It's a bit like putting in a $400k bid for a house then adding 30 years interest, property taxes, heating bills, maintenance, etc. and telling your parents you got a $1M house. Business does this all the time (compares full life-cycle cost of various options, with various cash-flow smoothing options), but for individuals who typically think in the present only, the values seem dramatically inflated.
This "proposal" is far worse than the Sheppard line. It literally takes people from random 1 dead end which is not even an destination in and of itself (Dundurn) and dumps them at McMaster. The ridership would literally consist only of university students, and ridership would be woefully pathetic.BTW, this proposal reminds me exactly of the Sheppard subway, which is why I brought it up: take a plan that nominally makes sense, chop it down to something that doesn't, point to the reduced ridership numbers and say "This is why <X> doesn't work". I've no confidence that the reduced plan is worth it (and I do believe Hamilton should have an LRT along the full route).
Yes it is, but the feds did get off from paying a cent for the Hurontario LRT, and only contributed a measly $300 million to the Finch West LRT. Different politics at the time, yes, but still.This whole thing is a giant ploy to shift costs off of the province onto the feds. What a way to save literally billions of dollars - get the Feds to pay for it!
The McMaster-Dundurn LRT "plan" is 100% intentionally awful to pressure the federal government into funding the line the full way to Gage/Tim Horton's Field. The BRT options are intentionally unpalatable from a "shovel ready" standpoint to try and force their hand. If the province was serious about creating a small line with only the $1B, they would have likely run it through the actual downtown. If the feds don't budge, this project will likely not get built until a new government comes in that wants to fund it, since the McMaster-Dundurn LRT wouldn't be practical or useful in any way, shape, or form. Here's a quick mockup with my development model to show how much the "Downtown Terminus" misses the actual Hamilton downtown:
Yes it is, but the feds did get off from paying a cent for the Hurontario LRT, and only contributed a measly $300 million to the Finch West LRT. Different politics at the time, yes, but still.
It's like saying you want to buy a car, like a base model Corolla, and saying you're going to pay $80k for it. Maybe it only cost $23k or whatever upfront, but there is $2k per year for insurance over 15 years, and again for gas, plus maintenance, tires, accessories, etc.
The federal government is making annual transit transfers to cities a permanent program, a move municipalities say will help them make longer-term spending decisions.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made the announcement Wednesday along with the federal infrastructure and environment ministers, Canada Infrastructure Bank chair Tamara Vrooman and Edmonton Mayor Don Iveson.
Cities have been calling for such a move because the federal government’s main infrastructure transfer plan, worth $188-billion over 12 years, is currently only budgeted through to the 2027-28 fiscal year. Wednesday’s announcement means the transit portion of that program will continue indefinitely.
The permanent transit transfer will be worth $3-billion per year beginning in 2026-27. The government also said in a news release that it was announcing $14.9-billion in public transit projects over the next eight years, but details were not immediately provided.
Such long-term spending promises come with the caveat that they extend beyond the life of the current Parliament, meaning the current Liberal government can’t guarantee what Ottawa’s spending priorities will be over the long term.
“We need efficient and modern public transit systems that make our communities more connected,” Mr. Trudeau said. “These investments will support major public transit projects like subway extensions, and help electrify fleets with zero-emission vehicles. They will also be used to meet the growing demand for walkways and paths for cycling, and help rural and remote communities deliver projects to meet their mobility challenges.”