Wes
My feedback
9 results found
-
229 votes
Transit (and transit fares!) are controlled by TransLink, not the city. Having said that, reducing or eliminating transit fares is an interesting idea.
Unfortunately it’s not very feasible, at least as TransLink is currently funded. Unlike most North American cities, Vancouver’s transit problems aren’t due to a lack of demand but rather a lack of capacity. Anyone who’s ever tried to squeeze onto one of our busy buses or trains knows this all too well — there isn’t enough space even when people have to pay, let alone accommodate the additional demand that would be created if transit were free. Compare this to cities with fare-free zones, which are typically struggling for increase demand, and which typically have (a) less frequent service and/or (b) plenty of extra capacity to accommodate more riders.
In Vancouver, we need to provide more transit capacity to meet existing demand — and a LOT more…
An error occurred while saving the comment Wes
commented
I live on Broadway and watch people step on and off through the back door of the buses all day long. And yes, many have passes but I know many others who don't. Seeing as how we aren't really checking for tickets anyways I think perhaps we can come to a better solution. It doesn't make sense to have the driver be solely responsible for the hundreds (thousands) of people getting on and off their bus each day, the translink ticketing system is broken! And translink repeated says that the amount of people cheating the system is negligible. I don't buy it! I know countless business professionals who jump on the skytrains and buses (normally only for short hauls) without purchasing tickets.
Here's what I propose: A farefree area in the downtown core (say Stadium to Waterfront) and a better ticketing system that allows less fare-jumpers. My guess is the two will balance each other out and more people dt will use transit rather than driving 4 blocks. Also great for the tourists dt.
-
27 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Wes
commented
agreed Matt. good last resort option.
Wes
supported this idea
·
-
5 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Wes
commented
Totally agree. When you flier an entire parking lot full of cars with crap, all you are doing is littering.
And best of all, you're providing your contact info on your litter. Thanks
-
5 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Wes
commented
Slowing down traffic in dense urban neighbourhoods is great (West End) as it promotes walking and cycling. However, this only works if everything you need is within walking/cycling distance and you have the time to walk/cycle everywhere. The reality is that not all amenities are easily accessible to all Vancouver communities. How do you propose a mother of 3 picks up her kids from school and daycare, while getting groceries, by foot or on bicycle, in the blowing rain, in January??? Furthermore, how do you think all of your "local" produce gets from the farm in Langley to the farmers market in Kits...certainly not by bike or by foot. Same goes for your milk, your grains, your clothing, etc, etc, etc. There is no one solution to our problems and banning things and restricting people or industries is not the answer.
Grinding industry/business to a halt is going to kill our city. We thrive on tourism (among other things) and restricting the flow of people and goods is a sure-fire way to wreck all the good things we have going. We need to figure out how to do what we are already doing better!
-
4 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Wes
commented
How?
-
3 votesWes
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Wes
commented
Recycling...what is it? Define it and set guidelines and penalties for those who violate such guidelines. Burning wood waste is not recycling, burning garbage is not recycling. Yet this is what companies are telling us. They "recycle" when in actuality they burn it as an industrial fuel or sell it overseas (after which we have no idea what actually happens to it). I can't go out and call myself a plumber, a doctor, a lawyer, a welder or any other regulated profession unless I'm properly qualified. So why is it that a company who burns garbage and smashes fluorescent light tubes (releasing the mercury gas) can call themselves a recycler???
There is a huge disconnect between what the public thinks recycling is and what 'recyclers' are actually doing with the materials. I encourage everyone to check out some of the companies listed on the RCBC website and pay them a visit. Those who say they they recycle non-tradishional items like wood, CFL lightbulbs, rubber, EPS (styrofoam), plastic #3,#6,#7, etc...check them out and ask them what they ACTUALLY do with the raw material.
-
118 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Wes
commented
The issue here is that just because Capers is accepting 1-7, it doesn't mean they are doing anything with it! They're disposal company hauls it away as does one of two things with it. They sell it as a low grade commodity where it is shipped to China or India (what happens to it then is anyone's guess), or it ends up in the landfill or incinerator.
The CofV doesn't accept all forms of plastic because they don't have a viable means to get rid of it. Furthermore, #7 just means "other" which is essentially an infinite number of different blends of plastic.
I love your idea, don't get me wrong. The problem is that recycling, 'green', and sustainability are extremely complicated issues whereby there are no simple fixes.
It's a very deep rabbit hole!
-
1,002 votes
An ongoing process. Many of the City’s recent initiatives (e.g. downtown separated bike lane trial, additional traffic calming on existing routes) work towards this vision. The draft Greenest City action plan will support this idea, and include directions to help inform the upcoming transportation plan update and new active transportation plan.
An error occurred while saving the comment Wes
commented
Don't get me wrong, few things get me in a better mood than riding my bike to work. However, the focus and energy being directed at this topic seems somewhat myopic and disproportional to its relevance within the 'big picture.' Vancouver is already extremely unaffordable in terms of living costs (and this is only going to get worse for reasons that are far beyond our control, so don't go off about us needing low income housing, subsidies, etc, etc, etc...economically it just doesn't work 'cause money, despite being commonly referred to as 'green', doesn't grow on trees) and if we want everyone to live and ride to work, it requires that we all live pretty close to work because people simply aren't going to combine 9 modes of transport in their daily commute. Back to my point...even higher living costs as we all try to pack into the DT core.
So...is cycling a fun, efficient means of transportation, sure is! Is it going to solve our environmental woes, not even close! Are electric, **** emission vehicles going to make this a moot point in the next few years, you can bet on it!
-
234 votesWes
supported this idea
·
