HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 12:58 AM
fredinno's Avatar
fredinno fredinno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,317
.

Last edited by fredinno; Jan 24, 2017 at 1:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 1:01 AM
Kisai Kisai is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plafuldog View Post
BC Ferries only has a monopoly because no one else is willing to run a competing service. There's no law against it, like there is for competing transit services.

When BC Ferries was first "privatized" in the early Gordon Campbell days, they were required to contract out as many routes as possible to the private sector. No one was interested because they all lose money and there isn't a way to make them profitable.

The only profitable routes are from Nanaimo-Horseshoe Bay and Swartz Bay-Tsawwassen. But the amount of Capital that would be required to start that service would be prohibative.
People are forgetting that the BlackBall line (Port Angeles) is competition for BC Ferries, and BC Ferries is cheaper. But only by a small amount. There is also the Washington State Ferries Anacortes to Sidney route (not year round) , and also the much more expensive Victoria Clipper (Passenger Ferry Only)

It just needs to be pointed out that until BC Ferries hits the same price as WSF and BB (Approximately $80USD) Plus the entire drive through the US, we can't say "BC Ferries is too expensive". Air Travel is still two to three times as expensive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 1:17 AM
fredinno's Avatar
fredinno fredinno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisai View Post
People are forgetting that the BlackBall line (Port Angeles) is competition for BC Ferries, and BC Ferries is cheaper. But only by a small amount. There is also the Washington State Ferries Anacortes to Sidney route (not year round) , and also the much more expensive Victoria Clipper (Passenger Ferry Only)

It just needs to be pointed out that until BC Ferries hits the same price as WSF and BB (Approximately $80USD) Plus the entire drive through the US, we can't say "BC Ferries is too expensive". Air Travel is still two to three times as expensive.
Then maybe we need to redesign our ferry service to be less like a cruise line.
It's 'tourist-friendly', but how many tourists really care that much about how pretty and comfortable the insides of a boat that they'll be in for a grand total of maybe 4 hours in a week (2 hours each way from Nanaimo to Horseshoe Bay, the rest of the week up around Vancouver Island)?

Not to mention most people who use it are people just wanting to get from point A to B.

It's like the Port Mann Bridge now losing money because they overbuilt it. Most congested bridge in Canada or not, they seemed to forget that tolling a bridge means you need to take the low estimate for future usage numbers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 3:40 AM
cornholio cornholio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster View Post
There's plenty of space to upgrade Horseshoe Bay, it would just be vertical and that isn't cheap.



I think the voters of Canada have told us time and time again they prefer a mix of government provided services for some necessities rather than business. That may change over time but for now that is how the electorate has chosen.
There is no space for extra berths. What you see now is what you get as far as berth space, and the ferries already are stuck wating because of congestion (only one ferry can enter/exit the terminal at a time).

But the real big problem with upgrading the terminal is that you need to keep the over capacity no extra space terminal running. That is a recipe for price escalation to the stratosphere.

Again its why they wanted to end the Nanaimo run while they rebuilt the terminal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 3:47 AM
Gordon Gordon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,063
It may be possible to move the third ship to Tsawwassen even with the single berth @ Duke point they couls probably make that work.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 5:21 AM
aberdeen5698's Avatar
aberdeen5698 aberdeen5698 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredinno View Post
Then maybe we need to redesign our ferry service to be less like a cruise line.
It's 'tourist-friendly', but how many tourists really care that much about how pretty and comfortable the insides of a boat that they'll be in for a grand total of maybe 4 hours in a week
Making a ship comfortable and pleasant costs next to nothing compared to the operational costs of crewing and fueling it. And BC Ferries makes a lot of money on its food services.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 6:18 AM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Rational urbanist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 5,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberdeen5698 View Post
Making a ship comfortable and pleasant costs next to nothing compared to the operational costs of crewing and fueling it. And BC Ferries makes a lot of money on its food services.
This. I always hear comments about how BC Ferries needs to cut the tourism/cruise stuff out and just focus on being a transportation service and then it'll be cheaper. But those tourism services were precisely started in order to boost revenue. I don't think they'd still be doing it if it wasn't.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 6:33 AM
Caliplanner1 Caliplanner1 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 692
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredinno View Post
I don't argue that, I argue that it's better to run services privately when possible because the free market has a reason to cut costs and fees, over the public sector, which has few.


It's a fundamental problem with all monopolies- there is no longer any motive to improve, so they don't.
I think that you really don't understand that the private sector is RELATIVELY fragile and thus cannot effectively deliver many CRITICAL (and expensive) services best left to government (which is driven by social equity concerns in economic development not narrow/myopic/self-serving money profit motives- in an economy subject to the debilitating forces of GROWING income inequality/attendant GROWING debt within the wider context of the long-run inflationary construct called the Time Value of Money).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 6:39 AM
jollyburger jollyburger is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 9,400
Can the Upper Level Highways even handle more traffic? And isn't all the discussion around the terminal to make seismic improvements and nothing to do with capacity?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 6:43 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,105
has anyone ridden the washington state ferries? I've heard they are more bare bones than us and they prefer the services we have up in BC, but i've never been on a WA state ferry.
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 6:52 AM
jollyburger jollyburger is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 9,400
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
has anyone ridden the washington state ferries? I've heard they are more bare bones than us and they prefer the services we have up in BC, but i've never been on a WA state ferry.
Well just by looking at their route map it seems like it would be more utilitarian which might explain why it's bare bones versus BC's system. If they had longer haul routes they probably would include more amenities on board.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2017, 1:22 PM
Kisai Kisai is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by jollyburger View Post
Well just by looking at their route map it seems like it would be more utilitarian which might explain why it's bare bones versus BC's system. If they had longer haul routes they probably would include more amenities on board.
Look at the Alaska Marine Highway Ferry.
http://www.dot.state.ak.us/amhs/fleet/columbia.shtml

Those are the long-haul ferries. They are 1/4th the size of ours in capacity. The Long haul ferries have a food court and a Movie lounge. The Columbia is the one that serves Bellingham.

http://www.dot.state.ak.us/amhs/fleet/aurora.shtml
The day-ferries have a movie lounge and a cafeteria.

Interesting thing to note is that Alaska's inside-passage ferries aren't ocean certified, so they have to go through BC to go between Bellingham and Alaska.

Alaska's ferries are also all around 50+ years old except for one.

Prince Rupert is the connection between Bellingham(WA), Port Hardy(BC) to Alaska.

Versus Washington State's ferries:
http://www.evergreenfleet.com/mark2.html , These ones are larger than our C (Our C class has more car capacity, less passenger capacity) and Coastal class ferries, but smaller than the Spirit class.

The largest ferries serve the Seattle-Bainsbridge route which is a 30-35 minute trip, unlike BC Ferries Mainland to Island trip of about 90 minutes.

BC Ferries has the second largest ferry system in the world, Washington State has the fourth. (Istanbul, Turkey has the largest ferry fleet. Norway has the literal largest Ferry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Color_Magic )

So I don't know why people think BC Ferries is some kind of Luxury Cruise when it's services are pretty much identical to Washington and Alaska.

So to say that BC Ferries is trying to be a cruise line is misleading as that is also what the both the Washington State and Alaska Ferries have, and their ferries have the same purpose as ours, with much longer routes in Alaska, and shorter routes in Washington. Having a cafeteria does not make it a Luxury Cruise liner. On an actual Cruise ship, the entertainment, food and staterooms are included in the ticket, and the ticket is often hundreds if not thousands of dollars.

Here, case in point:
http://www.princess.com/learn/cruise...uver/index.jsp

From Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada to Seattle, Washington
Interior Stateroom starting from:
$1,078.65* CAD
per person
Taxes, Fees & Port Expenses additional: $283.51*

That is Vancouver to Skagway Alaska, and then back to Seattle via Victoria.

Now compare both Alaska and BC Ferries state room costs:
BC Ferries: $90.00 (Inboard Cabin,Northern Expedition) up to $250 (Luxury Cabins, Northern Adventure) on top of $121-206 for the fare. If you are taking a vehicle, that's an additional $263 to $469
(Note this is the Port Hardy to Prince Rupert Route)

Alaska: (Bellingham to Prince Rupert) $360.00 without a vehicle, $1,215.00 with a 14' vehicle. Add $283.00 for the small stateroom, $507.00 for the large one.

Of course people like Jordan Bateman (CTF) would rather we outsource to Washington State Ferries. This entirely naive view would remove a source of competition, and thus fares would double.

Probably the only positive thing that could ever happen from working with Washington and Alaska is standardizing on one Ferry design, thus all the Ferry Terminals could be standardized, and instead of everyone keeping a old ships as spares, if a ship is out of commission, a standardized ship could be swapped out without canceling any schedules, thus reducing the costs of downtime.

But I digress, the problem is that people in favor of running BC Ferries like Washington or Alaska, overlook that the Mainland to Island route is not the route losing money, and is cheaper than the American ferries. It's all the routes that serve the small islands that are losing money. Outsourcing those to Washington would serve no purpose and would probably cause sovereignty issues over the Islands.

WSDOT fares are $8.20 for a passenger alone. $11.50 for a Driver and a small vehicle and $14.60 for a Driver and vehicle over 14' for their 30-minute routes. It is 19.45$ for a passenger and 53.65($67 peak) for a vehicle for the Anacortes to Sidney route.

You can't look at the Seattle - Bainsbridge route and go "Oh yeah, it's cheaper" because it's only 1/3rd the trip time, and WSDOT's ferries carry half the cars BC Ferries do.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #113  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 12:58 AM
fredinno's Avatar
fredinno fredinno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caliplanner1 View Post
I think that you really don't understand that the private sector is RELATIVELY fragile and thus cannot effectively deliver many CRITICAL (and expensive) services best left to government (which is driven by social equity concerns in economic development not narrow/myopic/self-serving money profit motives- in an economy subject to the debilitating forces of GROWING income inequality/attendant GROWING debt within the wider context of the long-run inflationary construct called the Time Value of Money).
The Governments of developed nations aren't much more stable, as seen in the Euro Crisis. In a fully private free market (ie not crony capitalism) there is never one point of failure. The production of smartphones doesn't stop because Samsung can't make them anymore.

If a monopoly or government fails to deliver or goes underwater in debt (like so may governments around the world nowadays), there is no backup. Which is why it's a bad idea to leave critical services to government if possible. We don't leave food production (one of the most critical services) to the government, we leave it to the private sector. And aside from price inflation, it's remained relatively stable.



Anyways, back to ferries. The most optimal solution would be for the government to take $$$ from infrastructure funds to build a Sunshine Coast fixed link across Bowen Island to relieve capacity in Horseshoe Bay to allow modernization upgrades.

Or spend it on a new "fast link" Iona Island Terminal to Gabriola Island and a bridge from Gabriola to Nanaimo- it would clear up Nanaimo City congestion, and possibly save $$$ on the long run by using fewer terminals, ferries, and a shorter link. The problem being the lack of will on the Gulf Island side, and the fact that Sturgeon Bank is a protected area.

Or even just move Bowen Island and Langdale services to a second, small terminal near Sea-to-Sky, leaving Horseshoe Bay solely for Nanaimo.


The last is the worst, but probably cheapest option. Also, I'd rather they finance this by cutting their own wages and management than raising prices and cutting services again. It's already bad as it is.
Or cut the new George Massey Bridge from 10 to 8 or 6 lanes. I know "future thinking" and all, but the most congested bridge in Canada couldn't fill 10 lanes. Especially tolled.
We can expand it later if transit won't cut it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #114  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 3:24 AM
Caliplanner1 Caliplanner1 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 692
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredinno View Post
The Governments of developed nations aren't much more stable, as seen in the Euro Crisis.
...but you forget the imperative....the private sector can disappear when bankrupt...but government/the nation-state won't. BIG DIFFERENCE in terms of sustainability/survival.

Further, the weakness of government in capitalist/free market economies is generally tied to the weakness of its respective private sector. If the business community can't or won't pay taxes then government finances will suffer to the detriment of all.

Finally,...here in North America/Europe etc. governments bail out the private sector when they get into financial trouble/go bankrupt and not the other way around.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #115  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 3:37 AM
jollyburger jollyburger is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 9,400
Alaska Ferries "movie lounge" on the LeConte (not getting into the debate about the ferry costs, just found the lounge photo amusing)



Credit: https://www.flickr.com/photos/b737se...96582/sizes/c/

Meals on th Colombia:



Credit: http://thatfoodguy.blogspot.ca/2013/...12-101912.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #116  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 4:09 AM
fredinno's Avatar
fredinno fredinno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caliplanner1 View Post
...but you forget the imperative....the private sector can disappear when bankrupt...but government/the nation-state won't. BIG DIFFERENCE in terms of sustainability/survival.

Further, the weakness of government in capitalist/free market economies is generally tied to the weakness of its respective private sector. If the business community can't or won't pay taxes then government finances will suffer to the detriment of all.

Finally,...here in North America/Europe etc. governments bail out the private sector when they get into financial trouble/go bankrupt and not the other way around.
That's because one of the flaws of a democratic system is people only tend to think 4 years ahead, especially when the USA caps a president's term at 8 years.

Bailouts don't help, they just bandaid the problem for tomorrow. And weak private sectors don't emerge out of nowhere. They happen because of overregulation, overtaxation, monopolization, tarriffs, or artifically low interest rates.

All of which are controlled by government or the central bank.

Quote:
...but you forget the imperative....the private sector can disappear when bankrupt...but government/the nation-state won't. BIG DIFFERENCE in terms of sustainability/survival.
Tell that to every person who survived hyperinflation. Worst case scenario if the private sector collapses is a Great Depression. Worst case if the public sector collapses is Wiemar Germany and the ensuing war.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #117  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 4:40 AM
Caliplanner1 Caliplanner1 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 692
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredinno View Post
That's because one of the flaws of a democratic system is people only tend to think 4 years ahead, especially when the USA caps a president's term at 8 years.

Bailouts don't help, they just bandaid the problem for tomorrow. And weak private sectors don't emerge out of nowhere. They happen because of overregulation, overtaxation, monopolization, tarriffs, or artifically low interest rates.

All of which are controlled by government or the central bank.

Tell that to every person who survived hyperinflation. Worst case scenario if the private sector collapses is a Great Depression. Worst case if the public sector collapses is Wiemar Germany and the ensuing war.
First off where do you place growing income inequality as a function of growing debt (via automation/union busting cost cutting/globalized outsourcing/tax cuts for the rich/money hoarding by the rich etc.) in your construct as to why the private sector gets weaker (in the wake of falling aggregate consumer demand by unemployed/under employed workers)?

Secondly,..have you ever studied the causes of the Great Depression which began in the United States not Germany (and which mirrors the Great Recession of 2008)? If you have, were there high taxes/lots of government regulation etc. during the 1920's leading up to the Wall Street Crash of 1929? Were wages not low and consumer prices high with cheap loans being used to empower consumers towards inflationary spending/debt (so as to allow the private sector to generate profits in an other wise moribund market were it not for said easy loans)? Read about the 1920's tax cuts via the link below: https://www.cato.org/publications/co...deral-revenues

As per Wiemar Germany,....do you understand the impact of the 1919 Versailles Treaty in terms of fueling hyperinflation (re: the vindictive/revenge seeking French confiscating German productive resources/limiting what they could produce commercially/militarily etc. so as to deliberately damage the German economy to the point where they -the Germans-could no longer wage war to endanger the rest of Europe?? Such SEVERE restrictions on production served to fuel hyperinflation as excess supplies of printed money chased non existent goods/services etc..

Last edited by Caliplanner1; Jan 25, 2017 at 4:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #118  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 5:08 AM
Migrant_Coconut's Avatar
Migrant_Coconut Migrant_Coconut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Kitsilano/Fairview
Posts: 8,335
Quote:
Originally Posted by jollyburger View Post
-snip-
Wow - I didn't know that Chinese takeout made it all the way to Juneau...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #119  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 6:55 PM
fredinno's Avatar
fredinno fredinno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caliplanner1 View Post
First off where do you place growing income inequality as a function of growing debt (via automation/union busting cost cutting/globalized outsourcing/tax cuts for the rich/money hoarding by the rich etc.) in your construct as to why the private sector gets weaker (in the wake of falling aggregate consumer demand by unemployed/under employed workers)?

Secondly,..have you ever studied the causes of the Great Depression which began in the United States not Germany (and which mirrors the Great Recession of 2008)? If you have, were there high taxes/lots of government regulation etc. during the 1920's leading up to the Wall Street Crash of 1929? Were wages not low and consumer prices high with cheap loans being used to empower consumers towards inflationary spending/debt (so as to allow the private sector to generate profits in an other wise moribund market were it not for said easy loans)? Read about the 1920's tax cuts via the link below: https://www.cato.org/publications/co...deral-revenues

As per Wiemar Germany,....do you understand the impact of the 1919 Versailles Treaty in terms of fueling hyperinflation (re: the vindictive/revenge seeking French confiscating German productive resources/limiting what they could produce commercially/militarily etc. so as to deliberately damage the German economy to the point where they -the Germans-could no longer wage war to endanger the rest of Europe?? Such SEVERE restrictions on production served to fuel hyperinflation as excess supplies of printed money chased non existent goods/services etc..

And the reason for hyperinflation is null, becuase that wasn't my point. Same with 1929. My point is the effects of private vs public collapse, and public collapse is much more dangerous.


But we really need to stop, this is the wrong place to do this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #120  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 9:26 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 38,229
Isn't the whole reason for the Sunshine Coast bridge / connector project to free up space at the Horseshoe Bay terminal (for Nanaimo service) by cancelling the Langdale ferry?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:32 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.