Transit City Plan

[spider]

Go right ahead. No, seriously, find a way. What do you suggest, a huge increase in property taxes? Major road tolls on existing roads and highways? A large gas tax, sales tax, income tax? Perhaps an annual bake sale?

1/ Property tax can be increased 10% with ALL proceeds to be invested in Subway construction only. Yes I am a residential property owner in Toronto.

2/ Ever notice that none of the fund raising proposals involve the TTC riders? They are going to benefit most from new Subways but shouldn't be asked to carry some of the load? Increase cash fares to $4.00 with the increase going to new Subway capital costs only.

3/ Considerable savings can be realised by yanking TTC operations into this century. A few minutes ago I dropped in on "Nextbus" and "Where is my streetcar" and noticed packs of streetcars running together on the 501 and 510 lines, like 5 streetcars in 4 minutes on a sunny Sunday afternoon. You don't have to be a math whiz to figure out that there are way too many streetcars out there, maybe twice as many as required but what do they care.

 

[nfitz]

1/ Property tax can be increased 10% with ALL proceeds to be invested in Subway construction only. Yes I am a residential property owner in Toronto.

Fair comment.

2/ Ever notice that none of the fund raising proposals involve the TTC riders? They are going to benefit most from new Subways but shouldn't be asked to carry some of the load? Increase cash fares to $4.00 with the increase going to new Subway capital costs only.

Sure, given the city is already subsidizing TTC operations to the extent of about $1.50 a ride, it would be cleaner to simply have users pay for the entire cost of operations (go to 100% farebox recovery), and instead have the city fund the capital expenditures.

3/ Considerable savings can be realised by yanking TTC operations into this century. A few minutes ago I dropped in on "Nextbus" and "Where is my streetcar" and noticed packs of streetcars running together on the 501 and 510 lines, like 5 streetcars in 4 minutes on a sunny Sunday afternoon. You don't have to be a math whiz to figure out that there are way too many streetcars out there, maybe twice as many as required but what do they care.

Uh ... no. it doesn't work like that. A bunch of streetcars means that somewhere in the city, someone has a big gap. If you remove half the streetcars, then somewhere in the city, someone has an even bigger gap. Right now, someone heading westbound at Royal York road is looking at a 30-minute gap - and there is a bunch just west of Royal York. What should have happened is that a car got held for 5 minutes at Roncesvalles or Humber loop, and presumably some of those cars will be held at Long Branch or Kipling loop to restore the gap. Cutting service doesn't make it more regular.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

We can debate all the "what ifs" - however the fact of the matter is the mayor didn't put forth any proposals to raise additional funds. Until he does so seriously, any talk from him about subway building in the absence of a realistic financial plan is just plain pointless.

And re: raising fares - an increase by that magnitude will a) surely result in a decrease in ridership, cutting into the overall amount of funds raised; b) causes undue hardship to those who doesn't have a choice OR necessitate some kind of subsidy and c) increase congestion. Not the greatest idea.

AoD

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Fares should be lowered to be honest. The new taxes after construction can go to fixing the system.

 

[spider]

We can debate all the "what ifs" - however the fact of the matter is the mayor didn't put forth any proposals to raise additional funds. Until he does so seriously, any talk from him about subway building in the absence of a realistic financial plan is just plain pointless.

OK over to you. Please don't dump on the guy who lives in Malvern and drives to work in Stouffville just because he owns a car.

 

[andrewpmk]

But the Eglinton line -- even in Rob Ford's "Undergound vision" wasn't going to to get any where near the airport and extending the current Sheppard Subway wasn't going to do the same either. Building 3 lines to enhance the network is a better way of spending $8.6 billion rather than putting the entire line underground when it doesn't need to be.

My objection to light rail is that it has at grade intersections which drastically reduce capacity. I am fine with building above ground, but grade separation is needed.

 

[gweed123]

It's a real pity it doesn't have a political champion really pulling for it. IMO it could potentially take a lot of cars off of roads, for a relative pittance compared to the Crosstown line.

Agreed. It would be a really 'quick win' (to borrow a phrase). The corridor is already there, it's just a bike path now. All they'd need to do is put the tracks back in and build a station at Eglinton. Hardly a budget-breaker.

 

[DTGeek]

As for this 2030 talk I imagine that the smartphone and tracking people would become much more advanced to not have to depend on such rigid concepts to pay to use separate systems and Berlin walls at borders.

In 2030 cars well be self-driving, so they'll be a lot cheaper and more efficient than they are today, and there's a chance that transit ridership will even decline. So one more reason not to over build.

 

[Tulse]

1/ Property tax can be increased 10%

Seriously? You think that is politically possible?

2/ Ever notice that none of the fund raising proposals involve the TTC riders? They are going to benefit most from new Subways but shouldn't be asked to carry some of the load? Increase cash fares to $4.00 with the increase going to new Subway capital costs only.

The TTC is already the least subsidized transit system on the planet, and you think riders should pay more?

3/ Considerable savings can be realised by yanking TTC operations into this century.

Right, but a lot of that yanking costs money (computerized signalling, GPS-enabled vehicles, new fare collection system, etc. etc. etc.).

 

[nfitz]

Seriously? You think that is politically possible?

A 10% increase? Mississauga is doing a 7.4% increase this year, and has increased taxes in many years recently more than Toronto. Yet the mayor of Mississauga has the highest approval rating in the country. So yes, if done properly, it could be politically possible. Probably more so than road tolls.

 

[ILuvTO]

I've been reading this thread with interest ever since the council vote a few days ago.

One side of me agrees that subways are not financially practical as Toronto simply does not have the money as it currently stands. And any new subway lines may not be warranted as they may not see full capacity for quite a few years.

But the other side of me wonders where we would be today if we applied that same thinking to the Yonge/University/Spadina and Bloor/Danforth lines? And how much better off would we be if Mike Harris didn't cancel Eglinton when there was a reasonable shot to pay for it?

Overall, subways are the way to go in my very humble opinion. Rob Ford now needs to have an honest and frank conversation with the tax payers of Toronto. If they want subways, then they are going to have to be willing to pay for them via new and increased taxes. This idea that the private sector will pay for them is simply a fantasy that Rob Ford needs to stop perpetuating.

 

[Fac1]

A 10% increase? Mississauga is doing a 7.4% increase this year, and has increased taxes in many years recently more than Toronto. Yet the mayor of Mississauga has the highest approval rating in the country. So yes, if done properly, it could be politically possible. Probably more so than road tolls.

Isn't a large reason for Hazel's support due to almost no new taxes during her tenure? This 7.4% increase is unprecedented in Mississauga, I believe? I'd like to see her approval ratings in a year or two, doubt it will be anywhere near as high. If she were to campaign on 7-10% increase over her last election, I'm not sure that she would have won (at best it would have been tight). Even if Ford was willing, he would be slaughtered in the next election cycle.

 

[ILuvTO]

Go right ahead. No, seriously, find a way. What do you suggest, a huge increase in property taxes? Major road tolls on existing roads and highways? A large gas tax, sales tax, income tax? Perhaps an annual bake sale?

It doesn't have to be a huge increase. It can be small, provided all the money goes to transit. In addition, I think we need to keep in mind that we don't need to build out the entire network at once. It can be done in stages as the money is raised. For example, extend Sheppard subway to Victoria park or Pharmacy as a start and use the increased property taxes to pay for it. Then bury the entire Eglinton line with the original money earmarked for Transit City. For a project like the DRL, cost it out, then find a public model to fund it (partially paid for by a combination of new city tax, provincial and federal funding). I know I make it sound easy, and I realize it isn't. But if the citizens of Toronto really want subways as Rob Ford says, then they need to be willing to pay for them.

 

[nfitz]

Isn't a large reason for Hazel's support due to almost no new taxes during her tenure? This 7.4% increase is unprecedented in Mississauga, I believe?

It was 5.8% for 2011 - that's 13.6% in 2 years compared to 2.5% in Toronto in the same period of time. Mississauga was 2.3% in 2010 and 4.5% in 2009. Toronto was 2.9% in 2010 and 4.0% in 2009. I think you have to go back to the 1990s to find a period of time when Mississauga has almost no tax increases.

 

[spider]

Originally Posted by spider

1/ Property tax can be increased 10%

Seriously? You think that is politically possible?

Absolutely

2/ Ever notice that none of the fund raising proposals involve the TTC riders? They are going to benefit most from new Subways but shouldn't be asked to carry some of the load? Increase cash fares to $4.00 with the increase going to new Subway capital costs only.

The TTC is already the least subsidized transit system on the planet, and you think riders should pay more?

The current level of subsidy is irrelevant, the TTC is the only system in town.

3/ Considerable savings can be realised by yanking TTC operations into this century.

Right, but a lot of that yanking costs money (computerized signalling, GPS-enabled vehicles, new fare collection system, etc. etc. etc.).

We already have up to date signalling and GPS enabled vehicles. No change is required in the fare collection systems. What is etc.?

We are looking for help on HOW TO DO IT not gee whiz it looks so hard.