayor, write an “official” letter to the ALC chastising the mayor and claiming to be sure it is what the people of Langley want…it isn’t and they are trying to ram-rod it through before anyone gets a chance to stop it.

All for the rail corridor…

Anonymous said...

Go and sit at any Millenium station and watch for the fare evading thugs exiting to do their thievery at Brentwood and Lougheed malls. The other station have the house and business breakers checking out your back yard. One fellow you didn't even need to see because the smell was so foul - - - . And they all seem to carry hockey bags and very large backpacks.

Anonymous said...

David, I detest translink and all of this taxation in the name of enviromental concerns. If we had some political paries trying to make reasonable changes that were economical sound with some sort of long term plan I would be on board. Until then picture of a polar bear about to drown over the words log it burn it pave it work just fine