Finance

by

A Few Myths About Subway Capacity (Updated)

Updated October 18 at 10:15 am: A few comments about system reliability during bad weather have been added as a postscript to this article.

In a recent post, I wrote about the TTC’s Capital Budget and the projects that are creeping into view as the true cost of adding capacity to the subway becomes evident.

Once upon a time, the TTC was really worried about the capacity of Bloor-Yonge Station, and came up with a scheme to add a third central platform on the upper (Yonge) level, and possibly a second, eastbound platform on the lower (Bloor) level.  Interest in this project faded with the dwindling riding of the mid-1990s, but it never completely vanished.  Plans such as a Richmond Hill extension raised concerns about YUS capacity even before recent ridership growth took back the “surplus” capacity available for many years to hide the problem.

Independently of the third platform proposal, the TTC came up with a plan to add to the number of trains on the line.  If only they could convert to automatic train control (ATC), they could decrease the headway of trains and add to the line’s capacity.  In practice, what happened was that the TTC had to replace the existing, worn out signal system anyhow, but really wanted other governments to buy into the project.  At that point, ATC’s justification became not only the rejuvenation of the subway (a maintenance project), but a way to add capacity at lower cost than building a new line.

Of course, the trains the TTC was running, the H-series cars and the newer T1 fleet, are not equipped for ATC.  A retrofit of the T1 fleet is possible but expensive, and this drives a “need” for a completely new fleet simply to make use of ATC on the Yonge line.  In earlier fleet plans, the TTC treated the entire system as one pool and simply counted trains regardless of which type they might be.  Now, however, they need a “YUS” fleet that can run ATC and a “BD” fleet that will run with conventional manual controls.  (It is unclear what will happen if a BD train finds its way onto YUS trackage, say, for a diversion.)

With the recent, overdue arrival of the first TR train in Toronto, there were bold statements by the Mayor no less (although he was just parroting the TTC) about how these new cars would allow a 40% increase in subway capacity.  Well, yes, maybe, but there’s a catch.  Several catches, in fact.

Continue reading →

by

TTC 2011 Budget Preview — Part II: Capital

In my previous article, I reviewed the TTC’s preliminary information regarding its Operating budget for 2011.  Here I turn to the Capital Budget — the one that pays for major repairs, replacement vehicles and system expansion.

Following this budget from year to year can be challenging.  For the better part of a decade it has been clear that there would be a funding crisis as project deferrals accumulated, and now the dam has finally burst and big-ticket schemes are underway.  The early years of such projects tend to have low cash-flows because they are mainly design work and progress payments on smaller preparatory steps (such as the utility relocations and grade separation on the Sheppard East LRT).  Now, as spending builds on Transit City, the Spadina Subway Extension, replacement subway trains and streetcars, the demand for capital will grow.

During the 2010 Budget Cycle, many projects were deferred beyond 2019 so that they would not appear on the City’s or TTC’s books.  This made the depth of the budgetary hole appear more shallow than it really was.  If that were not bad enough, the TTC has created a new group of projects aimed at Yonge Subway capacity problems and, in the process, is partly pre-judging the outcome of a Downtown Relief Line study.  The combined result is that the funding shortfall shown as $1.344-billion in the 2010 budget papers for the years 2010-2019 has grown substantially, and there is now a funding shortfall of $2.8b for 2011-2020.

The staff budget report does not include a detailed breakdown of the projected funding sources.  Much more information was presented in the September 2009 report in the previous budget cycle.  (Note that the 2009 report does not exactly reflect the budget as it was eventually approved by Council.)

For the 2011-2020 budget planning, the TTC is taking the approach that it should show what spending is required, not just which projects fit within the available envelope.  This puts both Council and various funding agencies on notice about the true scope of future needs.  Council may not like the level of spending, but at least a debate is possible on the relative merit of transit programs.

In theory, this is a welcome change as it avoids the “surprise” factor when unplanned spending requests appear out of thin air.  However, there will be some debate about how critical some “required” projects might be, and what additional projects are still hidden out of sight.

The TTC estimates that restoring previously omitted items as well as new additions will raise the capital requirement by $3-billion over the next ten years.  That is a gross number, but the degree to which it will attract subsidies depends on the generosity and enlightenment of other governments. Continue reading →

by

Still Waiting for Transit Priority

Back on June 22, 2005, the matter of transit priority signalling was discussed at the TTC meeting.  Arising from that discussion, then Vice-Chair Olivia Chow moved the following motion:

1. That staff be requested to take the necessary action to implement transit priority signalling on Spadina by September 2005 at all locations where it is not already active, with a report back in the Fall of 2006 on the impact.

2. That recommendations 2 to 6 embodied in Mr. Munro’s submission be forwarded to TTC staff and City Transportation staff, with a joint report back to the fall meetings of the TTC and Planning and Transportation Committee.

This item has sat on the list of outstanding Commission requests ever since, but on the recent agenda, it was closed with the notation:

Memorandum dated September 2, 2010 forwarded to Commissioners.

It took a motion of the Commission and a bit of harassment on my part to get this memorandum.  It was not exactly worth the wait.

Transit Priority — Signal priority on St. Clair is complete.  Signal priority on Spadina will be completed by the City in December, 2010.  Signal priority on Harbourfront will be upgraded when the Queen’s Quay Revitalization Project is undertaken by Waterfront Toronto (date unknown).  Recommended comments and action:  Mark complete, and remove from list.

Continue reading →

by

TTC Service Changes Effective October 10, 2010

The TTC will implement various service changes next week.  Changes in headways and trip times are detailed in a spreadsheet in the usual format.

2010.10.10 Service Changes

Eglinton West Airport Corporate Centre Service Discontinued

Mississauga Transit has discontinued the TTC’s contract service to the Airport Corporate Centre, route 32B.  The 32 and 32A branches remain.

This change does not affect the 307 night bus service to Pearson Airport.

Finch East Service Reorganization

Service will be provided by three routes:

  • 39 Finch East will provide local service on Finch
  • 139 Finch — Don Mills will operate via Don Mills Road rather than via Highway 404 to reach Don Mills Station
  • 199 Finch Rocket will operate from Finch Station to Scarborough Town Centre via McCowan weekdays except for late evenings, and during the daytime only on Saturdays

This change eliminates scheduled short turns at Warden (39B) and at McCowan (39A/C).

For headway details, please refer to the spreadsheet.

by

TTC 2011 Budget Preview — Part I: Operating

At its recent meeting, the TTC considered a staff report on the 2011 budget including Operating (the so-called conventional system’s day-to-day costs and revenues), Wheel-Trans and Capital (major repairs and expansion).  The material in this report is only an overview of the full budgets to be presented at the Commission in January 2011.  Many details remain to be seen, not the least of which will be the TTC’s reaction to the prevailing political mood after the October 25 election.

In this article, I will deal only with the Operating Budget, and will turn to the others in future posts. Continue reading →

by

TTC Mobile / Trip Planner Not Quite Ready For Prime Time (Updated)

Updated September 18 at 2:30 pm:

The following additional “features” have been noted on the mobile interface (in addition to many reported in the comment thread):

  • Service alerts started to appear this morning with announcements about the Howard Park and Roncesvalles work.  However, there are two separate notices for the same thing, and no notice for the subway shutdown on the Spadina line.  If I call up the page for the YUS and ask for info about Yorkdale Station, I get a wealth of material, but not the vital information that there is no service today.
  • The service alerts are not hotlinked back to the longer version of the information on the main TTC site.  Of course the fact that the TTC has multiple pages describing the same project/diversion makes consistency on this sort of thing difficult.
  • When I call up a schedule for a route, I am presented with the weekday schedule, even though the system is smart enough to present me with the next three vehicles at my selected stop for Saturday.  This has long been a problem on the desktop version of the site, and clearly has not been fixed yet.

Meanwhile, NextBus still doesn’t know about where the King car is these days.  In the west end, it is back on King east of Roncesvalles, but in the east end the Queen diversion from Church to River is not reflected in the stop list.  The TTC really needs to have a simple way of modifying NextBus info to reflect where routes really are.

Original Post from September 17 at 23:52:

On September 17, the TTC announced an updated version of its website with mobile device support, as well as an improved (and no longer “beta”) trip planner.

I kicked the tires briefly, and was only mildly impressed.

Continue reading →

by

The Mysteries of TTC Subsidies (Update 2)

Updated at 3:20 pm, September 7: Metrolinx wrote pointing out that there is a ten-year cash flow for the “5-in-10” Transit City projects.  It is at pages 25-26 of their presentation.  [Note that Metrolinx has fouled up its website, and their presentation is no longer visible.  The link here is to the two-page cashflow taken from their report and posted on my site.]

Updated at 10:00 am, September 7: The section on funding of Transit City lines has been clarified to distinguish between announced and suspected funding strategies.

Updated at 10:40 pm, September 4: A small section has been added near the end about the problem of creative project descriptions and their effect on capital planning.

Politicians love to claim that other people don’t know what they’re talking about.  Even transit commentators and activists like me say this sort of thing, but the pols tend to be more aggressive in their tone as they play for media and public attention.  Reading the source material helps, but it can be a long slog.

As a service to my readers and would-be transit financial analysts, here is a review of how TTC subsidies work.  The primary source material for this article is the draft audited financial statements of the TTC for 2009 which were published in May.  They are “draft” only in that, when published, they had not received formal Commission approval which has subsequently been given.

A journalist whose bluster is greater than his accuracy recently implied that the TTC was hiding its financial results when in fact they have been available for months.  This sort of thing passes for penetrating analysis in some quarters.

Continue reading →

by

Buses vs LRT: “And”, Not “Or” (Updated)

Updated September 6, 2010 at 4:50 pm:

Anna Mehler Paperny of the Globe and Mail writes about the difficulties of getting around on a bus network where service leaves much to be desired.

The better way? Don’t get Janet Fitzimmons started.

The East Scarborough resident lives less than five kilometres from her work in the Kingston Road-Galloway Road area. But the bus ride takes a good 40 minutes – once the Lawrence Avenue bus comes, if it isn’t full. If the weather’s nice, her commute is faster by foot.

“But I’m lucky: I’m able-bodied and healthy.” And, she adds, “my commute isn’t bad for Scarborough.” A colleague of hers takes three buses to traverse what’s barely a seven-kilometre direct trek.

Meanwhile, Tyler Hamilton of The Star tells of the travails of attempting to use service on Kingston Road in The Beach.

Last Tuesday I needed to head downtown – Bay St. and King St. – for an event. […] It was rush hour. I seemed to have plenty of time, so I decided to take the 503 Kingston Rd. streetcar route. Checked the schedule. Walked to my stop and arrived what I thought was 10 minutes early.

No streetcar. Twenty minutes later, no streetcar.

This is rush hour, remember. Finally a bus that would take me along Queen St. arrived and the driver encouraged me to get on. “The 503 won’t be coming. Take Queen St.,” he says. “It will get you close. Hop on.”

I hop on. A man sitting across from me leans over and says, “TTC, eh… it means take the car.” I offer a forced chuckle. The bus drives along Kingston Rd. for five minutes and then reaches Queen St. “Time to get off,” the driver says. Huh? I join a herd of passengers exiting the bus. Apparently I should have known about transferring onto a Queen St. streetcar.

Confused, I wait. I wait. I don’t see a streetcar. I see a cab. Hail it. It will be worth the $20 at this point – enough money, mind you, to drive half a month in my Honda Civic.

I share my frustration with the cab driver. “The TTC is good for the cab business,” he replies with a smile.

Of course, a regular rider would know that there is no such thing as a 503 car, at least not until September 7 when streetcar service returns to Kingston Road.  The scheduled bus service is every 12 minutes on the 502 and 503 providing a supposedly blended 6 minute headway.  Take the first thing that comes along if you’re going downtown.  If it’s a 502, change to the King car at Broadview if you want King rather than Queen Street.  This is the sort of survival tip a regular will know, but a novice won’t.

By the way, the streetcar services will run every 15 minutes, with an allegedly combined service of 7’30”.  Don’t hold your breath.  A big problem with both of these routes is that they are short-turned and wind up missing the very customers they are intended to serve.

Add to this the appalling off-peak service and you have a recipe for driving away customers.  The 502 bus or streetcar is scheduled every 20 minutes, but only a few days ago I waited 36 minutes for one to show up.  I had not just missed one, and so the gap was easily over 40 minutes.  By the time we reached Queen Street westbound, we had a light standing load even on that wide headway, and we had also passed two eastbound 502s.  That’s right:  3 of the 4 buses on the route were east of Coxwell.  This is called “line management”.

The real irony is that the 12 Kingston Road bus comes and goes at Bingham Loop every 10 minutes.  There is better service east of Victoria Park than west of it on weekdays.  Evening and weekend service on the 22A Coxwell is better than on the 502.  This is one of the few places in the TTC where weekday service is worse than at any other time, and that’s assuming the weekday service is vaguely on schedule.

An important part of improving bus services generally is that the TTC must stop thinking of the outer parts of lines as places where short turns and unpredictable, infrequent service are acceptable.

Continue reading →

by

What’s a Fair Share?

The question of a “fair” allocation of TTC revenues between the farebox and subsidies comes up quite regularly, often at budget time, but now also in the election campaign.  Some argue that the riders don’t pay enough, while others argue that they pay too much.  Rarely does anyone look at the detailed figures.

The TTC publishes a statement, as part of the Chief General Manager’s more-or-less monthly report, showing a breakdown of revenues and costs.  The report linked here takes us to the end of May 2010.  (There are separate accounts for Wheel-Trans which is not part of this discussion.)

There are three sets of figures:  data for the current 5-week period (this interval is used to avoid variations due to lengths of months), year-to-date data, and full-year data.  These are further subdivided by actual and budget values.

On the income side, the total 2010 revenue is projected at $957.515-million against expenses of $1,412.034-million.  However, within the revenue, only $905.200m comes from the farebox, while $52.315m comes from other sources.  Charters and services operated under contract for transit systems in the 905 are on at least a break-even basis.  Although the expense of running them appears as part of the system’s total, this expense is completely offset by revenue (projected at $17.675m for 2010).

On the expense side, the total cost for subsidy purposes is reduced by two deferred items:  post-retirement expenses and accident claims.  These do not require cash outlays in the current year because they not be paid until future years.  This gets us to a net cost for operations of $1,368.684m and a projected shortfall of $411.169m.

The City has actually budgeted for a shortfall of $429.805m, but the TTC’s ridership and fare revenue held up better than expected in 2010, and the City’s full subsidy provision will not be required.  Any leftovers remain under the City’s control for year-end budgetary adjustments.

Continue reading →