How to Make Mass Transit Financially Sustainable Once and for All

[doady]

The City gets around $160M annually from the Ontario Gas Tax. In 2012, $91.6M in gas tax funding was used for the TTC's operating costs, and $75.0M was used for the TTC's capital costs, so that's $166.6M total for the TTC in 2012.

So with Hudak's promise to cancel the gas tax funding, TTC will have to find another $167 million. With just over $1 billion coming from fares, then all they have to do is raise fares 16% to make up the difference.

Or the city can increase property taxes to raise $167 million.

Yeah, of course. Which is a large part of why a certain prominent 905 mayor has endorsed the Liberals and criticized Hudak. Tim Hudak as premier would result in huge increases in property taxes and/or huge cuts to municipal services. He's Mike Harris 2.0.

 

[ksun]

Most are much cheaper, but then again Toronto does have the lowest per rider subsidy in North America (and therefore already the closest to being financially sustainable) so it's not surprising.

That being said, a 28 day pass in Washington D.C. is $230 (http://www.wmata.com/fares/purchase/passes.cfm) and a 30 day London Travelcard for Zone 1 is approx. $220 (https://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/tube-dlr-lo-adult-fares-jan-2014.pdf). NYC passes are only $112USD, but MTA is nowhere near to being financially sustainable. GO transit is obviously much more expensive than the TTC and they continue to experience tremendous growth and overcrowding during peak periods, so there is clearly plenty of demand out there.

Personally I think we need to adopt a zone system similar to that in place in London. Longer trips generally cost more to serve than shorter ones, and the alternative (driving) is also more expensive. I've heard the argument many times that we need to encourage people in the outer suburbs to take transit by keeping fares low, but what about encouraging them by improvement service frequency, introducing express options and reducing overcrowding? Higher fares will allow all of this to happen.

Yep, Washington is indeed very expensive. Not sure why.

I prefer London's fare system too. They have peak fare and off peak fare, in addition to fare zone - that's the best combination to charge according to demand/supply I believe, I also like their daily cap thing, which makes our day pass redundant. Isn't that nice? I really think TTC should follow suit.

Encouraging long distance commuter is one thing, being fair to all riders is another. It is disingenuous to assume if subway fare is $1.5 higher from the farthest station, people will suddenly drive to downtown for work. Here at the Eaton Centre, parking alone is $18 a day, (15-16$ in some buildings). Raising long distance commute modestly won't discourage them from taking transit at all. Keeping fare artificially low for long distance trips at the expense of others is simply not wise - the TTC might end up losing money on both ends.

 

[doady]

The longest distance for the TTC is Malvern to Long Branch. Is there so many people doing this the TTC needs distance fares?

Distance fares make sense for a regional system. TTC is not a regional system. It's a local system for local trips and most people use it for that purpose.

If TTC wants to enourage even short trips, then it should have time-based transfers, like the rest of the GTA.

As for the idea of raising fares in the suburbs to improve service, just look to YRT to see how effective that strategy is.

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

Malvern to City Hall is almost 30km - that's not a local trip! In a rational world, that trip should be made on commuter rail. It makes zero sense that it costs the same to travel 30km on bus+SRT+subway+subway as it does to travel a few stops downtown, and by keeping flat fares we are incentivizing people to waste their time riding local buses for long trips, and voting for politicians that promise subways to the end of the city instead of frequent all-day GO service.

 

[W. K. Lis]

In the Far East, transit companies own the shopping centres, office buildings and residential buildings surrounding stations. They get the rent and leases from those buildings as a big source of revenue.

In North America, that would be considered a monopoly and be a no-no. Can you imagine if the TTC actually owned the Eaton Centre and Yorkdale?

 

[1overcosc]

ECLRT is NOT a true P3, because the design work is still done by Metrolinx, only construction is tendered. And the government still coordinates construction, and has separate contracts--there's a contract for one tunnel section, another for another section, another for stations (and surface line segment I think), whereas in Ottawa it's one contract, all in, with all design past the EA being done by the contractor too, and the city government having literally no role in construction. Much more potential for cost savings. The project budget of $2.1 billion was exceeded significantly when the city began detailed design. A number was never released but early leaks were showing that the cost had ballooned to something like $3-4 billion. And then they went with a P3, and the contractor did enough value engineering to bring the cost down to its original budget. Try to imagine that being in Toronto... you can't, because its never done. Project costs are just allowed to balloon and the government swallows it up.

 

[BurlOak]

ECLRT is NOT a true P3, because the design work is still done by Metrolinx, only construction is tendered. And the government still coordinates construction, and has separate contracts--there's a contract for one tunnel section, another for another section, another for stations (and surface line segment I think), whereas in Ottawa it's one contract, all in, with all design past the EA being done by the contractor too, and the city government having literally no role in construction. Much more potential for cost savings. The project budget of $2.1 billion was exceeded significantly when the city began detailed design. A number was never released but early leaks were showing that the cost had ballooned to something like $3-4 billion. And then they went with a P3, and the contractor did enough value engineering to bring the cost down to its original budget. Try to imagine that being in Toronto... you can't, because its never done. Project costs are just allowed to balloon and the government swallows it up.

I am not convinced that P3 is the best, but I agree that the only way P3 makes sense is if the entire project can be given to one contractor so they can find savings from top to bottom.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I am not convinced that P3 is the best, but I agree that the only way P3 makes sense is if the entire project can be given to one contractor so they can find savings from top to bottom.

Maybe import foreign workers to work on it at slave or minimum wages? That's what some would hope as a way to save money. They did that when they built the first continental railway in Canada and in the United States.

 

[ksun]

Maybe import foreign workers to work on it at slave or minimum wages? That's what some would hope as a way to save money. They did that when they built the first continental railway in Canada and in the United States.

Canada's minimum wage probably is a lot higher than what those "slave workers" can make in their own country.
Instead of habitually throwing words like "slave workers" and "sweat shops", why don't we look at the issue more objectively

1) those workers are willing to work in Canada, and they are protected by current Canadian labour law (no "slavse") and even by paying them 1/3 of what Canadian union workers make, they will make more than at home. They will be paid a *fair" wage. With fair it doesn't mean making $48 an hour and getting paid for 8 hours for 5 hours of actual work.
2) We can have infrstructure built much faster at a much lower cost (which means being more responsible for taxpayers).
3) a significant portion of the high price tag of subways is labour. We simply can't afford it without raising taxes which is bad for both the economy and everyone's standard of living.

I really see it as a win-win situation. The only loser is the greedy unions who constantly use "fair pay" to desguise the fact that their wage and entitlement is anything but fair.

 

[1overcosc]

I don't know... one of the big bonuses to infrastructure spending on things like subways is the massive amount of money it puts back into the economy. Bringing in foreign workers who will be paid very little and just remit most of the money back home, that won't put much more money into our economy. Whereas paying Canadian workers, means those Canadians will spend those wages at Canadian shops, on Canadian real estate, etc. thus ensuring the money circulates in OUR economy.

 

[ksun]

I don't know... one of the big bonuses to infrastructure spending on things like subways is the massive amount of money it puts back into the economy. Bringing in foreign workers who will be paid very little and just remit most of the money back home, that won't put much more money into our economy. Whereas paying Canadian workers, means those Canadians will spend those wages at Canadian shops, on Canadian real estate, etc. thus ensuring the money circulates in OUR economy.

Your argument makes absolutely no sense.
You completely ignore the fact that the higher cost is on taxpayers' back. While those workers have more money to put back to the Canadian economy, every cent is offset by the lost income in tax for everyone who won't have the money to spend on the same Canadian economy.

You also forget the fact that foreign workers will need to spend in Canada as well. It is not like that they can work remotely from their home country building subways.

And you also fail the mention the cost associated with much longer construction period and therefore more congestion cost to Toronto. As I mentioned before, the average time to build a subway in Toronto is 10 years, in China it is 3-4 years (construction only, excluding regulatory approval, relocation etc.). Gridlock is costing Toronto $11 billion a year, or $55 billion for a 5 year construction period difference.

Longer construction also means shops have to close longer. Business suffers longer and have less taxes to contribute.

The perceived necessity of using local workers to build expensive subways is based on nothing but political pressure and gimmick math, as well as outdated and misguided stereotype (slogans such as slave workers, sweat shops etc). Instead of striving for the least costly way of doing things, we do the most popular way with bad excuses.

 

[Voltz]

Your argument makes absolutely no sense.
You completely ignore the fact that the higher cost is on taxpayers' back. While those workers have more money to put back to the Canadian economy, every cent is offset by the lost income in tax for everyone who won't have the money to spend on the same Canadian economy.

You also forget the fact that foreign workers will need to spend in Canada as well. It is not like that they can work remotely from their home country building subways.

And you also fail the mention the cost associated with much longer construction period and therefore more congestion cost to Toronto. As I mentioned before, the average time to build a subway in Toronto is 10 years, in China it is 3-4 years (construction only, excluding regulatory approval, relocation etc.). Gridlock is costing Toronto $11 billion a year, or $55 billion for a 5 year construction period difference.

Longer construction also means shops have to close longer. Business suffers longer and have less taxes to contribute.

The perceived necessity of using local workers to build expensive subways is based on nothing but political pressure and gimmick math, as well as outdated and misguided stereotype (slogans such as slave workers, sweat shops etc). Instead of striving for the least costly way of doing things, we do the most popular way with bad excuses.

Why don't we just replace everyone's job with cheap foreign workers then? Including yours.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Why does the province and the city keep "upgrading" the building code? That only increases the price.

Go back to knob-n-tube wiring. It was cheaper back then, copper is too expensive these dates, go without the ground wire. And lower the main breaker amp ratings. So what if the wiring gets warm to the touch, it'll help melt the snow.

And why do we require elevators and escalators? The first Yonge Subway was made cheaper without them.

Kiddin'

 

[officedweller]

And why do we require elevators and escalators? The first Yonge Subway was made cheaper without them.

The standard configuration at SkyTrain stations in Vancouver (even new ones like Canada Line) is
- elevator for handicapped access, up escalator and stairs (for both up and down).
There may be space for a future down escalator if warranted.
Busy stations will may get both up and down escalators from the outset.