Premier Kathleen Wynne and What Her Election Means for Transit

pman said:

Since:
1. rapid transit projects will have 50-100 year lives, if not longer
2. long-term interest rates are really low

Why can't we consider a long-term funding solution for transit, where a provincially-guaranteed agency borrows the money very long-term (which probably means 30 years) with a 50-year plan to pay off the debt via a mix of GTA road tolls, additional taxes on parking spaces and perhaps an additional GTA gasoline tax. The notion we have to pay for transit out of general provincial revenues is pretty much a guarantee we'll never build anything more. And the idea that we can only pay as we go for projects more or less ensures we'll never build anything remotely adequate.

Click to expand...

Exactly what I've been thinking. Take out a loan for $XX Billion and create legislation to ensure it's paid off in full over a few decades via transit tax. Nothing wrong with carrying a little debt. But the big issue with this is that the Conservatives would surely scream about this plan. If this were to be done, now would be the time to do it before the Conservatives get in power.

pman said:

Since:
1. rapid transit projects will have 50-100 year lives, if not longer
2. long-term interest rates are really low

Why can't we consider a long-term funding solution for transit, where a provincially-guaranteed agency borrows the money very long-term (which probably means 30 years) with a 50-year plan to pay off the debt via a mix of GTA road tolls, additional taxes on parking spaces and perhaps an additional GTA gasoline tax. The notion we have to pay for transit out of general provincial revenues is pretty much a guarantee we'll never build anything more. And the idea that we can only pay as we go for projects more or less ensures we'll never build anything remotely adequate.

Click to expand...

Oh absolutely.

But Wynne shouldn't be leading the charge with the sound-bite about tolls. That's the point. She needs to let the bureaucrats do their job, not create sound-bites, and reluctantly acquiesce to it (twist my rubber arm) when it comes out, after a public debate.

She has to be political about this, not simply practical.

It's kind of a shame this conversation couldn't have been had earlier, when the Liberals had a majority government and we knew for sure when the next election would be. Having this talk during a minority government just opens the door to posturing (particularly on the part of conservative politicians) to 'vow to end this tax burden' and score political points.

Never underestimate the ability of conservative politicians to get their supporters foaming at the mouth over a 'liberal tax and spend' financing plan. It doesn't take very much spin on something like this to get public opinion to turn on it very quickly, regardless of how good of an idea/needed it is.

Peepers said:

Road tolls are a terrible idea because only the rich can afford to pay them. That leaves the average Joe to make his way to work on clogged secondary roads. It would be a disaster if the Gardiner or any other highway in the GTA was tolled.

Click to expand...

Average Joes are not poor people. If you are average by Canadian standards, you are very very rich by world standards.
Plus, if a person can afford a car and drive it on a daily basis, apparently he is not poor by any means. Stop using "what happens to poor people" as an argument against tolls. Poor people don't drive and tolls are unlikely to affect them.

I am very glad that she is considering charging by distance. I think it is the only fair way to go.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tra...sed-fares-could-help-pay-for-expanded-transit

balenciaga said:

I am very glad that she is considering charging by distance. I think it is the only fair way to go.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tra...sed-fares-could-help-pay-for-expanded-transit

Click to expand...

The article doesn't say that she is considering it. It only says this advocacy group is recommending it, and thinks Wynne should consider it.

Fare-by-distance ... on one hand, I'm not sure why I should pay $2.65 for my trip on Saturday that was only 4 streetcar stops long (1.0 km) long. On the other hand, fare-by-distance is very difficult to govern on surface vehicles - even London doesn't charge fare-by-distance on it's buses - only the subway and trains.

If tolls come in on the DVP and the Gardiner what will be the effect on the parallel arterial roads? How many will travel the Gardiner to the West Mall or DVP to Steeles only to exit to avoid tolls?

What will be the effect on surface transit routes of an action such as this when buses become entangled in overcrowded streets? What will be the environmental cost of extra congestion in city streets, lengthening trips and adding to idle times?

They talk about charging 905'ers for use of the highway. So does that mean people who live at Don Mills and Steeles would be forced to pay tolls if they live on the north side of Steeles while people living meters away would be able to ride the highway free of charge even though both residents are literally steps from the highway entrance?

What will be the effect on business in the city of this? Would those 905'ers choose to shop and eat in the city when they could save a few bucks by staying out? I know many of the people on this board would rather suburbanites stay away from "their" restaurants and clubs but I doubt the owners and employees of those businesses feel the same way.

nfitz said:

The article doesn't say that she is considering it. It only says this advocacy group is recommending it, and thinks Wynne should consider it.

Fare-by-distance ... on one hand, I'm not sure why I should pay $2.65 for my trip on Saturday that was only 4 streetcar stops long (1.0 km) long. On the other hand, fare-by-distance is very difficult to govern on surface vehicles - even London doesn't charge fare-by-distance on it's buses - only the subway and trains.

Click to expand...

it is difficult but not impossible. Passengers can be required to tap twice. I am sure a GPS system can accurately tell how long this person travelled. SHouldn't be too expensive as each cellphone nowadays has a GPS. If a passenger doesn't tap before getting off, the maximum amount will be deducted. I know people will complain about the hassle and argue "What happens to the poor people who live in the suburbs" etc (although most of them are not poor), whatever. asking people to pay more (although fairly) is never popular but shouldn't prevent us from doing the right thing.

That being said, starting with the subway is a good idea. People making short trips should stop subsidizing those who travel 3 hours everyday. Imagine someone who travel from East Scarborough to YYZ pay the same fare as someone travelling from Dundas Stn to Bloor station. It is like 20X the distance maybe?

balenciaga said:

it is difficult but not impossible. Passengers can be required to tap twice. I am sure a GPS system can accurately tell how long this person travelled.

Click to expand...

Require a passenger to tap to get off a surface vehicle with 4 sets of doors? How do you know when they are getting off? What if they get off to let other passengers off? What if they can't back on? Also the GPS is often unreliable ... it normally knows where the vehicle is - but sometimes loses them - particularly downtown with tall towers. Say I've got two kids with me ... not only do I have to make sure they get off the streetcar safely without getting run over, I need to get each one to tap off?

Seems like a way to make transit usage even less convenient.

balenciaga said:

That being said, starting with the subway is a good idea. People making short trips should stop subsidizing those who travel 3 hours everyday. Imagine someone who travel from East Scarborough to YYZ pay the same fare as someone travelling from Dundas Stn to Bloor station. It is like 20X the distance maybe?

Click to expand...

Possibly ... but you'd still have to institute tapping off. Which makes all our subway stations with built-in bus terminals problematic. You'd have to redesign a lot of stations to put fare gates in. Only a handful were designed for this - such at Main Street, which is why the mezzanine is so large down there - for the old fare gates, because it was the zone boundary.

I would be fine with zone based fares, but it can only raise so much. to raise the 40 billion needed, you would have to have HUGE fairs.. ($10-$15 to get from brampton to downtown)

balenciaga said:

it is difficult but not impossible. Passengers can be required to tap twice. I am sure a GPS system can accurately tell how long this person travelled?

Click to expand...

Person gets on and waits 2 stops and taps to get off. Person exits the vehicle 25 stops after that.

Without a fare gate at every doorway that opens/closes for each tap, this is what a large percentage of riders will do.

Having that fare gate and forcing customers to have their card ready to exit will make the stops take longer and increase expenses (extra vehicles, drivers, fuel, etc. required to maintain the same capacity of the line). This doesn't impact the subway because the exits are separate from the trains.


It works with GO buses because they have a single entrance/exit next to the driver (pretty hard to sneak an early tap-out) and the large distance/low capacity means deboarding time is less of a concern.

innsertnamehere said:

I would be fine with zone based fares, but it can only raise so much. to raise the 40 billion needed, you would have to have HUGE fairs.. ($10-$15 to get from brampton to downtown)

Click to expand...

considering you are going to another city 45 kms away via frequent transit, $10 is not too bad.

Plus, I assume this trips only happens occasionally, since if you need to get to downtown everyday, you are not supposed to live 45km away.

nfitz said:

Require a passenger to tap to get off a surface vehicle with 4 sets of doors? How do you know when they are getting off? What if they get off to let other passengers off? What if they can't back on? Also the GPS is often unreliable ... it normally knows where the vehicle is - but sometimes loses them - particularly downtown with tall towers. Say I've got two kids with me ... not only do I have to make sure they get off the streetcar safely without getting run over, I need to get each one to tap off?

Seems like a way to make transit usage even less convenient.

Possibly ... but you'd still have to institute tapping off. Which makes all our subway stations with built-in bus terminals problematic. You'd have to redesign a lot of stations to put fare gates in. Only a handful were designed for this - such at Main Street, which is why the mezzanine is so large down there - for the old fare gates, because it was the zone boundary.

Click to expand...

I agree Nfitz. Seems harder than thought, due to our integrated system!

Despite it, I think it will be the trend going forward, especially with the subway extension. It makes perfect sense. We can't gouge short trip passengers any more. Build more subway fare gates. Actually get rid of the existing turnstiles, which are pretty outdate technology anyway. TTC should enter 21st century someday....

balenciaga said:

considering you are going to another city 45 kms away via frequent transit, $10 is not too bad.

Plus, I assume this trips only happens occasionally, since if you need to get to downtown everyday, you are not supposed to live 45km away.

Click to expand...

it happens thousands of times a day...in ever growing numbers....because the province has, by policy, said "500k people in Brampton is not enough....you have to grow".

Whenever I read fare by distance discussions (which those dreaded commuters from Brampton and other 905 areas are already used to....3 different GO stations have 3 different fares to Union station because, you know, they have 3 different distances to Union) there is an underlying feeling that people want/advocate lower fares as much as higher fares. So, while people think (to follow the example) it is should be $10 to come in from Brampton they also seem to expect that the 3 stop subway trip should be lower than $2.65.......so if all those expectations are met, does it really raise more money via fares? If it does, is that extra money sufficient to warrant/justify the expense/changes to the system and the risk of losing customers through less "convenience".

TOareaFan said:

it happens thousands of times a day...in ever growing numbers....because the province has, by policy, said "500k people in Brampton is not enough....you have to grow".

Whenever I read fare by distance discussions (which those dreaded commuters from Brampton and other 905 areas are already used to....3 different GO stations have 3 different fares to Union station because, you know, they have 3 different distances to Union) there is an underlying feeling that people want/advocate lower fares as much as higher fares. So, while people think (to follow the example) it is should be $10 to come in from Brampton they also seem to expect that the 3 stop subway trip should be lower than $2.65.......so if all those expectations are met, does it really raise more money via fares? If it does, is that extra money sufficient to warrant/justify the expense/changes to the system and the risk of losing customers through less "convenience".

Click to expand...

Of course Brampton needs to grow, but as its own city, with jobs and amenities, not as a Toronto suburb. Toronto is 630km sq big. That's fairly large. If it is still not big enough for you, apparently it is your choice and don't complain it is difficult to travel from Brampton.

Lowering fares on short trip AND increase on long trip will most likely increase revenue, as most transit riders take longer trips, and low fares will encourage people to take transit instead of walking for 20 minutes.

Losing customers due to less convenience? Are you kidding? Someone would stop taking the subway to downtown because they need to tap their presto card one more time. What would they do? Driving to Eaton Centre or FCP and pay $18 a day for parking plus gas and possible tolls in the future? No matter what a hassle the transit is, it won't lose customers.