Report: Vancouver has the worst traffic congestion in North America

[Harvey Specter]

The issue with me is I need my car for clients so I can't carpool or take the skytrain. I know a lot of cities are trying to deter car traffic into their cores but is it a good idea? That's a debate that can go on and on. I personally feelthe next step for Vancouver, if the mayor stays on, will be some sort of congestion charge like they have in London. That would really cut traffic in half but you need a very good transportation system in place before you go down that route or else businesses in DT would greatly suffer.

[Gridlock]

Originally Posted by gars

They do it as an index of rush hour vs non-rush hour. So if you normally drive to work in 45 minutes in rush hour - but it takes you 15 minutes in non-rush hour - then it's a factor of 3.

In Toronto - it's always friggin busy - it may take you 1 hour to drive to work - but 30 minutes to drive in non-rush hour - so it's a factor of 2. You may cover a shorter distance in a longer period of time in Toronto - but because the difference between non-rush hour and rush hour isn't that great - it's supposedly not "congested" in Toronto.

Same goes with a lot of US cities. LA Traffic - DC traffic - there are so many terrible rush hours there - but because the city is constantly busy - they won't score as high in Vancouver.

Well if that's how its being measured, then they should call it something different than "congested". The city is actually very easy to get around during the day. I can be over at in surrey in 15 minutes during the day. Right now at 5 o'clock, I'd be the better part of an hour. What do I do? Not go to Surrey at 5 o'clock, that's what.

If that article says, "vancouver has the largest fluctuation in traffic volumes during the day" then it wouldn't get nearly as much press, would it?

[Elements604]

Originally Posted by xpl0sive

Right ya, let's inconvenience the majority of the population in this city for the benefit of a few. Great idea.

I live near commercial drive and work downtown. There are quiet a few people on the bike lanes, at least during rush hours. For me its faster than driving or taking the bus. Plus saves tons money by not having to park and maintain my car. It is challenging getting to work and changing into a suit, but still better than the bus I find. I Invested in a electric bike and have full rain gear which makes things much more comfortable. It really is awesome not having to deal with stop and go traffic.

I have taken things into my own hands instead of relying on gov to fix roads and make a better transit system.

Maybe you are inconveniencing your self wasting 25 min in traffic to go 5 km. Or maybe you have a good reason to be in a car I dunno. But there are a lot of people out there who really don't need to be driving. I really doubt removing the bike lanes is going to make your commute much better.

The way this city is growing more roads and cars just doesn't seem to be the answer.

[xpl0sive]

I attend sites all over the GVRD and cannot use anything other than a car. If I had an appointment downtown at 9am and had to go to Maple Ridge after, it would take me half a day to get there by transit.

I agree that people who live in the suburbs and work DT, as in sit in an office all day, don't really need to drive. My girlfriend takes the skytrain to work everyday and the skytrain is packed. Maybe the solution is to have more trains running more often? In big cities like London and New York, their subways come every 30 seconds at rush hour. I think it's every 3 minutes for the skytrain during rush hour?
Same thing with busses. I constantly see people having to line up at bus stations to get on a bus and there's never enough room to take everyone. If they had more busses running more often, people wouldn't be as opposed to actually getting on the bus.

If people could comfortably take public transit, traffic issues would be resolved, but it seems the city is not taking enough steps to improve the current system. They keep coming up with new ways to "deter" people from driving, by increasing taxes, taking away lanes of roads for bike lanes, etc. But without other options, people don't have a choice but to pay through the nose to have a car and sit in traffic for hours.

[Nlkko]

They are deterring people who don't really need to drive from driving and I think it's working. There's a lot less people driving now compared to 20 years ago. They're building another line (Evergreen Line) right after another (Canada Line). These lines cost several billions of dollars each. They're setting up a data-mining system (Compass) to utilize future resources. Infrastructure aren't just built overnight.

But of course, it's too easy to blame Translink when a bus skip stops because it's full, train is packed because there's actually something called rush hours. Of course it's too easy to compare our system to the system of cities with super density like London, NYC or Hong Kong. Those cities are ALWAYS busy. Here? It peaks during rush hours then die down significantly. They need to convert more car drivers to transit users so that they can justify running trains/buses more frequently.

It's too bad people who absolutely need their cars are affected by bike-lanes or fuel tax but something has to be done. We cannot build more roads or highways so you better get used to bike lanes and public transit.

[xpl0sive]

Originally Posted by Nlkko

They are deterring people who don't really need to drive from driving and I think it's working. There's a lot less people driving now compared to 20 years ago.

O Really?

Number of registered motor vehicles (2006): 2,586,000
Number of registered motor vehicles (2010): 3,236,166

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tabl...ade14c-eng.htm

Originally Posted by Nlkko

But of course, it's too easy to blame Translink when a bus skip stops because it's full, train is packed because there's actually something called rush hours. Of course it's too easy to compare our system to the system of cities with super density like London, NYC or Hong Kong. Those cities are ALWAYS busy. Here? It peaks during rush hours then die down significantly. They need to convert more car drivers to transit users so that they can justify running trains/buses more frequently.

How can you convert more car drivers to transit users when the current transit system is already maxxed out? They need to run more trains/busses first, so car adrivers actually have a chance to use the transit system.

[melloman]

Originally Posted by Nlkko

They are deterring people who don't really need to drive from driving and I think it's working. There's a lot less people driving now compared to 20 years ago. They're building another line (Evergreen Line) right after another (Canada Line). These lines cost several billions of dollars each. They're setting up a data-mining system (Compass) to utilize future resources. Infrastructure aren't just built overnight.

But of course, it's too easy to blame Translink when a bus skip stops because it's full, train is packed because there's actually something called rush hours. Of course it's too easy to compare our system to the system of cities with super density like London, NYC or Hong Kong. Those cities are ALWAYS busy. Here? It peaks during rush hours then die down significantly. They need to convert more car drivers to transit users so that they can justify running trains/buses more frequently.

It's too bad people who absolutely need their cars are affected by bike-lanes or fuel tax but something has to be done. We cannot build more roads or highways so you better get used to bike lanes and public transit.

Beating the dead horse on our public transportation is too easy now.

You say our govt is pushing people out of their cars, to get into public transit. But nobody can afford housing in Vancouver/Burnaby where transit is prosperous. Leaving people outside of the core to suffer.

Until we have atleast rapid bus lines like Washington (on the I5) that can stretch out further to places like Langley, Abbotsford, Chiliwack.. Trying to reduce traffic entering the core will just make businesses suffer.

They don't understand that they are legit PUSHING PEOPLE AWAY. It's not trying to push them into transit, it's outright expelling them from the core.

[Tapioca]

Facts that are worth repeating in this discussion.

1. Translink is a seperate organization from city governments (though city governments do have input into its decisions)
2. The region has 20+ independent city governments that sometimes make decisions without regard for what happens in other cities.
3. Metro Vancouver is an umbrella organization that tries to ensure the 20+ cities make decisions that reflect shared objectives (such as sustainable growth).

When you have a complicated governance system like this, you will naturally have some issues in managing regional concerns, such as transporation. To put the blame on one city, or on one organization, is lazy at best, or ignorant at worst.
Posted via RS Mobile

[xpl0sive]

Yeah, except even though Translink is a private organization, it still taxes the general population

"South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority (TransLink)
– Vancouver Area
The dedicated tax on clear gasoline and clear diesel fuel sold inside the South Coast British Columbia transportation service region (SCTA) is 17¢ per litre."

http://www.sbr.gov.bc.ca/documents_l...mft-ct_005.pdf

So in essence, it's bad for Translink for drivers to get on transit. More people on transit = less people buying gas. Less people buying gas = less money for Translink....

[lowside67]

Originally Posted by xpl0sive

Yeah, except even though Translink is a private organization, it still taxes the general population

So in essence, it's bad for Translink for drivers to get on transit. More people on transit = less people buying gas. Less people buying gas = less money for Translink....

Um no.

More people on transit = less people buying gas = MORE PEOPLE PAYING FOR TRANSIT = more money for Translink.

And Translink is not a private organization, it is a crown corporation.

[xpl0sive]

except more people on transit=more costs for translink. as opposed to collecting their taxes from gas and not spending any extra money on more busses/trains = more ridiculous salaries and bonuses

[melloman]

^^ Either way.. if you drive or take transit..

Translink still has their hand in your wallet.

[Nlkko]

Originally Posted by xpl0sive

O Really?

Number of registered motor vehicles (2006): 2,586,000
Number of registered motor vehicles (2010): 3,236,166

Motor vehicle registrations, by province and territory (Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia)



How can you convert more car drivers to transit users when the current transit system is already maxxed out? They need to run more trains/busses first, so car adrivers actually have a chance to use the transit system.

The number of registered vehicles of course increases because the population increases. The percentage of drivers indeed has gone down. Also you're using 2006-2010 to contradict my arguments that span over 20 years....

In order to run more trains and buses, you would have to buy more trains and buses to maintain the same service level in less busy areas. Those extra trains and buses will not be utilized off-peak. Of course nobody likes being skipped by the buses/trains but that's hardly the result of the system maxing out. Buses and trains do run a lot more frequent during peak hours compare to off-peak.
Posted via RS Mobile

[twitchyzero]

so where's the worst bottleneck in GVR?

Lions Gate, Willingdon Hwy1 to Upper Lvls or Massey Tunnel?

I live in east van and work in north van...I've noticed Upper Lvls Southbound is a shit show at peak hours...50min to an hour for 18km (normally takes 25 min)
for some reason it seems to happen daily in the summer but other than that it's only once in a while

[SkinnyPupp]

Originally Posted by dhillon09

Maybe it's based off time spent per kilometer driven?
If that's the case, hell yeah I can see how we're the worst.

It used to take me upwards of 40-45 minutes in rush hour to drive 9 kilometers -- from my house to work in downtown.

That same drive I can make in around ten to fifteen minutes if it's 5 am

It would be 10 mins on a bike, no matter what the traffic

Originally Posted by GLOW

we change it by adding more bike lanes

Good idea!

[meme405]

Originally Posted by twitchyzero

so where's the worst bottleneck in GVR?

Lions Gate, Willingdon Hwy1 to Upper Lvls or Massey Tunnel?

I live in east van and work in north van...I've noticed Upper Lvls Southbound is a shit show at peak hours...50min to an hour for 18km (normally takes 25 min)
for some reason it seems to happen daily in the summer but other than that it's only once in a while

Don't drive it regularly but if you get caught at the massey at the wrong time, you are FUCKED. Like straight up you're boned.

The interesting thing about the lions gate is that they debated a lot of different options for YEARS before finally just renovating the bridge and keept it as-is. The reason why they chose that was because they closely monitored traffic across the bridge and realized no matter how much the population of NV and WV were growing that bridge traffic was never really altered much. The reason was it was self policing, people were simply not willing to wait so if traffic got worse it would almost cure itself with more people taking transit... The lions gate actually made an amazing case study. I'll see if I can dig up the reports I saw on it...

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by meme405

The interesting thing about the lions gate is that they debated a lot of different options for YEARS before finally just renovating the bridge and keept it as-is. The reason why they chose that was because they closely monitored traffic across the bridge and realized no matter how much the population of NV and WV were growing that bridge traffic was never really altered much. The reason was it was self policing, people were simply not willing to wait so if traffic got worse it would almost cure itself with more people taking transit... The lions gate actually made an amazing case study. I'll see if I can dig up the reports I saw on it...

I've driven across the Lions Gate several times over the past year in various times of the day. I'm glad that they kept the bridge the way it is because aside from the mess at the north end of the bridge, traffic usually moves pretty well once you are on the bridge. As I've gotten older, I have come to appreciate the drive across a lot more, particularly when you cross into North Vancouver. It's quite stunning on a clear day.