News   Dec 20, 2024
 3.1K     11 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 1.1K     3 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 2K     0 

Finch West Line 6 LRT

Mods

Can nfitz posts be removed (or in the alternative moved to the provincial election section)?

His continuous name calling is approaching being a bully. Name calling (of any specific person) who is either on this forum or not is not OK (although only the former is part of the Code of Conduct). It is also (I think) Trolling.

Thanks

You can also choose to ignore someone. Click on their profile and then click "Ignore" and then you won't ever see their posts again.

I had to do this for several moronic people on here. Its a much nicer board without them!
 
Enough with a silly dumber-than-fudge candidates!

Given his incoherent ever changing policy, I don't think it's me on drugs. Besides, he is the one with addiction issues (though at least under control).

His pave the greenbelt promise is absurd - and a complete reversal of the previous PC position. Knowing Drug, he'll change his position again.
I think that what the crowd is saying, is that when obviously intelligent people resort to disrespectful name calling, we are putting ourselves at the Doug Ford and Donald Trump level. I won’t do it. You refer to your kids in your posts and you would not have them do it. We need to argue fiercely against factless policy-making, and opinion-based (as opposed to fact) arguments, but we should never wrestle on the ground with the scoundrels. Or we are just one of them. And none of us would aspire to being a classless, clueless thug.
 
It’s peak point ridership is something like 900, which is nothing. $500 Million to move 900 peak point riders is a poor investment.
@TheTigerMaster that is the current ridership.

We all know that higher order transit has the potential to grow ridership. Especially when it’s part of a network. Then people take routes they never would have previously because they want to get to a node. The more the network grows, the less one has to be concerned about spurs with no ridership.
 
It’s peak point ridership is something like 900, which is nothing. $500 Million to move 900 peak point riders is a poor investment.
@TheTigerMaster that is the current ridership.

We all know that higher order transit has the potential to grow ridership. Especially when it’s part of a network. Then people take routes they never would have previously because they want to get to a node. The more the network grows, the less one has to be concerned about spurs with no ridership.

900 is not the current ridership. 900 is the ridership forecast for 2031. LRT typically isn't recommended until ridership reaches at least 2,000 pphpd. Straight from the report:

Screen Shot 2018-05-07 at 10.20.24 AM.png
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-05-07 at 10.20.24 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2018-05-07 at 10.20.24 AM.png
    255.2 KB · Views: 468
Do they have the power to sign the contract during the Election?

I don't know if it's illegal, but its certainly extremely bad form to be tying the government up in significant commitments after the election has started. I imagine that the people at Metrolinx are working around the clock to get this done. About two weeks ago, they said the contracts would be signed in the "upcoming weeks", so I'm expecting a Wednesday morning announcement that it's been signed (the last possible day).

I cannot emphasize enough how stupid this situation is. Metrolinx has had seven years to get this done. After years of delays and excuses, they've waited until literally the final hours to get this thing done. This project is now at risk of not being built because of this bureaucratic nonsense. In any just world, heads would be rolling over this.
 
There isn't anything preventing them from signing it once the writ drops. They already have full legislative authority from the house - it's not like they need any further government approval. It's not like the all provincial agencies shut down for a month once an election starts.
 
Interesting to note that the contract is $2.5 billion after including the 30 year operations.. I often wonder how much of these costs are the actual capital cost.
 
Interesting to note that the contract is $2.5 billion after including the 30 year operations.. I often wonder how much of these costs are the actual capital cost.

The $2.5 Billion figure alone is meaningless. If that’s measured in net-present-value, that is quite a bit more than I had expected. If that’s measured using year-of-expenditure, then that sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

They say in the press release that the figure is “adjusted for inflation”. I don’t know what that is supposed to mean.
 

Back
Top