Dan416
Senior Member
I.e. the part of the plan that doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of happening.
|
|
|
miWay Transit
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
I.e. the part of the plan that doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of happening.
RedRocket191
Senior Member
'Tis better than having no plan at all.
Hipster Duck
Senior Member
What could a streetcar do that a dedicated busway can't, other than look cool and cost a lot of money.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
65% of the cost of running a bus is the operator wages. Since a LRV carries twice as many people, the wages are lower per passenger. Also the LRV will last 2 or 3 times as long, so the per year depreciation will be spread out over more years.
Anth
Active Member
I see it now, thanks! It's on Page 77 of the Draft RTP if anyone else missed it.
CDL.TO
Moderator
Dedicated busways are also wider and therefore take up more of the road allowance than LRT. Because buses aren't guided by rails, more clearance needs to be provided.
Hipster Duck
Senior Member
re: wage costs
This is because light rail operating costs are higher, which means that wages will be a bigger proportion of bus running costs. To use a food analogy, if you eat filet mignon and I eat hamburgers, but we both have fries with our meal, the fries will be a larger cost of my dinner budget than yours.
re: LRV physical advantages
A full LRV will carry twice or three times as many people as a bus, but how often does that situation arise? Outside of special events and rush hours, a bus will suffice, and a busway's capacity can be significantly raised by simply running buses with more frequency.
This opens up an interesting discussion about what's more appealing to riders: mode choice or increased frequency. I will admit that more people will say that they want to ride light rail than a bus, but what if the bus comes twice as often as the light rail vehicle (to make up for your theoretical slack in bus capacity)? I would wager that most people would couch their light rail prejudices pretty easily.
That's true, but I think the width of Hurontario is pretty generous, with 6-lanes and a grass strip on either side of the road for most of its length. The area south of the QEW is only 4-lanes wide and would not allow for a dedicated busway, but it's also not very amenable to a light rail ROW, either.
nfitz
Superstar
That assumes that the frequency drops in half. Which might be fine in rush-hour when an LRV comes every 2-3 minutes. But isn't acceptable off-peak when vehicles come every 10 minutes or so, and then would drop to every 20 minutes.
khris
Senior Member
So an LRT on Hurontario is at least 25 years away, even if it does happen? Seriously? Wow, that's sad.
Anth
Active Member
No, "express rail" GO to Square One is apparently.
RedRocket191
Senior Member
Frequent express buses on Hurontario is one to two years away in Mississauga and two to three years away in Brampton. Higher order transit is in the 5 to 10 year horizon. Over the next 25 years frequencies on the GO line will gradually increase to the point where we'll have subway-like frequencies at least to Cooksville. A heavy rail connection between the Milton GO line and the Mississauga City Centre district is beyond the vision of the plan.
drum118
Superstar
Sad point, unless buses go into SQ One, Ridership will be next to none for express buses. Anything over 15 minutes a waste of resources. 19 already wasting 15 minutes of riders time going into and out of the terminal now who want to go to either side of the terminal in the first place.
"IF" a new terminal was built where that new plaza is going up on Sq One Dr, then an express service would work. A new terminal has to be built in the north east corner of Sq One that can support, subway, LRT, BRT, REX and local service. It will have to be 3+ levels and be able to handle 100,000 riders daily.
Again, this RTP is not a "BOLD" plan.
I did the planning game at York RTP and our first go at doing a plan on $15B budget was over budget. We had express service on the LakeShore from Hamilton to Oshawa, RH line, Lower part of the Barrie line, CNR line from Pickering to Brampton, LRT on Hurontario, LRT from Downsview to York University, a subway extension from Kipling to the Airport and that came in at $20.5B. Our second try was still over budget.
My table was all rookies and they wanted to connect all the large dots with express services. Some will only require Regional service since ridership will not be there in the first place.
If you get a chance, try the game.
The game reinforce what I have said from day one (2003), need a check for $3B a year for capital cost for 20 years to put a transit system in the GTA. Based on more detail look back in 2005/6, it now $7B/year. The $7B allows more subway expansion as well local service improvement. On top of this, you need operating cost. Then you need to add in the expansion outside the GTA that been talked about.
khris
Senior Member
Did anyone go to the Hurontario Main Street Study Workshop last night at the Central Library? I totally forgot about it!
owen
New Member
nope, but there is another one tonight at the HJA brown education centre at hurontario and matheson.
drum118
Superstar
Carry more riders at lower cost as well been green and offering a smother ride.
At the same time, need less drivers to carry the load and allow those extra drivers to provide more service on routes that will only need buses in the first place.
To move 10,000 riders in one direction using double deck buses, you need 100 buses and drivers. Using 60' buses, you need 134 buses and drivers. Using 80' buses, 84 divers and buses are needed. Using 40' buses, 200 buses and drivers are require. For LRT's, 40 drivers using 2 LRT's are needed. Using 3 LRT's, you need 27 drivers.
Since labour eats up 80% of operation cost, which one wins?