It is also more expensive to operate, and I would love to know how much subway you think you could build with the money saved with BRT.
And yes, I know there is a hydro corridor to the north, and no I do not think it is a suitable alternative location for local transit on finch.
FWLRT = $1.2 billion dollars in 2007. Since then...
- proposed Don Mills-Finch East extension
- proposed Woodbine Live/airport extension
- six added stops
- underground station at Keele
- possible elevated station at Humber College
Surely the total has gone up exponentially a result.
The lowball end figure alone could build at least 4-5 new kilometres of subways (and nowadays when every cent counts that's important). If the TTC was serious about alleviating Finch and other crosstown bus routes, they'd invest more in east-to-west subway expansion such as to minimize commuters dependency on buses. Replacing rubber tires with steel rail means nothing if they're all just feeders dumping loads onto overtaxed narrow-reaching metros (YUS in particular). Better to least make those rubber tires compatible to the subway instead of just inferior to it. BRT with emphasis on long-distance travel is precisely that and costs less than LRT which in turn frres up funding for metros.
The southern edge of the F.H.C. is within 300m of Finch proper (2 city blocks walking distance or under 4 mins for able-bodied pedestrians). Also the 36 bus would still exist only in reduced frequencies (due to lowered demand since most commuters from Rexdale and Jane-Finch would opt for F.H.C.). Win/win.The goal of the BRT is to create a more humane city, a city not for cars but for people. We dont need to be extravagant, we dont need another debt our children would carry. BRT only needs Political Will.
How are BRTs more expensive to operate than LRTs? The TTC is now wondering how it would continue operating its network. It’s losing a lot of money to think that its underpreforming routes are being subsidized by the provincial government. For it to be able to break even they will have to eventually charge $6 for every ticket. That’s like 200% fare increase. So, soon, the government will have to take over and spend billions for the upkeep of a system which only the ‘chosen few’ can enjoy (since the average Torontonian cannot sustain paying into the fare hike). LRT is not best for a city that can't pay its own maintenance costs because corridors like Finch West, esp. after the Finch-Keele Subway Stn, won’t have the necessary number of people riding it. It is not desirable to rely on national budget just to maintain its LRT scheme. There is no need for road widening, BRT if fully implemented would minimize private car use. So it can utilize the existing lanes. Ongoing passing lanes and road widening are not required.
As a matter of sense, LRT is more expensive to build. As a matter of fact, it is more costly and polluting to operate and slower than BRT. Why? Electricity is made from burning oil, coal or hydro-power. 1 time of changing the energy-form (from oil to electricity) will cause loss somehow. Then later, the electricity will be changed again to make kinetic energy to propel the LRT's cars which is also subject to some energy loss i.e. 2 times of loss. Meanwhile for the bus which burns oil directly, it will suffer from only 1 time of energy transformation. Slower than BRT? Because it doesn't have the exclusive ROW potential which the F.H.C. readily provides, plus more minor stops.
Trains can be longer than buses, packing more people in per pound of steel and per driver (although 3 car TC LRT trainsets will have less ridership capacity than 3-compartmented biartics utilized in European BRT systems). This avoids wasting money moving steel around. HOWEVER, all of this only applies if you have high volumes, of course. If you aren't running very many vehicles per day, the capital costs of the electric wires overwhelm the operating costs of the diesel engines; and of course there's no point running quarter-full trains when you could be running fully-full buses.
