From BRT to TOD: An interview with TransLink CEO Kevin Quinn

TransLink CEO Kevin Quinn. (TransLink)

Metro Vancouver’s public transit system has experienced some of the highest ridership recovery rates amongst North America’s largest public transit systems.

This is true to the extent that TransLink’s SkyTrain system, for instance, now has a real ridership total that rivals far longer subway/metro rail systems in Canadian and American urban regions with significantly higher populations and economic activity.

You might also like:

All about SkyTrain expansion: Interview with TransLink's head of SkyTrain
TransLink is facing a $4.7 billion funding deficit by 2033: forecast
TransLink could discontinue funding to municipal governments for building and improving roads, bike lanes, and pedestrian paths
Metro Vancouver's SkyTrain is now the 4th busiest subway system in Canada and USA
TransLink's first three Bus Rapid Transit routes could cost over $1 billion
Big growing pains for TransLink to electrify buses and expand services

Earlier in 2024, the region saw some of its most severe disruptions to public transit services due to labour action since the months-long strike of 2001. A prolonged continuation and further expansion of the strike was averted after nearly a full month of uncertainty, and it exemplified the region’s dependency on public transit services since the disruptions of 2001.

“We all learned just how important transit is in Metro Vancouver. Nearly half a million people depend on transit every day in this region, it is a vital part of daily life and the economy,” TransLink CEO Kevin Quinn told Daily Hive Urbanized.

“I am grateful that both sides were able to come to an agreement to keep the people of Metro Vancouver moving.”

All the while, TransLink is also now heading into new long-term crossroads.

The public transit authority is facing a fiscal cliff after 2025, as a revenue shortfall of $600 million is currently projected beginning with the 2026 fiscal year. The cumulative shortfall between 2026 and 2033 could grow to $4.7 billion due to cost inflation, growing costs, and passengers buying cheaper single-trip fare products (as opposed to a monthly pass) for the fewer trips they take.

Without new funding sources, there will be continued pressure to increase fares and property taxes at a higher rate of annual increase, along with potential major cuts to services starting in 2026 — all in the backdrop of growing ridership and overcrowding.

Ridership will continue to grow as the region continues to see strong population growth and changing densification practices, especially with high-density transit-oriented development (TOD) being the new law of the land.

TransLink also intends to introduce a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) network, with the first three BRT lines potentially carrying a cost of roughly $1 billion.

It should be noted that the aforementioned financial issues beyond 2025 do not take into account TransLink’s $21 billion, 10-year plan to expand and improve the public transit network, including BRT, general bus service expansion, UBC SkyTrain, and the SFU Burnaby Gondola.

The public transit authority also has ambitious plans to transition towards a battery-electric bus fleet. However, this strategy also faces financial hurdles, given the higher upfront cost of battery-electric buses and the necessary supporting charging and maintenance infrastructure.

Just before the start of this year’s labour disruptions, Daily Hive Urbanized interviewed Quinn on the state — and future — of TransLink, the organization’s approaches and strategies, and Metro Vancouver’s continuing evolving public transit landscape. Here is what he had to say (for brevity, this is an edited and condensed version of the questions and answers):

1. What’s the rationale behind starting with RapidBus expansion between the North Shore and Metrotown and then studying whether to proceed with Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) or rail rapid transit at a later date? Why not start with planning BRT or rail rapid transit immediately?

“In the short term, what we’ve seen and what we’ve heard is that the North Shore needs a rapid transit connection as soon as possible. I think we see the quickest way to do that is by doing an extension of the R2 RapidBus.

It’s important to note that our RapidBus lines share many of the same characteristics of BRT systems. In fact, if you go to some cities, I think what we found through our research is that what we call RapidBus, many systems call BRT. There’s a spectrum of RapidBus, Bus Rapid Transit, and transit priority corridors. So I guess I say that in the sense that in the short term, we think we can extend the RapidBus and have those same transit priority measures along the corridor to create that rapid transit solution that people need now.

At the same time, I think we also recognize that it’s a really complicated corridor. It’s very complex, and so there is very limited right of way. I think we’ve got to be very careful with what the more long-term more permanent build-out looks like. We’ve committed to an extension of the R2 RapidBus and then, really doing a study in the long run to look at whether BRT or rail make sense.”

2. Could we see a new replacement Ironworkers Memorial Bridge?

“I think that everybody recognizes the constraints of the current bridge. I know that’s something that the province may be looking at. Whether we’re looking at the existing bridge, or a new bridge, we need to consider transit as part of the equation.

There’s so many cars crossing over that bridge, so if we can convert some of those cars to transit, I think there are benefits for everybody.”

3. What’s the latest on the planning work for the UBC SkyTrain extension?

“Yeah, UBC SkyTrain is coming along. It’s a provincially led project… The extension out to UBC has been identified as a priority. In our 10-year priority document, the UBC extension business case is being led by the province. It’s a good project and certainly a key piece of our larger 170 km of rapid transit expansion that we want to see in our region.”

4. What is your take on the provincial government’s new transit-oriented development (TOD) legislation, and how does that align with TransLink’s objectives?

“I think it is a step in the right direction and it does align with our transit-oriented development guidelines that we have at TransLink. We can all recognize that it’s important to densify around SkyTrain stations.

But I just want to make sure that we don’t forget the T in TOD. Transit. Right now, the province is doing what they can to densify and ensure there’s best and highest use of the land around SkyTrain stations.

For our part, the T, the transit part, is just as important. And so, we have a funding gap, and we need to be sure that we have a sustainable revenue source that allows us to provide transit to these transit-oriented development areas.

It would be quite a shame to densify around these areas but then not have the transit levels to provide for those people in the new homes, not to mention no minimum parking requirements at those developments. I think it wouldn’t fully achieve what the province is looking to achieve without equal investment and thought into transit.”

5. How does TransLink’s new for-profit Real Estate Division operate? What kind of performance metrics have been given to this division?

“Our real estate development program is very much in its infancy, as we just launched that program. In 2022, we announced our first development project, partnering with PCI Developments on the new rental housing tower at the corner of Broadway and Arbutus Street, and next to our future Arbutus Station on the Broadway Subway.

We’re always looking at parcels around our SkyTrain stations. Where we do own properties, we look to partner up with folks. Right now, we have a few sites that we’ve identified, like the Coquitlam Central park-and-ride and some others that we think there’s some really good opportunity, where there’s a critical mass of parcels to do something, either on our own or partnering with a private developer.

We think about those on a case-by-case basis, as all of those projects are unique individual projects. We want to ensure those are going to be revenue-positive and bring in funding that we can put toward the system.

I wouldn’t say right now that we have necessarily set any any kind of metrics that define that program. Again, it’s just very much in its infancy, and we only have one project that’s launched. I don’t think we’ve scaled it up to the point where have defined metrics for that program.

6. What role do you see for TransLink’s park-and-ride facilities at suburban transit hubs over the long term?

Park-and-ride lots haven’t really traditionally been a big part of TransLink. I think there’s a recognition that we’ve got to be really careful with the land that we do have. Sometimes, it’s better to just provide good transit service to neighbourhoods, coming at higher frequencies, rather than invest in a park-and-ride.

There may be some opportunities, like West Coast Express stations, where that model makes sense. But I think that for our part, what we really want to do is double bus service in the region. That means bringing bus service to more neighbourhoods at higher frequencies. At some locations, I think we can recognize a better use than just parking lots, where we can instead help meet the region’s housing needs.”

7. In 2016, which was long before you joined TransLink, the public transit authority sold its 14-acre Oakridge trolley bus depot in Vancouver to private developers for $440 million. If the same situation existed today, would TransLink sell such a facility or retain it for bus operations or in-house redevelopment potential?

“I’m not sure. I think we would still look to bring in revenue from that parcel. While we are looking for and need more bus depot space for expansion, I don’t know if that location makes a ton of geographic sense anymore. We likely went through a business case and rationale process for selling it back then, and my guess is that a lot of that rationale still stands today.”

8. This is a big question, but paint me TransLink’s financial and ridership outlook over the coming years.

“As you know, ridership right now is around 90% of pre-pandemic levels. We’ve got around 430,000 people per day that are out on the system, and we’re certainly leaders in North America on rail and bus. We’re really proud that ridership has come back.

At the same time, the pandemic fundamentally altered how people get around, not just in our region but around the world. The introduction of hybrid work has meant not everyone is coming into the office, so we are not back to 100%.

The fare revenue coming in from passengers isn’t what we expected it to be. We maintained low fare increases since the pandemic, and we didn’t do any fare increase at all in 2020, and did lower increases in 2021, 2022, and 2023, when we anticipated doing 4% increases. The revenue that has come in from ridership is about 20% lower than expected.

In addition, our fuel tax is a declining revenue source. We think that we probably peaked in the amount of fuel tax that can be raised in 2022. We know that with the introduction of electric vehicles and more energy-efficient vehicles, this is a declining revenue source. This is the challenge transportation agencies are facing, especially across North America, as this is how they have traditionally been funded.

And of course, our region is growing by 50,000 to 70,000 per year. We need to rethink how we fund transit.

While revenue is the first piece of the puzzle, the second piece is cost. Costs are increasing, inflation is still up, fuel is up, labour is up… name a category, and the cost has gone up. So revenue is declining in the long run, and costs have gone up.

Thanks to the financial relief we’ve received from the provincial government, we will certainly remain financially stable to the end of 2025. But after that, those dwindling revenues and escalating costs are certainly going to lead to a funding gap if we don’t rethink how we fund transit.

We’re working with the Mayors’ Council and the provincial government on this, and I’m pretty confident that we will come up with a solution. We have to come up with a solution to really meet the needs of the region.”

9. Governments, especially at the federal level, now appear to be tightening their belts to curb inflation and address their budget deficits. Will TransLink and the Mayors’ Council need to be more selective with their projects moving forward amidst funding constraints?

“I think what we’ve tried to do with the announcement and introduction of BRT is to recognize that we need to have the most cost-effective projects as possible. And I think there’s a recognition that buses have the ability to do that with essentially existing infrastructure that we have in place today. So certainly, investments in RapidBus, BRT, bus service… I think we see it to be really quite a cost efficient way to provide more service to the region.

I also don’t want to forget really big investments that we want to make in the active transportation network — improvements to bike facilities and the major bike network are really important and also quite cost effective for kind of what you get out of them.”

10. Amongst some policy circles, there are suggestions that the way capital projects are increasingly designed and planned are a major cost driver. It has been suggested that public transit authorities in Canada and the United States are increasingly too reliant on third-party private sector consultants instead of retaining in-house expertise, which can drive up costs substantially. What are your thoughts on TransLink’s strategies?

“We certainly use outside consultants to bring in expertise. BRT is a really good example, as we don’t have experience with BRT in this region.

We’ve relied on some outside consultants and expertise to help us navigate a new technology or product, and it augments our capacity. I would say that I think we use consultants less than other transit agencies I’ve worked for and that I’ve talked to.

From a cost and efficiency perspective, 85% of our budget goes to operations. Whether that’s salaries and benefits of operators and technicians or the cost of parts and materials, it’s all related to operations. The other 15% goes to those supportive functions that support operations, like HR and finance. Those consultant resources are, I think, pretty minor on that 15% side.

Where you see really big cost drivers, really big impacts on budget, and opportunities for efficiencies are really on the operations side as that’s the bulk of the budget. When you have increases in labour cost, materials, and fuel, those are the things where you see the biggest cost drivers. So we’re always looking for efficiencies, and we always want to use consultant resources carefully.”

11. I can’t help but notice that BC Transit’s brand new Umo fare payment system has a ton more features than Compass, including an app that can be used to pay fares. When could we see more types of Compass fare products, and are there plans to move forward with the major upgrade of the Compass system?

“Compass is a fascinating system. It has been a great platform for us and allowed us to do a lot of big firsts. We were the first in Canada to integrate debit card payments, the first to do tap-to-pay, and the first to do some of the wearable and fun products. We were also the first to do the universal fare gate access program for people with disabilities.

But as you’ve noted, there are a lot of products coming out today that have a lot more features. Under our Compass system, we’re really quite limited in the products that we offer, and we don’t have the ability to do distance-based fares. We don’t have the ability to do fare capping, loyalty programs, and a lot of other things.

We are taking a look at other payment systems and other potential upgrades to Compass over the next couple years. That’s a big focus area for us because we think there’s a lot of potential there, and a lot of opportunities to do some really cool programs for our customers. It’s something that we’re looking into for what the next generation of Compass could look like, and it’s really exciting given the technology that’s out there. Stay tuned.”

12. So to clarify, TransLink is still planning to ditch the existing three-zone fare system for SkyTrain and SeaBus and shift to distance-travelled fares when the Compass technology is capable of such a system?

“Yeah, TransLink’s board years ago did adopt a policy preference to go towards distance-travelled fares when the technology is available, recognizing the sort of equity benefits that would come with that type of system. I think that’s something we would look to go to, but we don’t have the Compass system capability that allows us to do it today.”

13. TransLink is making some progress on its new public washroom strategy. What are some of the operational considerations for these new facilities? Is there a relatively high budget for ongoing operations, cleaning, and maintenance?

“The opening of six washroom locations are funded in our 2022 investment plan. We have $18 million to build and operate these washrooms through the early 2030s. I hear from customers all the time about how important washrooms are. I’m out on transit a lot with my kids, and I’ve been in that situation with my son, when he needs to use a washroom. We know it’s really important. We are hoping to open the first new washroom in 2024.

A big challenge to opening those washrooms has been the high annual costs of ensuring that washrooms are clean, secure, and well-maintained. We’re taking lessons learned from other systems that have implemented washrooms, asking “How do they clean them? How do they ensure they stay clean? Do we need an attendant? How do we ensure the safety of individuals?”

14. Will we ever see more service on the West Coast Express?

“I know, right? Isn’t that crazy? So, I love the West Coast Express. I think it’s such a really cool service that we have, but clearly very limited at five trips in the morning and five trips in the afternoon on weekdays only.

I think there are a number of factors in thinking about West Coast Express service expansion. As you know, first is a funding question. What’s the most efficient use of our funding? Is an expansion of West Coast Express the most efficient use of our funding or is that better used elsewhere?

Perhaps more important is just the limited control over the tracks that are owned by Canadian Pacific, and not by TransLink. As you know, and my understanding is that, current freight use is at capacity. Providing additional service would further constrain freight operations and there would be freight impacts.

I’m absolutely open to having those conversations, but, without additional infrastructure — like a new third track installed, for example — I don’t know if there’s capacity right now to operate additional West Coast Express service.”

15. Like the ferry services in Seattle and Sydney, could we perhaps explore using the region’s waterways more for public transit? For example, with some improved bus connections reaching the new ferry terminals, could we ever see a passenger ferry service between Jericho Beach in West Point Grey to Ambleside in West Vancouver?

“Right, because we don’t have to build a lot of infrastructure, and it’s all there for us. Our Transport 2050 strategy does have some statements in there about further exploration of waterway travel, so it is in our long-term vision.

The short answer is, yes. But it is something in the long term. I’ll just note that there are several constraints to this, especially with water access and the space to build very safe docks for boats and facilities, and the cost of buying waterfront property and to perform upgrades. It’s likely very expensive.

The other key piece is knowing the origins and destinations of passengers — where they live and where they start and end their trips. Of course, we’d want high densities of people, as transit wants to be where people are. You’d also really want to be sure that in those waterfront areas, you have a high density of people that are going to use that service. Even if you don’t need to build roads, you need to build facilities where the ferries might sleep at night.”

You might also like: