Metrolinx $55 Billion Plan

[W. K. Lis]

By law -- todays laws -- all reductions of property tax must be passed on directly to the renter. The city is extremely aggressive about enforcing this to the point where landlords register existing rent with the city and the city sends the notice to the tenant about their upcoming rent reduction.

The price of natural gas went up 20% over the summer. However, you can't increase the rent by more than 1.8% for 2009. A property tax decrease forces a rent decrease, but the natural gas price increase does nothing.

 

[khris]

Adam Giambrone, the city councillor who chairs the TTC and also sits on the Metrolinx board, said yesterday he had not seen a copy of the plan. But he reiterated the TTC's objection to a subway along Eglinton, which he said is not warranted given the projected ridership numbers and would cost as much as $10-billion compared with a light-rail line with an estimated $2.2-billion price tag.

He warned it would also take much longer to build, meaning it might not happen at all - the fate met by the last subway planned for Eglinton, upon which construction had already begun before it was cancelled in 1995 by the newly elected provincial Progressive Conservative government of Mike Harris.

"I think we have said very clearly that we are not going to build a Metro or a subway on Eglinton," Mr. Giambrone said.

I'm sorry... but what an idiot!
You can't use the "warning" that construction started on the Eglinton line, and then got cancelled as an excuse to not build it now. That was in 1995 before transit was a real priority and demand like it is now.
These people running the TTC have no idea what the people want. They're making decisions based on what the TTC wants. It's about time that the people get what they want and what they demand. Everywhere I look (not just on UT) people are saying they want a subway line for Eglinton.

 

[doady]

It's sad, if Transit City hadn't been designed replace to subway, and desigend to replace buses as it should have been all along, perhaps there would have been less opposition to it and the city could have had a world-class LRT system and world-class subway system at the same time. But due to their extreme hate of subway it looks like we will get neither.

 

[Kiwi]

So it looks like Metrolinx will actually fund 3 rapid transit lines in Hamilton, B-Line, A-Line and a new Line which I think Metrolinx called it T-Line.

Based on the map T-Line connects from B-Line somewhere in Central Hamilton to Meadowlands.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Converting the Sheppard subway to LRT would be mindnumbingly stupid.

An expanded Sheppard, as originally intended, would likely not have been any better off on an operations standpoint than the current Sheppard is (i.e. no evidence shows ridership would triple for double the length -- TTC and Metrolinx numbers both considered here).

As such, the fare increase when Sheppard launched would have been larger than it was.

Sheppard's ridership would surely double and could easily triple if extended to Downsview and STC. The whole corridor is growing quickly, and these new riders won't be relying on expensive feeder routes. It could also take riders off parallel/connecting bus routes (though it could also increase ridership on nearby routes...we can't know until it's done and being used by riders).

Or, we could extend Sheppard to York and then along Finch West to Humber, Woodbine, and the airport...such a line would have at least as much potential as Eglinton and in a world where connecting suburban dots is de rigeur, it has more dots than any line other than a DRL. It'd certainly take lots of buses off the road. A year ago I'd say such a line was pure fantasy map territory, but that was before there were serious proposals to build an SRT line from Malvern to the airport (this SRT line would cost at least $6B and probably $8B and would be longer than a Sheppard subway from the airport to STC via York U). $8B would, incidentally, be enough to build the entire Sheppard line I mentioned, and would 'free up' $2B of Transit City's total.

I'd like to see a pie chart showing where your TTC fare goes...X cents to the King streetcar, Y cents to the Finch bus, Z cents to surly old men manning the collector booths, etc.

 

[Whoaccio]

I'd like to see a pie chart showing where your TTC fare goes...X cents to the King streetcar, Y cents to the Finch bus, Z cents to surly old men manning the collector booths, etc.

You could do that with surface routes, but does the TTC publish cost recovery statistics for it's RT division? I only see station ridership levels, never the Yonge Line costs x to operate and generates y revenue. I presume most of the RT branch makes money, as most surface routes operate at about 50-60% cost recovery, below TTC average.

 

[officedweller]

As for P3s, I think they only make the pricetag look smaller in the short term. In the long run they will cost the government more. Look at the 407 for example. Even just building it privately ultimately takes more money out of government coffers. The money spent on our workers goes to pay income tax, sales tax on their purchases, helps save for their children's education, helps them save for retirement so that they can be self-sufficient in old age, etc. In my mind, hiring a private contractor in this case is just paying some rich people to do the government's dirty work.

Even if P3 projects are awarded to foreign contractors and hire in some specialized foreign workers (tunnel borers), they still involve a large number of local companies, firms, workers and employees - and that money works its way into the local economy. i.e. for the Canada Line, SNC Lavalin has a Vancouver office, local architects are designing the stations, local bridge engineers Buckland and Taylor designed the North Arm Bridge (and I think the Middle Arm Bridge), elevated guideway precast segments were cast in a new precast yard built in Vancouver close to the site, bored tunnel precast segments were cast in Nanaimo on Vancouver Island and barged to Vancouver, etc. etc.

The main benefit of a P3 is controlling schedule and costs (a fixed cost contract). The Canada Line was scheduled to open in November 2009, but is now expected to open early. Some reports say August 1, 2009.

WRT the operating portion of a P3 contract - the 407 was just a poorly negotiated contract. Who in their right mind would cede the establishment of fares/pricing to the private P3 party? For the Canada Line, Translink, the governmental agency retains those rights while transfering most (construction and operations/ridership) risk to the P3 contractor. TransLink retains some ridership risk, because the P3 operator is reliant on TransLink feeding passengers onto the line by bus.

 

[RedRocket191]

WRT the operating portion of a P3 contract - the 407 was just a poorly negotiated contract. Who in their right mind would cede the establishment of fares/pricing to the private P3 party?

I would not even consider the 407 a P3. It was a straight sale of public assets.

 

[EnviroTO]

What I really like about the plan:
1. Downtown subway line.
2. Improved GO service including all-day to more lines, 15 minute headways on some routes, and express services.
3. LRT used on many routes.
4. Having new routes meet at shared hubs to reduce transfers (i.e.Finch West and Sheppard. Jane LRT and Eglinton West GO / Eglinton LRT/subway )

What I am OK with:
5. Converting Sheppard to LRT in the short term. This costs very little to do as it only involves changing the profile of the platform and doesn't change the support structures at all. A single route without transfers from the airport, past Humber college, through Downsview and North York to SCC makes more sense than a Finch LRT from Humber college to Finch station, transfering to Yonge line, transferring to Sheppard line, transferring to Sheppard LRT, and getting near the SCC but having no obvious way of getting there.
6. Considering putting LRT on Eglinton in the underground portion under the condition that the underground portion is tunnelled and planned to allow subway use in the future... this means space for turnstiles and a booth when POP is replaced and tunnels large enough and with track laid to handle subway loading. If a tunnel is built for LRT only it would be an impediment to building subway when needed because the whole route would need to be shut down after building up ridership.
7. The numerous east-west routes north of Finch if what is there is a Steeles LRT, a GO busway, and Highway 7 LRT/BRT. This plan seems more organized in this repect because some proposals had something on Finch, in the hydro corridor, on Steeles, in the CN north rail corridor, a 407 busway, and a Highway 7 LRT which I think would have made the area the most overserved. The Metrolinx plan strikes a better balance in that the Steeles LRT doesn't start until Finch swings down to Sheppard, and there isn't both a 407 Busway and a Hydro Corridor Busway (redundant).

What I completely dislike:
8. That the SRT still exists. We just don't need this extra mode of transit in between LRT and subway nor do we need the extra transfer between Scarborough and Downtown. Make it subway to Scarborough Town Centre and LRT to Malvern as a continuation of the Sheppard Finch LRT.
9. The airport access is a spur line rather than a corridor diversion or loop which serverely limits the potential of the connection.

 

[carrefour]

As an example (being a Brampton resident) I am frankly a bit tired of the number of times in my working life that people have told me that soon I would be able to rely on two-way commuter rail service.

Aside from a 6:45 p.m. train that gets me part way home, there has been no meaningful change in the train service levels in the 20+ years I have been commuting down here....so another report telling me that it is now going to happen in the next 15 years does little to excite me....yes, count me cyinical too!

Well, considering that one aspect of this plan - the "DRL" possible aka Queen Street Subway was first proposed in 1911, I remain cynical as well.

The only thing I believe in without seeing concrete is God.

 

[rbt]

The price of natural gas went up 20% over the summer. However, you can't increase the rent by more than 1.8% for 2009. A property tax decrease forces a rent decrease, but the natural gas price increase does nothing.

Yes, that's correct. Nor would a natural gas decrease cause a rent decrease.

Nothing obligates the landlord to renew a lease unless the tenant negotiated that into their contract.

 

[rbt]

Converting the Sheppard subway to LRT would be mindnumbingly stupid.

Agreed. I would like to see it extended from Downsview OR Finch West through to SCC. In fact, I support both a fare increase for the operating costs (short term while grown occurs) and a 5% increase in income tax for the upper tax bracket, which hits me pretty heavily, to do it.

I feel very strongly that it is important to invest in the future of the city in order to increase my own wealth both in terms of dollars and in enjoyment of life.

Sheppard's ridership would surely double and could easily triple if extended to Downsview and STC. The whole corridor is growing quickly, and these new riders won't be relying on expensive feeder routes. It could also take riders off parallel/connecting bus routes (though it could also increase ridership on nearby routes...we can't know until it's done and being used by riders).

I'd like to see a pie chart showing where your TTC fare goes.

My very rough math was based on the final estimated savings by mothballing Sheppard indicated that todays Sheppard roughly breaks even with busses today. We know there was an initial fare increase when Sheppard launched to cover a sudden jump in operating costs.

If you assume operating cost is based on the length (equal station spacing, etc.) with a slight increase for increased train frequency and length resulting in about 3x the operating cost for an NYCC to SCC Sheppard subway over today.

3x the operating cost requires roughly 3x the ridership to result in an equal subsidy as today's Sheppard.

Like I said, very rough math. I would like to think it is on the conservative side and operating costs would only be double in actual implementation.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Rough math, yes, but only with a longer/finished Sheppard subway would you be able to start factoring in savings from having bus riders on routes like Finch or York Mills shift to the subway (precious few riders have shifted so far because the line isn't long enough...we know that virtually all the ridership growth has come from the Sheppard corridor, both along the subway and along Sheppard east of Fairview, like the 190, etc.).

We would simply not need to go broke extending a line like Sheppard, either for capital or operating costs...we're already looking to spend billions of dollars on Transfer City lines like Sheppard and Finch and even a small shift of bus riders to a longer/finished Sheppard line could make an operating cost difference considering the hundreds of buses that ply the east/west routes at great losses.

 

[lordmandeep]

Sanata Claus should send one representative from every family in the GTA to Berlin for one week where they can experience a transit system that works: Buses, U-Bahn, S-Bahn, and Regional Rail in perfect harmony. The trip would convince people that transit can work and change cities for the better in the process, and they would all come back ready to effect change.

with 84 billion dollars in debt, it should be paved with gold...

 

[isittimetomoveyet]

with 84 billion dollars in debt, it should be paved with gold...

Very good point. We cant go nuts to the point of having billions of dollars of additional debt, unless we can show and implement laws to repay that on a consistent basis, such as what the Dalton McGuinty proposed doing for MoveOntario 2020.