BRT would carry less people right?
Every transit mode has its own use and where it should go.
Since MTO has rule out Rapid Transit on 427 with its own ROW, we are left with BRT. Depending on what the top limit of ridership is to the airport, BRT will have its max limit of 72 riders per 60' artic bus with 52-58 seated and the rest standing. Using double deck buses and that the way this BRT should go, it will carry 85 with everyone having a seat. No provision for luggage has been allow for. Once you allow room for luggage, you reduce your carrying capacity for riders.
You could put an elevated ROW up the centre of 427 and it has to be high as the highest overpass to get over it. This is only good to the 401 and has to return to grade north of it, due to the flight path.
When you look at cost recovery, LRT out weights BRT. It currently cost $110/hr to put a bus on the road with a min of 4 hours of service. An LRT should run about $250 with subway costing $450/hr.
We know we can add cars to both LRT and subway cars and not increase the hour rate if ridership increase 30% as well keeping cost ratio high. You can maintain the same headway until the train max out the platform space. Only then you would look at adding a train or 2 and that will reduce the headway and cost ratio.
When it comes to BRT you have to add more buses that will reduce the headway, as well reducing the cost ratio to match that 30% increase of ridership.
As I have stated in the past, the current Dundas in Mississauga or the rail corridor does not justify a subway to Sq One, as there is no density along it nor will MT #5 have enough ridership to feed it to help to justify the line. The whole section along Dundas can be redevelop to support a subway in the future. The first section for development is between 427 and Dixie, as this is a blight zone as long as I have live in Mississauga. If plan correctly, you can put in 200,000+ residents/employment in this area and over 500,000+ along Dundas to Hurontario. It will never happen in your life time.
The Yonge subway was built when there was some density along it to the point, its only been the last 10-15 years real development has taken place at Eglinton station area, 40 years after it open. North York Centre station was an after thought to the point it sees over 25,000 riders daily today with the station being built after the line had open. It was not rough in like it should have and cost twice the cost to do so over a live line.
Single seat rides have the highest operation cost, cost more for a rider to use it than a high turn over of seats trip. Just look at GO for those cost.
As for reducing the ARL fare, it would be pouring oil on a fire to do so, when it was shown from day one this was a mistake in the making. Unless numbers have change much in the past 4 years, do the math what this ARL cost to build, operate and divided by 17,000 riders per weekday and 6,000 for all other types of days to see what the cost will be to ride this white elephant. I have no breakdown what % of that 17,000 are family members, but once a family traveler looks at all options getting to the city core, they will not be using the ARL if there more than 3 in their party. I will lay odds that business people going to the hotel first will still be taking a cab in place of the ARL.
I cannot tell you when I heard of it, but somewhere in TTC backroom there is a plan to run a streetcar line along the Queensway to Sherway. Even before I heard it, I saw a line on that road going out to Hurontario, but could not come up with numbers to justify it going past Sherway. With the slow redevelopment of the Queensway, a line should be in place by no later than 2025 to meet the growing demand for service on that road.
I disagree about a subway being justify going to Sherway to pull drivers off the QEW when it would be better to have a new station and parking tower at Park Lawn for GO. You will not pull the drivers off when they look at the total travel time by subway or fighting the traffic.
