Montréal Transit Developments

[kEiThZ]

$1.2 billion for a Finch West light rail line, and 40,000 passengers served. That's $30,000 per passenger!

And that line will be significantly reducing pollution and travel times. You could not achieve the same thing for the same price even if you bought each passenger a hybrid.

And by the way, using google from Islington and Steeles to Scarborough Town Centre using the Finch-Sheppard LRT is 31.7 km. For 29.6 km of that distance, the LRT will be available going 22 kph. This means that from Islington and Steeles to STC will take 90 mins with only one transfer once the LRT is in service (if we assume 10 mins from Islington and Steeles with the transfer to get on to the LRT). I assure you, that will generate far more than the current 40 000 riders. 90 mins may not be as quick as a car, but it's not bad for the price of a TTC token.

 

[LowerBay]

I don't give a shit that you care or not.

I did not point out the frequency of the Finch buses to how good suburban transit is, but to show the the suburbs already support frequent service and why it is worthwhile to improve transit in the suburbs. You bitch about transit and yet you oppose any attempts to improve it... you are a hypocrite.

Stating that we cannot cost-effectively improve transit in the suburbs to a level that is competitive with the automobile is not hypocrisy. Go waste 10 bill on TC and then come back and let's look at the overall difference ... huge expense, small improvement. We're better off pumping that 10 bill into the health care system.

 

[Disparishun]

Stating that we cannot cost-effectively improve transit in the suburbs to a level that is competitive with the automobile is not hypocrisy.

No. But is certainly such an overbroad statement as to be unfalsifiable and, therefore, without meaning. However:

1. We can certainly cost-effectively improve a relatively high proportion of transit in the suburbs to a level that is competitive with the automobile. Better than the automobile, in many cases; come visit us in Thornhill some time to see what I mean.

2. At the same time, we can certainly improve urban planning -- particularly density, street layout, and commercial/residential adjacency -- to ensure that, as time goes on, the proportion of transit that can be improved cost-effectively continues to raise.

 

[nfitz]

These were your typical commute times? Either you're the luckiest guy in town or you're forgetting what these highways look like on a normal weekday.

Those numbers looked pretty fair. Toronto isn't THAT grid-locked. Islington and Steeles is a bad place for transit. Though surely that will improve for some trips when you can jump on the Finch LRT to Finch West Station.

 

[kEiThZ]

Go waste 10 bill on TC and then come back and let's look at the overall difference ... huge expense, small improvement.

Your original sentiment, repeated later was about improving transit in the suburbs. Disagreeing with a program is a far cry from disagreeing with the principles and objectives of the program. We have some problems with our health care system, does that mean we should forego any improvements to health care or get rid of it altogether? Perhaps just use that money to partially fund private insurance for everybody.

 

[LowerBay]

Your original sentiment, repeated later was about improving transit in the suburbs. Disagreeing with a program is a far cry from disagreeing with the principles and objectives of the program. We have some problems with our health care system, does that mean we should forego any improvements to health care or get rid of it altogether? Perhaps just use that money to partially fund private insurance for everybody.

Health care is a different animal -- there is no alternative. With transit, I have an alternative ... my car. That's why they won't declare transit an essential service.

That 10 billion dollars would go a long way to building more hospitals, hiring more doctors and nurses, buying more MRI machines to reduce wait times, etc. ... instead of wasting it on suburban streetcars to fulfill a Miller/Giambrone fetish. OHIP could re-list a lot of services they de-listed.

 

[kettal]

How cheap do you think it is to build highways and expand roads in built up areas?

 

[Hydrogen]

With transit, I have an alternative ... my car. That's why they won't declare transit an essential service.

That's right, transit is an alternative to using a car - and a good one.

As kettal points out, roads and highways don't come cheap, either.

 

[LowerBay]

How cheap do you think it is to build highways and expand roads in built up areas?

Not cheap, but still cheaper than transit. Did you guys actually know that while it only cost the gov't $1.6B to build the original 407, it cost them close to $100B over a 20-year period to acquire all the land that it sits on?

If we could build $100 billion worth of subways and if everyone ditched their cars, then YES, transit in the suburbs would work. That type of intense system would be time and cost competitive with the auto, but ... THAT WON'T HAPPEN. Even if we could build it, it would not be economical to operate unless everyone ditched their cars.

That's the fundamental problem with trying to service a large sparse area with diffuse origin-destination patterns with line-haul transit ... it's not very cost- or time-effective/competitive unless everyone uses it.

 

[afransen]

Wait--they spent $100 billion acquiring land, or that is what the land was worth?

 

[kettal]

If we could build $100 billion worth of subways and if everyone ditched their cars, then YES, transit in the suburbs would work. That type of intense system would be time and cost competitive with the auto, but ... THAT WON'T HAPPEN.

Why do you think it is it any less likely than new urban highways?

 

[MisterF]

If we could build $100 billion worth of subways and if everyone ditched their cars, then YES, transit in the suburbs would work. That type of intense system would be time and cost competitive with the auto, but ... THAT WON'T HAPPEN. Even if we could build it, it would not be economical to operate unless everyone ditched their cars.

Suburban transit doesn't have to be subway. In many cases regional rail is a better option, and it's very economical. Light rail can work well in the suburbs too. Existing bus ridership already shows that people in the suburbs use transit in large numbers.

 

[Swarley]

Not cheap, but still cheaper than transit. Did you guys actually know that while it only cost the gov't $1.6B to build the original 407, it cost them close to $100B over a 20-year period to acquire all the land that it sits on?

That $100 billion is unbelievable, I had to look it up but apparently you're right. Even with the TTC's figure of $300 M / km of subway we could get 300 km for that much.... There could be a grid of subways cris crossing Toronto, no Transit City needed.

 

[kettal]

I reckon LB might have had a change of heart

 

[kEiThZ]

What that 100 billion figure shows is how unsustainable driving is. could we afford another highway like that? For that kind of cash, Metrolinx could have completely finished its plans and launched a second era. Let's hope we don't make that kind of a mistake again.