Updated June 4 at 10:20 am: The Star has published an article discussing road tolls and other ways to squeeze money out of drivers to pay for transit improvements. David Gunn weighs in on the folly of a Sheppard subway, and Toronto’s transit woes in general.
Updated June 2 at 2:00 pm: Inside Toronto has published an article discussing the zoning increases needed to make the Sheppard Subway a reality. This includes an illustration of the intersection at Victoria Park developed at the density likely to exist. The drawing is from Tridel, a well-known developer, not from some wild-eyed lefty trying to frighten the locals.
Although Mayor Ford has disowned the concept of road tolls as a revenue source for subway funding, Gordon Chong continues to press the issue saying:
“I was hired to put all the options on the table and that’s what I’m doing. Road tolls are off the table for the Ford administration. But they’re still part of the toolbox. If you choose not to use that tool, that’s your choice.”
Honesty about the real cost of Ford’s obsession with subways is rare, but refreshing.
Missing from the discussion is the whole question of what development at this density will mean for suburbs through which subways are built, and by extension along Eglinton Avenue which may encounter the same fate. Just because you have a subway (or underground LRT) doesn’t mean that the neighbourhood or the roads can accept the resulting traffic and population. Many people who live in the new buildings along Sheppard do not travel by TTC, and they will simply add to congestion on the road system.
Updated May 28 at 10:30 pm: The Star has published a followup article with reaction to Royson James’ column.
Original post from 9:18 am, May 28:
Today’s article by Royson James in the Star brings the astounding news that the crew running City Hall have already run aground on their mad scheme to build subways with private sector investments.
Gordon Chong, the former TTC Commissioner and politician hired to run Toronto Transit Infrastructure Limited (TTIL) has barely moved into his office and is already talking about tolls and congestion charges. How this will sit with the “war on the car” crowd remains to be seen.
The subways will also need better government funding and higher development fees.
According to James, Chong says that
claims that the private sector will step in and build the line on their own are not realistic
This statement should surprise nobody, but coming from the current administration at City Hall it is an astounding admission of the bankruptcy of thought behind the Ford transportation plan. What was touted as a miracle of private sector investment quickly has turned into the usual exercise of looking for government handouts and new revenue tools. The private sector might be lured in somehow, but to what degree and to what benefit is uncertain. After all, with a potload of public investment, there’s less reason to give away the store in return for private capital.
This view, not yet an official City policy but certain to generate lots of debate, has implications for Metrolinx whose own “Investment Strategy” will be funded from the same collection of revenue tools. How many hands will be in motorists’ pockets at the toll booth, and is there enough revenue available to both municipal and provincial treasuries to build all of their pet projects?
Discussions at the provincial level have deliberately kept a low profile for fear of spooking voters, but the background info has been out in reports and workshops for a few years. If we want a big transit network, we have to pay for it, and this will mean public sector investment on a grand scale, however it might be disguised in neocon flim-flam.
When TTIL was created and Dr. Chong hired to run it, I feared the whole question of sound financing would disappear into research and consultation for an extended period, long enough to get Mayor Ford through the troubles of the coming 2012 budget cycle. With Chong’s public acknowledgement that private sector financing won’t get us anywhere, we must turn to the larger question of Ford’s fiscal wisdom and the state of Toronto’s finances.
Coming years will not be pretty for transit budgets as the City wrangles its deficit, and Queen’s Park sits back saying “you’re already getting enough”. Now at least one of Ford’s team has the courage to say there is no Tooth Fairy, no pot of gold hidden at City Hall to fund the something-for-nothing plan Ford sold to gullible voters.
Steve Munro 
If this keeps up, I think the next headlines will be: “Finch and Sheppard to be LRT”, “Eglington to be surface LRT to fund Finch and Sheppard lines”, and “Fords taking credit for stopping Sheppard gravy train”.
LikeLike
Steve:
I must concede that the time spent reading your website has changed my thoughts towards subways a little bit. I would always have understood the folly of building a subway to an empty field in Vaughan, but in the past I might have been seduced by the apparent attraction of a Sheppard subway. However, with the knowledge gained from your insights and those of the other contributors to this site, it is now clear that it does not make sense to build transit capacity that is a mismatch to demand, both now and in the foreseeable future. The Sheppard subway is simply a waste of money in pursuit of a poorly thought out ideology. (My belief is that there is no actual pro subway belief – the project is merely a smokescreen for a desire to rebalance priorities in favour of the car.)
My use of the word “waste” is based on the merits of the project and should not be confused by the apparent belief by our mayor that all public investment in infrastructure is a waste. Our society is actually quite wealthy, and we can afford to have properly funded medical care, education, transit and many other things that have a positive impact on our quality of life. (Including the Fort York Bridge.) Unfortunately, governments at various levels have allowed themselves to be painted into a corner where they are unable, or unwilling, to raise the necessary taxes to get the job done. There is plenty of wealth in our city, province and country – just a lack of commitment to provide a desirable quality of life for all.
However, having said that there is a limit to even our considerable level of wealth. Money that is squandered on an unnecessary subway is money that cannot be spent on something else. Somewhere in our society someone is going to have to “do without” the good that could have been delivered by that 4.2 billion dollars. Meanwhile, the operating costs of an underused subway will continue to drain the wealth of future generations.
Mr. Chong’s proposed revenue tools – road tolls in particular – might be useful ways to improve government revenue for the benefit of our society. However, wasting that money while other priorities – including transit – remain underfunded is indefensible.
LikeLike
No doubt the $60 per year vehicle registration tax will be looked back on with some nostalgia!
LikeLike
The last two paragraphs in the article are rather telling.
Why does “It Falls Apart” by The Odds come to mind all of a sudden?
Road tolls serve a function that goes beyond just revenue generation, as it has the potential influence to shift cultural habits. I think that the inherent rebalancing of resource consumption that could conceivably result, and the financial implications that represents, is something that self-proclaimed pro-market types should acknowledge, even if it is not popular.
Steve: The “pro-market” types tend to be uninterested in, if not openly hostile to, anything that might shift cultural habits away from cars. Indeed, they would claim that pricing adjustments such as tolls are an artificial interference in the natural operation of the market. This would not, however, prevent them from arguing for lower fuel taxes when that market charges more than the politicians’ constituents can bear. The “free market” is for everyone else. For true believers, it’s subsidies all the way.
LikeLike
I think people did not like the fact that the Vehicle Registration Tax was on both the municipal and provincial levels and felt they were paying twice. I think if Toronto implements a different tax (i.e. entertainment tax) that went to things such as transit, I am sure people would be more open to the idea.
Steve: Entertainment tax would be charged on items such as movie tickets which already bear HST from the Feds and Queen’s Park. We would be paying three times. No, the real problem is that people don’t like paying taxes without seeing a direct immediate benefit, and it suited the Ford faction to bundle this into the “war on the car” mythology of his campaign. It also made a very easy and quickly implemented “victory” once he came to office. Good theatre. Lousy financial planning. Maybe we should charge an entertainment tax on Council.
LikeLike
I do not mind if they implement road tolls but all of the money has to go towards a combination of projects that help to reduce the number of people driving into and around the city. I am worried that part of the revenue generated from road tolls would start to be used for things such as taking down the Gardiner or general expressway maintenance.
LikeLike
It’s refreshing to see that someone so close to the administration, and this administration in particular, is being so open about the need for revenue tools that may be unpopular. Lots of people and organizations — including groups like the Toronto Board of Trade — have called for a grown-up discussion on these types of measures in order to be able to finance transit improvements that will make a dent in the GTA’s gridlock, but it’s been a political third rail, even amongst “sympathetic” politicians.
The problem, of course, is to what extent the Fords’ fantasy Sheppard subway would have the effect of making a dent in traffic congestion, or at least providing the entire city with travel options, especially compared with Transit City and/or the Big Move. People may be persuaded to pay road tolls, parking surcharges, sales tax surcharges, bear taxes etc. if they feel that the fees are being applied equitably and that the benefits will be widely shared across the city. (For example, when the Board of Trade advocated for measures such as road tolls, it was in the context of speeding up implementation of GTA-wide measures in the Big Move.) They may be less impressed at the financial calisthenics that turn out to only really benefit a small segment of the city. Imagine how Rob and Doug’s Etobicoke taxpayers would react to paying a $5 toll to drive on the Gardiner, solely to pay for a subway out in Scarberia.
So while it’s good that some of these measures don’t seem to be political suicide anymore (and in direct contrast to a certain somebody’s mayoral campaign less than a year ago), we need to see the purpose of the funding guided back to the GTA-wide improvements as originally intended.
LikeLike
In regards to earlier comments on an “Entertainment Tax”, we were paying an “Entertainment Tax” levied by the city. There was a 10% entertainment tax on movie tickets for example. They used to print the amount of that tax on the movie tickets. I don’t know if that tax is still around after the HST was implemented.
In regards to the Royson James article, Ford basically got rid of a $60 tax on vehicles and canceled Transit City but now one of the folks in his camp is proposing road tolls which would end up costing motorists more than the $60 vehicle registration tax. Oh, and on top of that we don’t get Transit City while a Sheppard subway extension to Scarborough Town Centre still may not happen. Clearly the emperor has no clothes.
LikeLike
I wonder how many Scarborough residents who voted for Ford are now wishing they had voted otherwise……….No subway in the foreseeable future yet had Transit City continued they would now be looking forwards to a great LRT system.
Never mind pro Ford residents … as you continue to travel in the over crowded buses or “slog” it to work in your car at snail’s pace you can think of the old saying “marry in haste and repent at leisure”.
LikeLike
While old Toronto enjoys a fair and decent transit service, suburbanites will now live in their car-addicted hell for a long time. What a good choice you made folks, now live with it for years to come.
LikeLike
I had the pleasure of visiting the McCowan carhouse today and spend a good half hour speaking with a TTC instructor outside the yard. The subject came to rapid transit in Scarborough and the man’s eyes misted a little. He said that he’d love to see the Eglinton line make it out Kennedy, but that he “remembered other plans . . . .” He didn’t explicitly say so, but he seemed not to believe that the Eglinton line will become reality, at least not as conceived, pre- or post-Transit City.
I thought about this exchange while making my way to Roncesvalles. If the private sector is unwilling or unable to build the infrastructure this city needs, and if our governments are also unwilling to lead–this is what a gubernator is, a helmsman–then this seems nothing if not hopeless.
LikeLike
This isn’t specifically related to subway financing, but I think it is about wise use of resources.
We went to Doors Open today. We started by taking the subway to Main Street, bus to Queen, streetcar to Neville Park to visit the R. C. Harris filtration plant. Afterward, we waited a while, then five ALRVs showed up. We got on the first and went back westbound in convoy.
While I was always inclined to believe Steve when he wrote about line management, seeing this sort of ineptitude live really brings home how absurdly incompetent the service management really is. How hard would it be to arrange for the vehicles to leave the terminus on a five-minute headway? There is no possible legitimate reason for vehicles to leave the terminus significantly closer than scheduled headway.
(Note: I know actual TTC staff read this sometimes. This is meant to criticize the entire structure, not any specific employee. I know front-line staff have to do what they are told to do, and even individual managers don’t have the unilateral ability to change everything. I’m sure a detailed study could reveal individuals who are contributing to the problem, but for me the goal of any change would be to fix the problem, not find people to blame. All the employees with whom we interacted today were very helpful and friendly and they deserve commendation for helping to make the experience good for the kids.)
Afterward, we took more streetcars to get to lunch and then over to Roncesvalles where the kids very much enjoyed the trip through the (street)carwash and the old cars, not to mention the model streetcar layout and the service pits. We got turned out of a 504 on the way over due to an impromptu (i.e., it was labelled for Dundas West when we got on) short turn but even so we were lucky enough to have no really uncomfortable waits, even given three children in tow.
While there, we also had an opportunity to see the CIS control room. It was explained that runs appear in white for on time (0), green for ±1, ±2, and red for more than two minutes off schedule (if I remember correctly). Well, right here we know part of the problem: for frequent service, headway management is the way to keep things working properly rather than slavishly insisting that each car follow a pre-determined timed schedule. I suppose that convoy left as a convoy because all cars were “late”—the first one by 20min, the next by 15min, etc.
But even for runs that should be scheduled, the idea that being ahead and behind schedule are equivalent is totally bogus. No vehicle should ever leave a timepoint so much as one second ahead of schedule, because by doing so one may be leaving behind people who arrived at the stop with a reasonable expectation of being able to board the vehicle. The only purpose of the transit service is to pick people up and drop them off later at a different location, so anything that detracts from this single goal is clearly incorrect practice. Between timepoints, with modern technology I can’t see any reason for vehicles to get more than about a minute ahead of schedule.
So the colour codes should be something more like (assuming “+” means late, which I’m not sure matches actual practice) white for 0, green for +1, +2, yellow for +3 through +6, red for +7 and up, red for -1, and blinking red with a big red crosshairs and an exclamation mark for -2 and below.
As far as I can tell line management could be improved by just using the existing technology properly, for trivial budget. This would dramatically improve the overall utility of the TTC and I believe the ROI would be very good, albeit somewhat hard to measure financially since most of the “R” would be in the form of improved quality of life.
LikeLike
I’ve been wondering how soon it will be before we’re told that the city has to sell off every possible asset/property and out-source as many operations as possible – Not because of ‘respect for taxpayers’, but because the Sheppard Subway extensions somehow become an inescapable liability. I can hear it already – “Just ’cause there’s a $4 Billion subway on the books… That’s not why the budget’s short. Don’t talk to me about subways!” Next thing you know Ford’s going to say “I’m eating my cookie…”
By the way, has anyone else noticed that Rob Ford speaks in half sentences most of the time? Reminds me of Mel Lastman, although even he managed to form more structured sentences now and then. No surprise the two biggest bonehead Toronto mayors of all time both pursued a Sheppard Subway.
LikeLike
And somewhere tonight, Sarah Thomson is shaking her head while wondering why her idea is suddenly viable a year later.
LikeLike
It sounds like Dr. Chong is coming as close as he possibly can to saying that some parts of Transit City actually made sense.
It will be interesting to see what the net results will be. Who will blink first?
Somehow I think/hope that Rob Ford will concede on the proposed Finch West “LRT” as long as Finch is widened from Keele westwards – allowing him to save face on that corridor.
As for Sheppard, as the potential for extension to STC starts to look worse and worse, maybe we will see a final push to extend the Sheppard line westwards to Downsview (instead of STC) as a last ditch attempt to get a subway built.
Looks to me that in the absence of clear direction from Toronto’s Mayor/Council, the city’s public transport future will be in the hands of GO Transit and the 905 transit authorities for now.
Now, if someone can find a way to convince CP to allow GO Trains on their rail line running through the middle of Toronto … with “interchanges” to various subway lines at 3 or 4 points crossing Toronto … they just might find a way to transform public transport in Toronto.
Dr. Chong, do you think you can handle it?
Cheers, Moaz
LikeLike
Many of the contributions to this discussion do not seem to consider that road tolls are a non-starter in Toronto. It might be good that the issue is being discussed and it’s significant that it’s being raised from within the mayor’s administration. But the fact is that the implementation of tolls will happen over the mayor’s politically dead body. That means no road tolls anytime soon.
However, I would think that Ford will not let his pet project fail. He spoke about subways in the campaign. He’s going to have to build something. He might want to have shovels in the ground, or at least some kind of concrete plans to take back to his suburban voters by 2014 rather than cancelled lines and broken promises.
So the ball is in the mayor’s court now. We might be hearing from him soon. I believe eventually he’ll work out some way to get money from the public for this ‘private sector’ project. I just don’t think he’ll be waging his own ‘war on the car.’
Steve: Yesterday I was asked by CITY-TV about road tolls, and I repeated my position that as a “transit advocate” I worry that assuming motorists should always pay for transit improvements is a poor tactic. There is huge resistance to tolls, and this means we lumber transit proposals with a political fight that diverts resources and time from actually doing anything. Moreover, transit benefits everyone and should be paid for with broadly-based revenue sources such as a regional sales tax. Metrolinx is already grappling with the fact that their Big Move will cost a lot of money and won’t address all of the demands in the GTA equally because of the dispersed nature of some demand patterns. Asking motorists who may or may not directly benefit to pay the freight for transit raises questions of fairness and could lead to political gridlock on funding.
LikeLike
Denis T said: “While old Toronto enjoys a fair and decent transit service, suburbanites will now live in their car-addicted hell for a long time. What a good choice you made folks, now live with it for years to come.”
I don’t think so. Best transit service exists at and around the subway lines, both in the old Toronto and in the outer 416. On the other hand, service in the parts of old Toronto located east and west of downtown is no better than in the suburbs.
LikeLike
It’s good to hear that the idea of dedicated taxes for transit expansion gains traction; particularly, when the support comes from a right-leaning politician.
However, if road tolls, a GTA fuel surtax or similar revenue tools are introduced, it would not be wise to direct $4 billion to the Sheppard corridor when there are many other pressing needs; notably, the DRL.
LikeLike
I saw one of the old PCC streetcars running on the Spadina line yesterday. What a beautiful sight. They are in revenue service every Sunday this summer on the 509 Harbourfront route.
LikeLike
Denis T wrote:
“While old Toronto enjoys a fair and decent transit service, suburbanites will now live in their car-addicted hell for a long time. What a good choice you made folks, now live with it for years to come.”
I hear this sentiment a lot. I suppose being able to blame this mess on the other makes people feel better. I am glad no inner city councillor has gone down that route. However, I could see the rise of an inner city demagogue who spouts this sort of stuff in the future, if we don’t encourage people to get out beyond their comfort zone. As a frequent TTC traveller across the city, I am amazed about the complexity and richness of it all. I am also conscious that most people, from both inner city and inner suburbs don’t get out and see how each other lives much. There are far more similarities then differences.
Without getting into a full on rehash of the election, lets just say that the provision of a coherent vision for the city as a whole, however flawed, was what people across the city (somewhere between 20-30% of the downtown voted for Ford) bought into.
The question now is what is going to be done with this mess.
From a toll tax will come the question of value for money. Until now, the Sheppard line extension hasn’t really had to deal with that sort of scrutiny. We’ll see how much scrutiny this poorly thought out idea can stand when every other bit of city business is being looked at in strong detail.
Steve: The words “coherent vision” and “Ford” do not belong in the same sentence. He may have given the impression of a unified outlook, and the sense that it would be so simple to fix the perceived woes of past years, but “coherent” does not automatically imply “thorough”, “sensible” or “practical”.
LikeLike
Denis T wrote:
“While old Toronto enjoys a fair and decent transit service, suburbanites will now live in their car-addicted hell for a long time. What a good choice you made folks, now live with it for years to come.”
There are suburbs in Toronto and people living “urban” lives in the suburbs. Not everyone in Mississauga or Markham is living in a 1500-2500 sq ft. detached 4-bedroom house with a massive 2-car garage out front.
I live in an apartment on a major public transport with 2 “regular” (every 20 minutes) and 2 “express” (every 10 minutes) services that alternate nicely so I never have to wait more than 10 minutes for a bus. My trip from home to U of T, for example, never took more than 55 minutes.
Many of the suburban areas have good road infrastructure and enough space to allow for more density – and the will to provide “local” and “mainline” bus services – with service expanding. It’s not perfect and definitely not as good as Toronto, but it is also not the public transit hell that you might assume.
Cheers, Moaz
LikeLike
I think the media has forgotten to remind people often enough (I have seen them remind people, but less and less frequently as time goes on) that the original campaign pledge was to have the Province pay for most of Sheppard’s costs. That was really the only way to do it without any new taxes, tolls, or other charges (although the Province supposedly plans to implementing something via Metrolinx sooner or later), and this was, to be fair, acknowledged in the YouTube campaign video.
Sheppard was going to be paid for by a level of government all along, it was only a question of which level of government (or how much each), even though at the end of the day, it’s Toronto-generated tax-dollars either way (the 416/City of Toronto does, after all, subsidize the rest of the country to the tune of $14B that leaves Toronto and doesn’t come back to Toronto annually, and climbing each and every year).
Steve: Of course the tiny problem was that Ford’s campaign claimed it could repurpose $3.7b from the “current provincial commitment” and add $300m from development charges to make up the $4b his plan would cost. If you think good planning consists of two extensions to an underperforming subway line, ditching Finch, Eglinton and the rest of Transit City, then in a warped way this might “make sense”. No matter what, Ford’s pledge has always been that his plan wouldn’t cost the taxpayers anything. Not true. Never was.
LikeLike
A crack has formed in the Ford plan. Wasn’t the Miller Transit City fully funded? Maybe the Dumb and Dumber brothers will bring back Transit City plan. We can only hope.
Steve: TC was funded, sort of, up to the level of completing Sheppard, Eglinton, Finch (west from Keele) and the SRT (to Sheppard). However, changing Eglinton to fully underground soaked up most of the money. I say “sort of” because Queen’s Park kept pushing the funding off into future years, far enough that a project could die on the vine waiting to start while a new government changes priorities. The whole idea of a fast start to Transit City was to prevent this from happening, but Miller was sandbagged by provincial funding cuts leaving far too much vulnerable to his successor’s meddling.
LikeLike
So Ford’s plan originally wanted the BD line to absorb the SRT. Now the Crosstown is absorbing the SRT.
Isn’t an LRT and a subway kind of same thing technically, both electrical trains just some differences but overall the same thing.
Steve: Yes, technically, but LRT can run on shared right-of-way while subway cannot. That’s the heart of the difference.
Remember those old (I think GM) buses from the 90s (you see them being used on 6 Bay) where you could ring the bell a million times (I did that when I was in high school and I apologize to all the TTC drivers that drove the 43 Kennedy bus), now look at the current fleet of buses. Current buses are upgraded but at the same time they are both BUSES, same thing. If I were to drive you in my car, if you sit in the front or one of the back seats, it’s still me driving you in my car.
Aren’t LRT cars like mini subways (thus cheaper?). I am trying to think if the SRT replacement going to the Crosstown is better or worse than going to the BD?
Steve: The cost comparison depends on the vehicle, the scale of implementation, etc. LRVs tend to cost more per passenger than subway cars because the subway cars are (a) bigger and (b) trains share equipment between cars that must exist on every LRV. For example, you must have a full propulsion control system, air (for brakes and suspension), and interface with any automatic signalling system on every LRV, but you don’t need six sets on a new TR train. This saves a lot of money, but the offset is that you have to build and operate more expensive infrastructure.
If it went to BD, then we’d lose Ellesmere, Midland and McCowan. The Crosstown-SRT would keep the stations.
When did Ford change the SRT being absorbed by BLR to Crosstown?
Steve: That change came as part of the deal with Queen’s Park. I suspect this was requested by the province, not by Ford.
By the way:
Steve said: “Ford’s pledge has always been that his plan wouldn’t cost the taxpayers anything.”
This is one of my biggest pet peeves. If Queen’s Park pays for any transit project … it still comes out of MY wallet. If Ottawa … MY wallet.
When will politicians from all levels realize that there is only ONE set of taxpayers. At the end, no matter which level of government pays for transit projects. It is still the SAME taxpayer pays for things. I don’t care if Rob Ford says it, Adam Giambrone, David Miller, Karen Stintz, Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, Barrack Obama.
The one small difference is that if provincial money comes, then someone in Thunder Bay, Kenora, Ottawa, Windsor, Gananoque or Peterborough might be paying for the Sheppard Subway and most likely will NEVER ride the Sheppard Subway.
If federal money … someone from Nanaimo could be paying.
Steve, how do you prevent yourself from becoming a bitter something from all these promises? I asked you long LONG time ago “what if someone changes their mind and cancels Transit City?” voila we are here, then what if someone goes back to LRT, then back to subways … I honestly don’t see REAL TRANSIT in your lifetime or my lifetime coming to Toronto.
Steve: I have learned not to count on “promises” until I can actually see construction and ride the service, although this last letdown was particularly depressing considering how close we were to finally getting an LRT network that did something useful rather than one or two subways to nowhere. Now, I have to look on the bright side and enjoy (but not too much) the unravelling of Ford’s financial schemes. I say “not too much” because he will move heaven and earth (and a few Councillors) to be able to deliver on his promises and get re-elected. There’s also the provincial Tories to worry about.
Schadenfreude is best enjoyed when one is sure one’s opponent has really lost.
LikeLike
Road pricing must not be conceived as a means to pay for transit. It will generate needless resentment from motorists. It is much better to conceive it as a congestion fee, matching the supply of scarce roadspace to the demand. Plus, this would show a direct link between the fee and the service: pay $2.50 (or whatever the market bears) and you get to drive on a nice, open road and get home fast.
The fact that the extra revenue can also be used for subways is (as they say) all gravy.
LikeLike
Neocons never let the waste of sunk funds interfere with their ideologically driven imperatives. I don’t know how much Mike Harris squandered by reversing the Eglinton subway which was already “shovels in the ground”. Mr. Ford did not hesitate at all in wasting the $150mm in development cost that has been expended on TC. It is likely that if Mr. McGuinty had not skimped on his funding commitments that Rob Ford would have wasted even more when he cancelled TC.
LikeLike
I can’t wait until Mike Harris #2 is elected in Ontario. If Rob Ford thinks he has it rough with the McGuinty government with transit funding, just wait until all of the cuts Hudak will make to transit. Quite a shame really and yet Ford thinks that a Hudak government would be good for transit and he will of course endorse him. Ford’s dream is about to become a nightmare that he’ll enjoy living in. I honestly wish the McGuinty is re-elected but at this point I think it won’t happen and transit will once again crumble all around Toronto.
LikeLike
From the Ontario Tory platform: “We will stop the war on the car. Our transportation policy needs to be a balance between public transportation and the cars we drive.”
It could be taken straight from Ford’s platform. Also shows that the “war on the car” is either Ontario-wide or a right-wing fiction.
There are a few more transit mentions, including increasing the gas tax transfer and letting municipalities set priorities, but no really clear statements. They may hope to impose cuts, but they are not expressly running on it.
LikeLike
Moaz Yusuf Ahmad said: “As for Sheppard, as the potential for extension to STC starts to look worse and worse, maybe we will see a final push to extend the Sheppard line westwards to Downsview (instead of STC) as a last ditch attempt to get a subway built.”
I’d think the never ending quest for an extension to Victoria Park would be the last ditched attempt for subway construction along Sheppard.
LikeLike
The Tory platform is committing $35-Billion in infrastructure spending over the next 3 years, most of which is on transit and transportation. Regardless of how the breakdown actually works out to be, that’s some big money, delivered in a swift timespan.
Steve: It’s almost impossible to spend that amount in such a short time, and my guess is that this means many announcements, but little actual outflow of cash. Don’t forget that The Big Move was worth $50-billion (before inflation and extras like the Eglinton tunnel), but that stretched over 25 years. According to the Star’s coverage, the Tories are only talking about $3.7-billion in new yearly spending, and that won’t pay for a promise ten times the size.
LikeLike
What ridership level was predicted by the original Sheppard Subway EA? Did it state 5,000 pphpd as is now acknowledged?
Steve: The original study projected a much higher ridership, but it also projected demand at Wellesley Station near 50k/hr which would have been impossible. There were serious problems with the way the demand model was set up because, for example, it made no allowance for the growth of commuter rail lines and the Sheppard subway was the only route to which it could assign trips from NE Metro to downtown. The demand projection was cooked to “justify” the subway.
One must be very careful with demand projections to determine how they might be biased for or against a proposal.
LikeLike
I’ll add to this my paraphrase of an old Chinese proverb: ‘If you elect a chicken, you’ll be stuck with the chicken; if you elect a dog, you’ll be stuck with the dog.’
LikeLike
That is EMBARRASSING.
When I was browsing through my Google Reader I found two blog post one above the other.
In one I just found out that Toronto is struggling just to complete one subway line. (This one)
In the other I just found out Paris is going to add 125 miles of new metro lines.
Steve: It’s amazing what a commitment by various levels of government of about $30-billion can do for a rapid transit scheme. The cost/km works out to about $150m, and it will be interesting to see what mix of underground and surface construction this entails. Almost one quarter of the cost will be raised by new taxes on “commercial activity”, and the state will use its powers of eminent domain (expropriation) to acquire and redevelop land around future stations. This is a very different situation from Toronto where everyone flees from any talk of new taxes.
LikeLike
‘…if provincial money comes, then someone in Thunder Bay, Kenora, Ottawa, Windsor, Gananoque or Peterborough might be paying for the Sheppard Subway and most likely will NEVER ride the Sheppard Subway.
If federal money … someone from Nanaimo could be paying.’
Miroslav, I don’t really think this would be the case. While the amount varies, based on who is doing the estimating, there is no doubt that vast amounts of GTA raised tax revenue is spent elsewhere in Ontario and Canada by higher levels of government. As a citizen, (who pays taxes – the price of citizenship) I strongly support the basic concept of equalisation. This makes it, in my opinion, right that the richer parts of the country will always pass some of their wealth to those less well off.
However, in the current situation, it seems very likely that the balance has shifted so that the GTA is subsidising the taxes of equally well off people elsewhere who do not pay their share. On that basis if the higher levels of government spent money on meaningful infrastructure in the GTA, they would merely be giving us back a more equitable part of our own money rather than asking people from elsewhere to subsidise our lifestyle.
LikeLike
Drivers already pay for congestion – it’s just they pay with their time (a non-renewable resource) rather than with their wallet.
Radical idea: turn the express lanes of the 401/427 into HOV lanes. That would really encourage car pooling…
LikeLike
Toll roads are coming, like it or not. The Gardiner and DVP should be tolled. No reason not to. There are alternate routes. The majority will choose to pay. Just look at the 407 toll road. No shortage of vehicles using it. Remember the Mayor of London, England who introduced a congestion charge for private cars going to the core of the city? Everyone said it was political suicide. Yet, it worked, congestion relieved, traffic improved and he was not turfed out. However, the one thing he did first was to get plenty of public transit buses in place. That is what made it work. Toronto will try it without the boosted transit component and it will be a mess.
LikeLike
Hi Steve
I just noticed this in “The Star”. Royson James has fired another direct hit at the Sheppard Subway.
Steve: I was at an almost surreal meeting of the Planning & Growth Management Committee today where the Sheppard and Finch services were under discussion, and Royson James sat in for a good chunk of the discussion. I will be writing up my own thoughts in the next 24 hours.
LikeLike
Steve: No offense, but could you please check out this link.
It is a story posted by the Post whereby Chong is being quoted as saying that the Ford idea of financing the Sheppard line was “almost inconceivable”, at least according to Royson James.
One small question regarding the Eglinton LRT and the Sheppard subway. Just what is the difference between a subway that has trains underground that surface occasionally, Ie. Bloor line and an LRT, Eglinton, which are small trains that go underground and surface occasionally. Semantics probably, but a burning question at the moment.
Steve: Eglinton is more and more like a subway subway than an LRT thanks to the province caving in to Ford’s insistence on underground construction. There is always the possibility that Ford won’t last more than one term, and a future administration could choose to return to surface operation, at least for whatever part of Eglinton remains unbuilt at that time. There will also be more flexibility on the SRT where full-blown subway trains will not fit on the existing alignment or stations, and where the extension to Malvern might wind up partly on the surface. The single biggest difference is the size of the trains.
LikeLike
So the illustrious Mayor Ford’s illustrious plan for his Sheppard stubway extension is apparently withering on the vine. Well, there’s still the fact that the subway is still the stubway and right now I’d still like to see something of an extension to it because, as I’ve said before here, at least part of the ridership problem on that line is the fact that it’s the Subway to nowhere and that any extension at all is bound to help out at least some. Leaving it a stubway isn’t going to solve the ridership problem one single solitary iota.
LikeLike
When reality hits Ford hard, he’ll have to concede and reincarnate Transit City, but with at least one subway extension…that being the Sheppard west to Downsview.
From a $ standpoint where countless studies, proposals, EA’s that determined Transit City LRT projects would be costing less to build and gain a lot more ridership then subways alone, if he wants to run for more then one term, he’ll have to turn his subway obsession and give what Toronto needs to leap forward into this decade and future generations.
LikeLike