[adys123]

That's not comprehensively true. The city is expecting 50,000 riders per day for 3.8 km. That's still less ridership per km than many BRTs out there including the TransMilenio in Bogota Colombia and the Guangzhou BRT. There is this pervasive notion across multiple threads that BRT has to be some third-world level, barely-faster-than-normal-bus service like VIVA in York Region. Ironically, the third-world does have BRT that has high capacity and ridership. And surprise surprise, probably cost less to build than whatever Waterfront East will turn out to be.

I am not saying BRT is what's best for this corridor or Toronto in general, I am saying don't discount BRT just because we don't have any good ones.

I also can't imagine that economies of scale will be great when this poor LRT line is less than 5 km long to start.

The line would have economies of scale by default, as it will use existing rolling stock and maintenance and storage facilities. It will also provide additional network resiliency.

 

[urbanclient]

The line would have economies of scale by default, as it will use existing rolling stock and maintenance and storage facilities. It will also provide additional network resiliency.

Yes you are right, but what about economies of scale for the start up costs for construction, hiring the labour, sourcing the materials; not to mention the soft costs involved in planning, overanalyzing, EAs and business cases etc... All just for 3.8 km? Sounds like a missed opportunity. I guess maximizing economies of scale cannot be expected from government(s) with shoestring budgets. Penny wise, pound foolish.

 

[adys123]

Yes you are right, but what about economies of scale for the start up costs for construction, hiring the labour, sourcing the materials; not to mention the soft costs involved in planning, overanalyzing, EAs and business cases etc... All just for 3.8 km? Sounds like a missed opportunity. I guess maximizing economies of scale cannot be expected from government(s) with shoestring budgets. Penny wise, pound foolish.

Some of these things like the environmental assessment and substantial design work has already been complete. Changing the mode would mean spending the time and money to redo those aspects of it.

 

[KhalilHeron]

That's not comprehensively true. The city is expecting 50,000 riders per day for 3.8 km. That's still less ridership per km than many BRTs out there including the TransMilenio in Bogota Colombia and the Guangzhou BRT. There is this pervasive notion across multiple threads that BRT has to be some third-world level, barely-faster-than-normal-bus service like VIVA in York Region. Ironically, the third-world does have BRT that has high capacity and ridership. And surprise surprise, probably cost less to build than whatever Waterfront East will turn out to be.

I am not saying BRT is what's best for this corridor or Toronto in general, I am saying don't discount BRT just because we don't have any good ones.

I also can't imagine that economies of scale will be great when this poor LRT line is less than 5 km long to start.

do you know how many drivers it takes to run BRTs with that kind of capacity? That business model is usually only viable in countries where labour is cheap. Believe thats why a BRT was shut down on finch.
Also if you're talking economies of scale it's not like its an isolated line or that we don't have plenty of other transit projects going on. The argument would make sense if this were a standalone line and the first projects we'd built in years. Also ignores the plans for future extensions, and more projects in the west