News   Aug 09, 2022
 1.9K     2 
News   Aug 09, 2022
 1.4K     0 
News   Aug 09, 2022
 603     0 

OneCity Plan

gweed123

Moderator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
7,821
Reaction score
1,548
Location
Burlington
datamouse:

The other revenue tools, given their nature, should be discussed in conjunction with other municipalities. However, there is nothing wrong with the city at least start the process and at least try to come up with a chunk of the money. Should those other sources materialize I am sure they can be worked into the plan. Any tax is a hot issue in Toronto - playing the waiting game just delays the inevitable.

AoD

Exactly. Some tools are better administered at the local level (tax increases, vehicle registration fees, parking fees, etc), while some are better administered at the regional level (road tolls, sales tax, etc).

What I expect to happen is that Metrolinx will propose some tools for revenue generation to get a "base layer" of permanent funding. This base funding will be divided up most likely based on population. This means that theoretically a municipality can do nothing on their own and just wait for their "funding pot" to top up to the point where they can build one of the projects on their list.

OR what they can do is implement tools on their own (like Toronto is doing) in order to supplement what Metrolinx will already be giving them, allowing them complete more projects in the same timeframe.

And if we get a National Transportation Strategy (hey, a guy can dream), then those funds would be added into the Metrolinx "base funds" as well.
 

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
17,120
Reaction score
16,001
No it's $180. Didn't we have this conversation?

indeed we did. take a look at this graph from the presentation. It shows a 4 year phase in of the tax, of a small amount each time. not a continuous escalation. a slow increase to $180, then it steadies out, with no more tax increases.

awdawd.png
 

datamouse

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2012
Messages
272
Reaction score
1
Again it's not like I'm opposed to OneCity's funding (I'll pay it) it just also seems a tad rushed when Matlow and Stintz just had their motion to look at transit funding approved by the executive council. I would have waited until fall when things (hopefully) became more clear with Metrolinx's plans and the like.
 

leopetr

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
386
Reaction score
54
All I can find for Sheppard are peak numbers 7800ppd [...] These should be comparable numbers and if you justify ridership for one you cannot ignore the other.

Yes, that peak number for Sheppard almost but not quite justifies having a subway between Yonge and Don Mills. There already is a subway between Yonge and Don Mills, though.
 

scarberiankhatru

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
5,274
Reaction score
6
Like Transit City, OneCity is a very poor transit plan. Quantity over quality. At least Metrolinx/MoveOntario had ambitious plans which included regional components and more than just little stubway lines a few kilometres long that save hardly any time, while adding transfers. Oh, sure, if we actually managed to get all these OneCity lines on the map built, we'd be in a better position than we are now (which says more about how underserved by transit Toronto is right now), but if we're going to all the trouble of carefully creating a master transit plan in response to previous plans we think aren't good enough, why not bother to sit down for a second and make all the components are useful and appropriate? They're not.

There's a *lot* of spaghetti being thrown at the wall here to see if it sticks, a crude mixture of previous plans as Superman mentioned a bit earlier in the thread. "It's a transit buffet for only $180 a year! Who cares what the food tastes like? Thank you, municipal politicians who are not Rob Ford!" is the reaction Stintz is hoping for.

For instance...
- Do they really think ending the Yonge subway at Steeles is going to help get funds flowing for transit in the 416?
- Most of the busiest routes in the city are still being left untouched, like Dufferin, King West, Finch East, etc.
- We'd get a DRL...sort of. There's almost no point in building the DRL unless it runs west of Yonge and north of Eglinton - the only way to significantly relieve the Yonge line and the Yonge/Bloor interchange is to run a Don Mills line up to Finch and there's way too much development beyond the YUS loop for a short link to King/Queen station to deliver on promises and effectively move people around.
- The Jane LRT is back from the dead with the same unrealistic price tag. By the time Spadina is extended, Finch built, Eglinton built, St. Clair extended, and some kind of line in the GO corridor is built, Jane is going to be moving smaller crowds than what it does now, let alone what is needed to justify spending billions of dollars.
- The obsession with Malvern and its light-ridership routes continues. This time, there's lots of streetcar ROWs running all over the place...except where people are going, like STC or Centennial.
- Token bits to appease modally ideological transit fanatics, like the Wilson BRT stub. "We're using multiple modes so everyone will be happy!" Fine, but why not Dixon or Steeles or McCowan? Why ignore a line in the Portlands and a subway extension past Kipling? I guess corridors and projects like these were not picked out of the hat when the other ones were.

Some things are nice to see even though they may never happen.
- A recognition that Danforth needs to go to STC (although by diverting everything else away from STC they're just killing the natural hub and forcing people out of their way). This is just another pendulum shift, though, in terms of the latest way to fix the RT.
- The connection from Humber to Pearson. Oh, look, we have a college campus, a mall, a racetrack/casino, and an airport, all lined up in a row waiting to be served by one transit line. Every other city in the world seems capable of recognizing corridors that have trip generators in a nice little row and building a line that connects them, efficiently consolidating travel patterns into one line. We're failing miserably on Sheppard with an idiotic streetcar ROW to nowhere, but maybe there's hope for a sane and continuous transit line on Finch.
- The revamped GO lines, though god knows how this would jive with GO's 40-year plan to improve service. Throw in a couple stations, change to more nimble trains, and run them more than 5 times a day and, hey, maybe people outside of Oakville and Ajax will benefit from these rail corridors.
- The idea of "Hey, let's spend MORE on transit than we are currently spending, and actually get MORE transit!" Rob Ford tried to do this but to no one's surprise he messed up. We know Stintz can do better job but she's starting from a very weak position with this unpolished transit scheme.

Yes, that peak number for Sheppard almost but not quite justifies having a subway between Yonge and Don Mills. There already is a subway between Yonge and Don Mills, though.

And when Eglinton moves less than that (and possibly less than what the 5km stubway moves now), it'll be perfectly fine because all those billions, more than what Sheppard would cost, will have been spent on light rail and not "a subway"?
 

M II A II R II K

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,892
Reaction score
997
I think it's really quite interesting that, despite all the hand-waving, this seems to boil down to -- OK Scarborough, if you want a subway replacement for the SRT, we'll do that. But you have to pay up for proper transit everywhere else, as well.

Who can also take an express line to go downtown bypassing the short stop spaced BD, and the Yonge transfer altogether.
 

nfitz

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
24,983
Reaction score
5,620
Location
Toronto
- Do they really think ending the Yonge subway at Steeles is going to help get funds flowing for transit in the 416?
That's your number one objection? The plan they released clearly shows the Yonge subway extending north of Steeles, with a big arrow. City of Toronto is discussing what they are funding, which would only be up to Steeles. But there's no indication here that the TTC would end the subway at Steeles, if people were willing to fund north of Steeles.
 

nautilus

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
if Scarborough wants subways why dont they pay for it themselves. Im never gonna be taking transit to Scarborough why should I have top pay for something I will never use especially when it costs billions.

If a certain area wants transit they should pay for it themselves.
 

Juan_Lennon416

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
1,739
Reaction score
269
Location
Toronto
if Scarborough wants subways why dont they pay for it themselves. Im never gonna be taking transit to Scarborough why should I have top pay for something I will never use especially when it costs billions.

If a certain area wants transit they should pay for it themselves.

I live in Scarborough and I'm never downtown. Does that mean I should not pay for the DRL or any upgrades to the streetcar system? :rolleyes:
 

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
17,120
Reaction score
16,001
For instance...
- Do they really think ending the Yonge subway at Steeles is going to help get funds flowing for transit in the 416?

if you watched the presentation they gave, you would extend the yonge subway "to steeles and beyond", probably signifying that they were willing to pay for the part to steeles, and the province / York Region will have to pick up the tab for the rest of it.

- Most of the busiest routes in the city are still being left untouched, like Dufferin, King West, Finch East, etc.

Just earlier you were claiming that this is trying to do too much..

- We'd get a DRL...sort of. There's almost no point in building the DRL unless it runs west of Yonge and north of Eglinton - the only way to significantly relieve the Yonge line and the Yonge/Bloor interchange is to run a Don Mills line up to Finch and there's way too much development beyond the YUS loop for a short link to King/Queen station to deliver on promises and effectively move people around.

Though I agree that the DRL should go up to Sheppard, I consider this quite good. a 10km subway line is no stub. (and it still has plenty of potential to be extended westward, which will likely happen when GO builds its new train terminal at Bathurst & Front.)

- The Jane LRT is back from the dead with the same unrealistic price tag. By the time Spadina is extended, Finch built, Eglinton built, St. Clair extended, and some kind of line in the GO corridor is built, Jane is going to be moving smaller crowds than what it does now, let alone what is needed to justify spending billions of dollars.

The spadina extension has always been factored into Janes ridership projections. the line ends at Steeles West station. Eglinton as well, and the St. Clair extension will do nothing but help usage levels on the LRT. I do share concerns with the Rail corridore project though. I suspect the rail corridore will just be 10 stations instead of 2, with it being electrified and having 5 minute frequencies instead of 15.

- The obsession with Malvern and its light-ridership routes continues. This time, there's lots of streetcar ROWs running all over the place...except where people are going, like STC or Centennial.

The fact that all of these miss centennial is saddening. a SELRT extension to Centennial makes more sense than one to Malvern town centre. The Malvern LRT has been justified since the original TC proposal, as it fills the transit gap of that area. and there will be access to STC from that part of town, its called the Ellesmere BRT. heads right from the Malvern LRT to STC. there is presumably more demand to head downtown (to the bloor subway) than to head to STC, hence the LRT to downtown via the Bloor Danforth subway, and the BRT to STC.

- Token bits to appease modally ideological transit fanatics, like the Wilson BRT stub. "We're using multiple modes so everyone will be happy!" Fine, but why not Dixon or Steeles or McCowan? Why ignore a line in the Portlands and a subway extension past Kipling? I guess corridors and projects like these were not picked out of the hat when the other ones were.

probably not steeles because York has mused about funding its own BRT on that street, and you can't fund everywhere. so if you are going to fund something, you may as well build the part that has NO chance of being built otherwise. McCowan will have a subway running on it, so no need for a BRT. Dixon because the upgraded ARL is a km north, and the Eglinton Crosstown 2km south. Wilson has no east-west lines running anywhere near it for several km in both directions.

Some things are nice to see even though they may never happen.
- A recognition that Danforth needs to go to STC (although by diverting everything else away from STC they're just killing the natural hub and forcing people out of their way). This is just another pendulum shift, though, in terms of the latest way to fix the RT.

and to shut up the Scarboroughians about not getting a subway. and to eliminate the Transfer at Kennedy. Though yes, I find it to be largely a political move. (as well as Sheppard west)

- The connection from Humber to Pearson. Oh, look, we have a college campus, a mall, a racetrack/casino, and an airport, all lined up in a row waiting to be served by one transit line. Every other city in the world seems capable of recognizing corridors that have trip generators in a nice little row and building a line that connects them, efficiently consolidating travel patterns into one line. We're failing miserably on Sheppard with an idiotic streetcar ROW to nowhere, but maybe there's hope for a sane and continuous transit line on Finch.

agreed.

- The revamped GO lines, though god knows how this would jive with GO's 40-year plan to improve service. Throw in a couple stations, change to more nimble trains, and run them more than 5 times a day and, hey, maybe people outside of Oakville and Ajax will benefit from these rail corridors.

Not when they run to steeles. I disagree with wasting $7 billion on the Scarborough express line.

- The idea of "Hey, let's spend MORE on transit than we are currently spending, and actually get MORE transit!" Rob Ford tried to do this but to no one's surprise he messed up. We know Stintz can do better job but she's starting from a very weak position with this unpolished transit scheme.

while it is certianly not perfect, It is by far the best proposal I have seen since network 2011.


And when Eglinton moves less than that (and possibly less than what the 5km stubway moves now), it'll be perfectly fine because all those billions, more than what Sheppard would cost, will have been spent on light rail and not "a subway"?

there is no way in hell that Eglinton will move less than Sheppard. there are no new major East West lines than before, meaning none of the previous "potential" riders will shift over to other lines.

another point of concern, is that you claim that they aren't building enough subways, but then you go on to say that eglinton (one of the only 2 proposed lines that could probably use a subway) will have less riders than the sheppard subway. which case are you arguing for here?
 

nautilus

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I live in Scarborough and I'm never downtown. Does that mean I should not pay for the DRL or any upgrades to the streetcar system? :rolleyes:

the difference is that the subways cost way too much compared to everything else. None of the LRT are over a billion dollars while the subways for Scarborough are all billions. If you need to come to downtown from Scarborough just drive like people from Mississauga and Brampton do.
 

Solid Snake

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
866
Reaction score
1
Province not inclined to change assessments for TTC tax

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/06/27/province-not-inclined-to-change-assessments-for-ttc-tax

TORONTO - A TTC-driven property tax increase has hit a speed bump but not a roadblock at Queen’s Park.

Aly Vitunski, a spokesperson for Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan, said Wednesday that the proposal by TTC chairman Karen Stintz to raise $250 million a year from property taxes to pay for transit improvements would require a regulatory change on the part of the province.

“However, they can achieve the same tax revenue by increasing their municipal tax rate which would also be more transparent for taxpayers,†Vitunski said in a statement, suggesting that the province is not inclined to alter the market value assessment process through regulation.

The proposed hike would eventually cost the average homeowner in Toronto an additional $180 a year.

Stinz said Tuesday she is confident she has the votes on council to achieve her plan, although Mayor Rob Ford and his allies are vowing to fight it.
 

gweed123

Moderator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
7,821
Reaction score
1,548
Location
Burlington
So I did a bit more detailed analysis on the post that I had earlier about Metrolinx providing a level of "base funding" based on Road Tolls and a 1% sales tax. If there are any more things you think should be added, let me know. I figured based on the total GST revenue that the GGH would bring in $1.409 billion per year. I roughed the road toll revenue at $500 million per year.

What I did was I divided the total revenue based on the % of the population that that region has. The road toll revenue is just divided amongst the "core area", while the sales tax is divided over the core + extended area.

Funding Breakdown.jpg


So for Toronto, $604 million per year in "base funding" from Metrolinx, in addition to the $272 million from the property tax income would mean $876 million per year for transit. That's not too shabby at all.
 

Attachments

  • Funding Breakdown.jpg
    Funding Breakdown.jpg
    32.3 KB · Views: 377
Last edited:

Top