News   Jul 17, 2024
Side-by-Side The Davisville and Uovo Top Off on Yonge in Midtown
 473     0 
News   Jul 17, 2024
Midtown Resubmission Adds Height, Density, Matches Adjacent Proposal
 1.4K     2 
News   Jul 17, 2024
News Roundup for July 17, 2024
 613     0 

New Transit Funding Sources

If the idea to make people pay their fair share for the burden they place on Toronto's road maintenance budget, then shouldn't Toronto residents who don't use the Gardiner or DVP get an extra tax rebate as well? Why should the transit user pay for roads they don't use? That doesn't seem fair to me.

The best solution is to lower property taxes in the old city, and/or raise property taxes in the former boroughs, to reflect their usage of the Gardiner/DVP and the burden it places on the City of Toronto's budget.
 
BurlOak said:
That is probably the best plan that I have heard.

The only thing better is to somehow force Metrolinx and TTC (at least the subway portion) together so they could finally start planning and building transit on the GO lines that doesn't just shuttle people to Union.
Click to expand...

I agree as well. The fact that he wants the GTA to use Transport for London as a model is great news. We need a model like that as a foundation upon which we can build and add more transit infrastructure. I won't shock anybody by saying that our current model just doesn't work. The National Rail service is perfectly integrated with the London Underground which isn't the case here. That model effectively takes transit off local city politicians which this regions needs.
 
Hi,

I haven't had a chance to go through everything but just thought I would put the following out there to gauge responses from forum members:

I'm wondering if there are plans to improve the links between the different lines that are proposed and/or are under construction to provide a more seamless ride for transit users? For example, connecting Finch West LRT and Shepperd East LRT could create one seamless line with the Shepperd East LRT line running north at Don Mills from Shepperd all the way to Finch and then turn west and run all the way to Humber College on Finch.

The Shepperd subway should be extended westward to connect with the Downsview line so there is a link to both legs of the YUS line (i.e. it'll become less of a stub).

With Don Mills station becoming an important link/transfer-point, the DRL should start here (so it is connected to the Shepperd/Finch LRT and the Shepperd subway), go south via Pape through the financial district and king west district and come back north via Dundas West and connect to Jane Street, where it can connect to the future Jane LRT.

With the plan for Jane LRT to connect with Finch LRT, the connection of Jane LRT to the so-called 'downtown relief line' (as per my point above) would enable one massive transit loop covering outer-Toronto via the downtown. This would greatly improve transport in any direction in the city of Toronto, and would particularly help lower-income outer-ring suburbs and highly-dense inner-city suburbs.

This would be in addition to expanding Eglinton crosstown all the way to the airport.

The city of Toronto would then have a one large seamless LRT line covering the north (Shepperd linked in with Finch), a large seamless line covering central Toronto (Eglinton crosstown), the existing south subway line (Bloor-Danforth) and two loop lines - the existing inner Yonge-University-Spadina subway and the new Don Mills-Downtown-Jane line.

I'm assuming that the DRL will be using the LRVs that Eglinton and Shepperd are planning to use so it can be connected to Jane and Don Mills (the only thing being that the DRL portion would be running underground). The current proposal for the DRL is not heavy-rail like the existing subways is it?

Any comments on whether this idea or something similar is being considered and what the time-frame would like should this type of idea materialize? I'm not sure what the cost would be but it should be possible within the $50B 'Big Move' plans I would think?

Thanks in advance.
 
TORONTO -- A report from a panel looking at ways to raise the billions of dollars needed to upgrade and expand public transit in the greater Toronto-Hamilton area is to be released today.

Premier Kathleen Wynne appointed the panel earlier this year to examine proposals from transit planning agency Metrolinx.

Those proposals included a jump in the HST, a five-cent-a-litre regional gas tax, a $350-million-a-year business parking levy and $100 million a year in development charges.

Read more: http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/report-fr...-to-be-released-today-1.1586383#ixzz2nGUX2h4P
 
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...lp-fund-toronto-area-transit/article15910196/

A government-appointed advisory panel is recommending a five-cent-per-litre hike in the gas tax to help fund public transit expansion in the greater Toronto-Hamilton area.

Government sources confirm the report from the 13-member panel chaired by Ryerson University’s Anne Golden projects boosting the gas tax could raise about $800 million a year, and generate another $80 million through the HST.
 
Funny how Hudaks sources selling the lcbo headquarters to fund transit. You would think he would know it sold a year ago to Daniels, and that a single $200 million sale doesn't provide $2 billion annually.
 
innsertnamehere said:
Funny how Hudaks sources selling the lcbo headquarters to fund transit. You would think he would know it sold a year ago to Daniels, and that a single $200 million sale doesn't provide $2 billion annually.
Click to expand...

While I agree he should know about that sale....I don't think it is a fair reflection of what I have read him saying as suggesting he thought that a single $200 million sale would provide $2B annually. Asset sales were one aspect of ways he says transit expansion can be funded without the new tax(es). Here is a quote from thestar.com

Hudak said there is no need to increase taxes, instead that dipping into existing provincial revenue, selling off surplus properties and commercializing subway and GO Transit stations would cover the $2 billion a year necessary to deal with paralyzing gridlock.
Click to expand...

I think the LCBO site was just given as an example (albeit a bad one) of the selling off of surplus properties.
 
I'll take Hudak seriously when he's able to find multiple billions of dollars in efficiencies to fund transit. From the Rob Ford debacle everyone in Ontario should be suspicious of anyone claiming that they can fund anything of significance through efficiencies.
 
Asset sales also aren't a reliable form of funding. You only own so much property, and the last time the province sold a major asset we ended up with the 407, and privatized hydro which has jumped our rates just as much as the green energy act.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
I'll take Hudak seriously when he's able to find multiple billions of dollars in efficiencies to fund transit. From the Rob Ford debacle everyone in Ontario should be suspicious of anyone claiming that they can fund anything of significance through efficiencies.
Click to expand...
The budget is scheduled to be in surplus by 2015-6 according to the current government, so if that's true he may not have to find that many "efficiencies" should he win the next election.
 
GenerationW said:
The budget is scheduled to be in surplus by 2015-6 according to the current government, so if that's true he may not have to find that many "efficiencies" should he win the next election.
Click to expand...

Look, I think there should be a balanced approach to this and likely some new revenue will need to be generated.....but those suggesting that the sort of efficiencies that need to be found in Ontario to generate $2B are akin to what Ford promised are skewing the discussion. $2B is, what, 1.4% of the provincial budget?
 
He would need to find 2 billion in effiencies every year, good luck with that. Let's get real folks.
 
Adjei said:
He would need to find 2 billion in effiencies every year, good luck with that. Let's get real folks.
Click to expand...

What if he found $1B (less than 1% cost saving on provincial budget) and the gas tax could be halved? What if he found $1B....and identified $500 mil or so of asset sales per year and the gas tax could be cut?

Is it not worth looking or should we just say "we need to find $2B...lets get it all from tax increases".

What if, say, more people in Ontario supported transit expansion than some other costly government programs?
 
TOareaFan said:
Look, I think there should be a balanced approach to this and likely some new revenue will need to be generated.....but those suggesting that the sort of efficiencies that need to be found in Ontario to generate $2B are akin to what Ford promised are skewing the discussion. $2B is, what, 1.4% of the provincial budget?
Click to expand...
A big enough surplus could give him some breathing room in theory. But in general I agree with you -- this transit expansion can't work without dedicated revenue streams that can't be turned off at the whim of the government.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top