Politics: Tim Hudak's Plan for Ontario if he becomes Premier

[innsertnamehere]

^ agreed.

 

[Filip]

Again, not denying the report. Just pointing out that the same argument was made for Eglinton when Metrolinx deemed it viable for grade separation... where were you to defend those conclusions? I'm only saying BRT would be enough because I'm using the same reasoning than the LRT crowd when they claimed that Scarborough and Eglinton didn't need a subway.

I stand by my interpretation of that report that even by 2031, a BRT wouldn't be at over capacity. They're only assuming that it will. Aka a famous quote that was so often ridiculed "Build it and they'll come". Funny how true it is for LRT and doesn't make sense for subways...

Which is why at that cost, burying the whole line made sense with the projected ridership which was to double.

Sheppard West is needed but Sheppard East for me is a big : Proceed with caution. Extend it at least to Victoria Park since the ridership is there. With caution to Agincourt. Past Agincourt, I'd put a BRT and re evaluate the stretch to McCowan after the Scarborough Subway is built

I was being facetious but this is a great conversation. We should inquire as to what the plans are for Eglinton by our dear friends in the PC party.

 

[innsertnamehere]

just a note, i'm no longer really paying attention to the entire thread, but Eglinton ridership can quadruple before it starts to run into problems. (opening day will be 5,400 PPHD at the busiest point, maximum is around 20,000)

and yes, most of the ridership from the underground version of Eglinton was from the SRT, which will now funnel into the Bloor Danforth line instead. peak ridership at the busiest point would have doubled (presumably right before Eglinton-Yonge) as all of the riders from the SRT (8,000 piling on top of the existing 5,400) would be going to Eglinton Yonge instead of Bloor Yonge.

 

[Electrify]

QQ: Where are we getting 15,000 pphpd for Eglinton? The numbers I have found seem to suggest 5400 passengers. One presentation I found suggests 15,000 passengers in the central portion, but does not specifiy if that is total passengers or passengers per hour per direction. Another PDF says that 5400 pphpd will be the most predicted for the central underground portion.

I did find a chart which compared the pphpd for various modes. Enjoy:

http://stuff.mit.edu/afs/athena/cou...l_public_transport/public_transport_m1679.pdf

 

[innsertnamehere]

Another thought, but I wonder if the Liberals could turn the LRT cancellations into another Gas plants if the PCs win power? (especially if they build the Sheppard subway instead) You could look at the up front costs of the LRT cancellations, the extra costs of the subway, as well as additional maintenance and operation costs over a certian time period, (just like they did for the gas plants) and I am sure you could come up with a number much, much larger than $1.1. billion.

 

[Rainforest]

just a note, i'm no longer really paying attention to the entire thread, but Eglinton ridership can quadruple before it starts to run into problems. (opening day will be 5,400 PPHD at the busiest point, maximum is around 20,000)

I think, the practical maximum will be in the 12,000 - 15,000 ppdph range. For 15,000 ppdph, it will need a 3-car train every 2 min in each direction.

The demand on Eglinton will largely depend on the state of transit in other major corridors. If the transit expansion continues, Eglinton is likely to stabilize and stay well within the LRT range. If the expansion stalls and Eglinton remains one of a few reliable transit lines, riders will flock to Eglinton in growing numbers and might overwhelm it eventually.

 

[Rainforest]

Again, not denying the report. Just pointing out that the same argument was made for Eglinton when Metrolinx deemed it viable for grade separation... where were you to defend those conclusions? I'm only saying BRT would be enough because I'm using the same reasoning than the LRT crowd when they claimed that Scarborough and Eglinton didn't need a subway.

Based on the formal logic, you are right. However, cost ranges need to be taken into account. A subway appears to cost 350 - 400 million per km these days; even a 5-10 km subway extension is a major fiscal burden. LRT costs 70 to 100 million per km, and street-median BRT, perhaps 30 to 40 million per km. Then, there is a cost associated with any construction and ripping up a street; it is hard to give precise dollar amount for that but it is probably similar for all three options.

Intuitively, it seems that the above justifies choosing LRT over BRT when in doubt about the future ridership; while choosing subway over LRT requires more caution.

 

[junctionist]

Another thought, but I wonder if the Liberals could turn the LRT cancellations into another Gas plants if the PCs win power? (especially if they build the Sheppard subway instead) You could look at the up front costs of the LRT cancellations, the extra costs of the subway, as well as additional maintenance and operation costs over a certian time period, (just like they did for the gas plants) and I am sure you could come up with a number much, much larger than $1.1. billion.

Does it matter? The transit plan would be killed at that point for a significantly inferior version. Meanwhile, Hudak will probably build more highways as well. It would be yet another setback for addressing congestion in the GTA in the most effective way: through significant investments in transit improvements across the region, not just in or two subway corridors. The most notable setback so far was when the Mike Harris government cancelled most of the subway expansion plans in the 1990s--building only the Sheppard stub--but building the 407 as well and continuing to widen highways.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I think, the practical maximum will be in the 12,000 - 15,000 ppdph range. For 15,000 ppdph, it will need a 3-car train every 2 min in each direction.

The demand on Eglinton will largely depend on the state of transit in other major corridors. If the transit expansion continues, Eglinton is likely to stabilize and stay well within the LRT range. If the expansion stalls and Eglinton remains one of a few reliable transit lines, riders will flock to Eglinton in growing numbers and might overwhelm it eventually.

you could easily do 90 second frequencies on the line and it is being specifically designed to be able to do that.

And yes it does junctionist, as it would highlight the fact that they are no different than the liberals.. first thing they do when taking office from them after spending years ridiculing them over the gas plants is go and pull an even bigger "scandal"

 

[Dan416]

I would have liked Eglinton to be a subway, but I can live with how it's being built as an LRT, although it could be improved (i.e. avoid building any sections in-median).

SELRT should just be cancelled outright.

SRT replacement with subway--perfect.

Finch I'm not too dogmatic about. Could go BRT or LRT as far as I'm concerned.

Hurontario and Hamilton need their LRTs.

DRL needs to be subway, no question.

Yonge North--it should wait for the DRL.

 

[BurlOak]

By the sounds of some post here, it appears that they would like the Yonge capacity to be

20k pphpd at Finch,
22k at Sheppard
23k at York Mills
24k at Lawrence
28k at Eglinton
29k at St. Clair
33k at Bloor
32k at College, etc.

The truth is that not all locations on the same line will have the exact same demand to capacity ratio.

For Eglinton, I do not know the exact numbers, but I would say that if east of Don Mills the demand is 12k, while at Bayview it is 14k, then it just makes sense to runs the same number of trains all the way through.

 

[BurlOak]

Another thought, but I wonder if the Liberals could turn the LRT cancellations into another Gas plants if the PCs win power? (especially if they build the Sheppard subway instead) You could look at the up front costs of the LRT cancellations, the extra costs of the subway, as well as additional maintenance and operation costs over a certian time period, (just like they did for the gas plants) and I am sure you could come up with a number much, much larger than $1.1. billion.

But I think it will be viewed as an order of magnitude worse to cancel your own plans for $1.1B (as the Liberals did) than to cancel the other parties plans for whatever the cancellation fee is.

I remember Chretien cancelling the Mulroney helicopter order for +/- $0.5B in 1993 dollars and he was praised for it. That may have even helped motivate Harris to cancel Eglinton in the mid 1990's. He spent about +/-$70M in cancellation to avoid the $1B+ expense.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Ahh but you see that is a minor point that everyone has no problem with, it is the problem of the "wasting of 1.1 billion" that gets everyone yelling and screaming. You could easily come up with a $3 billion + figure for the cancellation of the lines, if Sheppard gets built, and it would be the EXACT same situation the liberals got bitten in the ass for. come into power, cancel a project. Claim minimal cancellation costs (probably around $200 million) at first, and relocate the funding elsewhere (to the sheppard subway). Get auditor generals report out, looking at long term costs as well, and viola, hundreds of millions if not billions extra come up! Exact. Same. Scenario. just replace the words "gas plant" with "LRT", and you get the situation exactly, but with probably much larger numbers.

 

[doady]

Reading is key! Let me point out the choice of words...



That paragraph is not facts but just assumptions. I actually have nothing against those conclusions. Where I have a problem here is that whenever the same arguments were used to promote subways, it was ridiculed, shut down and heavily mocked.

The same assumption can be made for Eglinton or Sheppard. I still remember that our very pro-LRT members were dismissing those same assumptions when it was regarding the Scarborough Subway even when the TTC and Metrolinx stated that the numbers were there.

My issue is with LRT fans denying the double standards.

The report is saying that even the conservative ridership estimates sees Hurontario reaching the capacity limit of BRT by 2031. That is not analogous to the LRTs in Toronto in any way.

So by your logic, Eglinton and Sheppard should have been subways...right? Or are you going to find some kind of acrobatic argument to deny it?

Umm, I have always supported subways along Eglinton and Sheppard and the subway to Scarborough on this website. You can search the forum and see. Or maybe others here can confirm. All these subway lines have also always been included in the various fantasy maps I have made and posted here. You are barking up the wrong tree.

You are just as bad as those LRT fans, going off on the LRT along Hurontario just because it's LRT. You subway fans and the LRT fans are both equally annoying. I have nothing more to say.

 

[TOareaFan]

The report is saying that even the conservative ridership estimates sees Hurontario reaching the capacity limit of BRT by 2031. That is not analogous to the LRTs in Toronto in any way.

Can you help me with the reading of the report. If I am understanding it correctly:

a) I am not sure how conservative the estimates are (is a section of road going from 8.4% transit to 71% transit just by switching from express bus - Zum - to an LRT in mixed traffic (for most of that section) conservative?

b) even with those estimates, if I am reading it right, they are at 60% (+/-) of BRT capacity by 2031.

Am I reading it wrong.