jozl
Active Member
I often wonder if we need a new way to conceptualize how we deal with mass transit. The catalyst that always gets me thinking that there must be a better way than the "Better Way" is Toronto's woeful taxi cab system. It's way too expensive, which is bad for the general public, pays lousy wages, which is bad for taxi drivers, and is tangled up in an arcane licensing system that makes some people rich while screwing the rest of us. Terrible.
So, I wonder, if my musings are at all feasible. I suppose it would take an army of number crunchers and systems analysts to determine that.
The most expensive factors in a transit systems are capital costs, which include the purchase of subway trains, street cars, buses, and the paths they run on, be they tunnels, streetcar tracks or public streets. The second most expensive factor is the cost of operating the system, which includes wages and maintenance.
What if we weighted the system toward the latter of these two factors (wages and maintenance) and cut way back on the former (tunnels, trains and streetcars)?
Toronto already has a very comprehensive system of streets and boulevards, the maintenance of which is already dealt with within current revenue streams. What if we used those streets as the basis for bolstering mass transit in a different way?
Say the TTC purchased 2,000 hybrid or fully electric van sized vehicles that seats from 6 to 8 people. For arguments sake, lets say each vehicle costs $80,000. So 2,000 of them would cost 160 million dollars. Let's also say the TTC had to hire 3,000 drivers and 500 support staff to drive these vehicles at $85,000 per year which would total about 300 million dollars per year.
What if each van were constantly circulating loosely fixed routes, including residential neighborhoods, that allowed them to stop anywhere they were flagged down or requested via cell phone text and then proceed to a predetermined subway stop or major landmark such as Union Station, TD center, Eaton Centre, etc. I look at it as a feeder system which is plugged into the main "trunk" system. It could possibly replace, or at least, offer an alternative to busses and LRT's. I'm thinking of a public mass transit adaptation of New York's excellent taxi cab system. Think of it as thousands of small busses constantly circulating through city streets as opposed to huge and expensive sparsely spaced busses lumbering along main thoroughfares on unreliable schedules. In other words, transit comes to us instead of us going to mass transit. The system would cost a fraction of what a new subway or LRT would cost and it could be up and running in a relatively short time. The system could be tracked via GPS and once a van is full it could be indicated electronically and continue uninterrupted to its final destination. There would be another van close behind. Mind you, our streets would be full of these things but reserved lanes at certain times could accommodate the added congestion. Besides, presumably, this system could replace thousands of private vehicles downtown.
I realize there are tons of other considerations I haven't mentioned or even thought of but my musings might have some merit. I just read an article in the Star that stated even if our provincial and city politicians were able to agree on a final comprehensive transit plan for the GTA it would take ten years of environmental studies and planning before construction would even begin. It also stated that there is no funding in place and any plans would likely take 20 years to build out. That makes 30 more years before anything is realized. It seems to me that we need to rethink mass transit and use the infrastructure we already have to its fullest capacity. My idea might be unworkable but we need to think outside the tiny box we're stuck in.
So, I wonder, if my musings are at all feasible. I suppose it would take an army of number crunchers and systems analysts to determine that.
The most expensive factors in a transit systems are capital costs, which include the purchase of subway trains, street cars, buses, and the paths they run on, be they tunnels, streetcar tracks or public streets. The second most expensive factor is the cost of operating the system, which includes wages and maintenance.
What if we weighted the system toward the latter of these two factors (wages and maintenance) and cut way back on the former (tunnels, trains and streetcars)?
Toronto already has a very comprehensive system of streets and boulevards, the maintenance of which is already dealt with within current revenue streams. What if we used those streets as the basis for bolstering mass transit in a different way?
Say the TTC purchased 2,000 hybrid or fully electric van sized vehicles that seats from 6 to 8 people. For arguments sake, lets say each vehicle costs $80,000. So 2,000 of them would cost 160 million dollars. Let's also say the TTC had to hire 3,000 drivers and 500 support staff to drive these vehicles at $85,000 per year which would total about 300 million dollars per year.
What if each van were constantly circulating loosely fixed routes, including residential neighborhoods, that allowed them to stop anywhere they were flagged down or requested via cell phone text and then proceed to a predetermined subway stop or major landmark such as Union Station, TD center, Eaton Centre, etc. I look at it as a feeder system which is plugged into the main "trunk" system. It could possibly replace, or at least, offer an alternative to busses and LRT's. I'm thinking of a public mass transit adaptation of New York's excellent taxi cab system. Think of it as thousands of small busses constantly circulating through city streets as opposed to huge and expensive sparsely spaced busses lumbering along main thoroughfares on unreliable schedules. In other words, transit comes to us instead of us going to mass transit. The system would cost a fraction of what a new subway or LRT would cost and it could be up and running in a relatively short time. The system could be tracked via GPS and once a van is full it could be indicated electronically and continue uninterrupted to its final destination. There would be another van close behind. Mind you, our streets would be full of these things but reserved lanes at certain times could accommodate the added congestion. Besides, presumably, this system could replace thousands of private vehicles downtown.
I realize there are tons of other considerations I haven't mentioned or even thought of but my musings might have some merit. I just read an article in the Star that stated even if our provincial and city politicians were able to agree on a final comprehensive transit plan for the GTA it would take ten years of environmental studies and planning before construction would even begin. It also stated that there is no funding in place and any plans would likely take 20 years to build out. That makes 30 more years before anything is realized. It seems to me that we need to rethink mass transit and use the infrastructure we already have to its fullest capacity. My idea might be unworkable but we need to think outside the tiny box we're stuck in.