Expressway  Traffic  Optimization 

Daily Commute -- Toronto . Ontario . Canada

  • 7+ M light vehicles (cars, vans, SUVs, pickup trucks) registered.
      {Ontario 2005}

  • 82 percent of trips by auto.
      {Greater Toronto & Hamilton Area 2001}

  • 1.5 M fares / business day.
      {Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) 2009}

  • 35 percent of trips by transit.
      {City of Toronto 2001}

  • 420,000 vehicles / day.
      {Highway 401 near Highway 400 in Toronto 2007}

  • 190,000 passengers / day.
      {GO Transit in all Ontario 2007}

Plenty more traffic statistics, on their entire own web page loaded with numbers and comment, are accessible to Club ETO members.

Transit and Roads -- Both Vital

Efficient public transit AND congestion-free expressways are BOTH vital to the economic success of Ontario.

Pushing public transit as the only congestion solution, anti-car activists quietly block ETO, keeping expressways jammed with cars, trucks and ironically, public transit buses, too.

Promising all expressways everywhere PERMANENTLY congestion-free, clean, green and efficient, ETO confounds nonsensical anti-car ideology that labels all car drivers as gridlock emissions villains.

Public transit is no miracle solution. It has both positives and negatives. Responsible transit advocacy must acknowledge:

Nine Big -- Public Transit Disadvantages

  • Less private and convenient, way slower overall than personal car.

  • Requires large taxpayer financial subsidies, capital and operating.

  • Union strike power blocks transit labour productivity gains.

  • Mass ridership powers spread of infectious disease epidemics.

  • Transit a compelling terrorist target, especially trains and tunnels.

  • Under-used bus routes are diesel emissions and budget headaches.

  • Transit construction and operation often disturb neighbourhoods.

  • Lack of lockable (e.g. trunk) space means you drag "stuff" along.

  • Being limited to transit seriously hurts job-seeker work prospects.

Setting transit fares high enough for break-even finances, usually drives down revenues.

Some riders cannot afford to pay the large fare increase necessitated by end of taxpayer operating subsidy.

Other riders switch to transport alternatives of perceived better value for the price of the much larger (unsubsidized) transit fare.


Subways vs LRTs

Many pixels have been lit (and much ink spilt) over the "subway vs LRT" debate in Toronto, with more confusion than clarity the result.

The link below is to descriptions of input parameters for a simple but realistic "subway vs LRT" transit line finance model.

Only the model input parameters are described (the input parameter VALUES themselves are examples and NOT realistic).

The computational model itself has not been constructed. This awaits contribution of realistic input parameter values by interested parties.

Intended model primary output, is the transit ride FARE PRICE that covers any FUNDING GAP (for line construction, rolling stock, operation, maintenance and interest), left after subsidies and sale of air rights.

Subway vs LRT Transit Finance Model (81 KB pdf)

eto_public_transit.htm -- 10 July 2014

Copyright(c) & TMs 2011- 2014 ITS-ETO Consortium

Website Policy