News   Jun 18, 2024
Quilt of Green
 116     0 
News   Jun 17, 2024
Markland Wood Tower-in-the-Park Infill Revised Through Local Feedback
 991     3 
News   Jun 17, 2024
Catching Up With Westmount Boutique Residences on Sheppard West
 472     0 

TTC suspects province is plotting a takeover

Quite right, SeanTrans.

I'm talking about a change in how individual routes are assessed for profitability. That should have no bearing on overall costs for the entire system.

Also, think about the difference in calculations that could happen if you apply the revenue to the route that the initial fare was paid on versus if it was an average spread across the whole system. Routes with a higher proportion of Metropass users would be disadvantaged in the first scenario... a minor calculation difference creating what could be a major difference in results.

But if there's 80% cost recovery at the farebox overall for the system surely there's some routes doing 60% or less while others do 100% or more?
Click to expand...

The only ones doing more than 100% are the subway lines.

TTC Surface Route Fare Recovery 05-06
 
Well if you look at certain branches, there are some that are profitable. When we do financial comparisons (called "Pinks and Blues", in more technical terms "shared" vs. "unique" stops), there actually are some that make more money than they cost. Off the top of my head, the 133C branch, north of Finch into Morningside Heights is a very very profitable route.
 
it's usually when you hit the linehauls (where a section of roadway is shared by a number of routes into the subway) is where routes lose money since the service run on that section (i.e. Eglinton between Leslie and Yonge) is way beyond what is required but is required by the route, but subsequently lowers the financial performance of the route. Though usually when I did the analyses, I excluded those sections of the route.
 
What a fantastic idea! The TTC is terribly run (I can honestly say this having worked with TTC management/administration in the past), and is a huge burden on the City of Toronto. Anything to relieve Toronto of that burden, and eliminate the millions of dollars of waste is a great idea.

Maybe the TTC could still exist, but only be responsible for the subway and streetcar lines. Those are highly specialized services unique to only the TTC. The GTTA could take over the operation of all bus routes, including those of the surrounding regions, to have one harmonized and integrated bus system that connects to the subway and GO.
 
Maybe different transit agencies use different methodologies for calculating cost-recovery. But even just considering the TTC itself, there is not much difference between the cost recovery of the downtown surface routes and the suburban routes.

Since the TTC, along with GO Transit, have the highest cost recovery in North America by far, so I don't think we should worry about it so much. I don't think profitability is unrealistic goal for the TTC.

CDL.TO said:
Quite right, SeanTrans.

I'm talking about a change in how individual routes are assessed for profitability. That should have no bearing on overall costs for the entire system.

Also, think about the difference in calculations that could happen if you apply the revenue to the route that the initial fare was paid on versus if it was an average spread across the whole system. Routes with a higher proportion of Metropass users would be disadvantaged in the first scenario... a minor calculation difference creating what could be a major difference in results.
Click to expand...

But Metropass users do provide revenue for the TTC, why exclude them?

Also I don't think where a fare is paid makes much difference. For example, someone who pays a fare on the subway and then transfers to the a bus route will pay a fare on the bus on their return trip, so it probably doesn't make much of a difference.
 
Here is a site that compares various aspects urban areas around the world.

Since it is a little outdated, it shows Toronto having "only" 61% transit cost recovery. But even then it points out how much Toronto stands from the rest of North America and Australia, which average only 35% and 40% respectively.

Toronto now has an even higher transit cost-recovery of around 80%, MUCH higher than even the average European city. In fact, Toronto's transit cost-recovery ratio is closer to Asian cities than it is to European cities...
 
doady said:
But Metropass users do provide revenue for the TTC, why exclude them?

Also I don't think where a fare is paid makes much difference. For example, someone who pays a fare on the subway and then transfers to the a bus route will pay a fare on the bus on their return trip, so it probably doesn't make much of a difference.
Click to expand...

I was providing it simply as an example of different ways that fare recovery could potentially be calculated. Geez.

Of course Metropasses bring the TTC revenue, but the TTC doesn't track where people are using their Metropasses. For the hypothetical example perhaps the TTC would just assume that the ratio of cash/ticket to Metropass was the same for each route thereby disadvantaging high-Metropass routes in their calculations.
 
I could have been clearer, but in my view I prefer a thread discussion with a smooth flow reflecting a conversation between people around a table. Taking the effort to frame every post and provide context as to exactly what it is one is referring to can be frustrating and clunky and I would like to think should also be unnecessary. Just read the original posts fully and completely and confusion shouldn't occur.
 
from thestar.com

Provincial takeover of TTC cost proposed
Panel reviewing city finances advised to upload services with `regional implications'
Feb 08, 2008 04:30 AM
Tess Kalinowski
Vanessa Lu staff Reporters

Toronto should consider letting the province take over the cost of the subway system and other TTC services with "regional implications."

That's the advice Ontario's transportation planning chief, Metrolinx chair Rob MacIsaac, has given a six-member independent panel reviewing the city's finances.

"My advice was that Metrolinx did represent an opportunity for the city in terms of uploading some services that had regional implications," he told the Star yesterday.

While MacIsaac said he was referring to a provincial takeover of the costs of operating and building subways, not actually running them, such a move is likely to come with strings "in terms of expectations of quality and quantity of service – better quality, better connectivity, more seamless service," he said.

"The Yonge line is the busiest transit line in the country. There are lots of folks who need that line to be working well," he said.

MacIsaac met privately with two members of the city panel, including chair Blake Hutcheson, before Christmas, but stressed he hadn't spoken to any of them since and didn't know what they would recommend. The volunteer group, which holds its final meeting today, was asked to assess the city's financial performance. It may deliver its report and recommendations as early as next week.

Mayor David Miller announced the independent review of the city's finances last October on the eve of the crucial vote on a land transfer tax.

While the subway has the most potential as a regional resource, MacIsaac said other possibilities include the planned Transit City streetcar lines, where they extend to Toronto's borders.

Metrolinx, officially the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority, was formed by Queen's Park last year to create a transportation plan for the GTA. "We need to identify a regional network of both transit routes and perhaps roads and make some recommendations around those assets in terms of our investment strategy going forward," said MacIsaac.
 
Not really, considering:

While MacIsaac said he was referring to a provincial takeover of the costs of operating and building subways, not actually running them, such a move is likely to come with strings "in terms of expectations of quality and quantity of service – better quality, better connectivity, more seamless service," he said.
Click to expand...

AoD
 
What harm can possibly come from diversifying service operators? More options equates lowered fares for customers and improved frequency of vehicles across the board. Like someone said earlier, the TTC could still run subways/streetcars because of their limited catchments. Buses on the other hand cover vast distances and if the TTC expects to route 20 buses per hour in some places and only AM/PM rush in others (especially if there's no alternative all-day routes nearby), then maybe its time someone lightens the load for them. Fare integration here's the key, such that drop-in box customers' revenue can maintain subways/streetcars without worrying about bus maintenence. Transit City and any future subway lines could also be handled by different companies so long as customers don't face a tariff getting from one system to the next.
 
Providing an acceptable quality of service, not cost recovery, should be the objective of a public transit agency. The Spadina streetcar is an improvement over the bus because it transports 19,000 additional people per day, even if it sacrifices a profit to do so.

I personally think that the province should take over the TTC and integrate it with the region. My only objection would be the aforementioned accountability to local transit needs but, really, the TTC is not exactly visionary when it comes to addressing local needs, anyway.
 
I agree, i don't the see the point in the province taking over the TTC unless they take over the 905 systems as well. The province runs GO yet GO is even more stingy than the TTC so I don't see the province making things better from a financial standpoint. If anything, the TTC will go even further into decline.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top