Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[smallspy]

I thought it was just in the immediate vicinity of stations.

That's mostly correct. You can already see parts of it done at Keele and Dufferin.

But beyond those sections, Metrolinx agreed to fund the rebuild of the section of Eglinton between Duplex and Oriole Parkway.

I'll defer to @Northern Light for whether the City has funded for the remainder of Eglinton Connects. I want to say "yes, but....", although my memory has been faulty before.

Dan

 

[Northern Light]

That's mostly correct. You can already see parts of it done at Keele and Dufferin.

But beyond those sections, Metrolinx agreed to fund the rebuild of the section of Eglinton between Duplex and Oriole Parkway.

I'll defer to @Northern Light for whether the City has funded for the remainder of Eglinton Connects. I want to say "yes, but....", although my memory has been faulty before.

Dan

The 10-year capital budget does have funding for Eglinton Connects, but only 15M for near-term works, the bulk is from 2027 onwards, from my post, here:

Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

Had another semi-annual jaunt across Eglington from west to east yesterday.....man, that road is in rough shape. And not just for cars, add walkers and bikers in there as well. I cannot imagine biking Eglington. And I am not just speaking of the obvious areas affected by ongoing construction...

urbantoronto.ca

 

[11th]

Quebec City is planning to put in their own tramway. See link. You may have to use an online translator, from French to English, to read it if you don't know French.

From Présentation sur l’insertion de surface du tramway dans les quartiers Montcalm et Saint-Jean-Baptiste (PDF)

If I comprehend this right, the tramway (LRT) surface platforms will be heated in winter. Which means that there maybe no snow accumulating much on the platforms.
View attachment 391821
Translation software below...
View attachment 391822

View attachment 391824
Translation software below...
View attachment 391825

View attachment 391826
View attachment 391827

Overall, the Quebec City tramway is more pedestrian and transit friendly, than the Eglinton Crosstown. The Eglinton Crosstown is more friendly to the single-occupant automobile.

English translation link.

They have the better design. Although they also have something we don't have for Eglinton - closely spaced parallel arterials. I see they are staying off of Grande Allée.

 

[EnviroTO]

The 10-year capital budget does have funding for Eglinton Connects, but only 15M for near-term works, the bulk is from 2027 onwards, from my post, here:

Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

Had another semi-annual jaunt across Eglington from west to east yesterday.....man, that road is in rough shape. And not just for cars, add walkers and bikers in there as well. I cannot imagine biking Eglington. And I am not just speaking of the obvious areas affected by ongoing construction...

urbantoronto.ca

Wow, the whole of Eglinton is a big pothole and mess, and they aren't going to fix it until 2027? The city is so poorly run. They honestly started planning for Eglinton Connects in 2012 and then 2022 rolls around and the city doesn't have funding yet???

 

[Northern Light]

Wow, the whole of Eglinton is a big pothole and mess, and they aren't going to fix it until 2027? The city is so poorly run. They honestly started planning for Eglinton Connects in 2012 and then 2022 rolls around and the city doesn't have funding yet???

Pavement that was damaged during construction will be resurfaced/milled at Mx's cost.

Eglinton Connects pays for a variety of 'enhancements' to Eglinton ranging from cycle tracks to elaborate streetscapes to some new/improved public parks/park frontages/entrances etc.

That said, I agree the work should have been seemlessly coordinated, rather than having the contractors de-mobilize and then coming back in 5 years to make more mess.

 

[EnviroTO]

Pavement that was damaged during construction will be resurfaced/milled at Mx's cost.

Eglinton Connects pays for a variety of 'enhancements' to Eglinton ranging from cycle tracks to elaborate streetscapes to some new/improved public parks/park frontages/entrances etc.

That said, I agree the work should have been seemlessly coordinated, rather than having the contractors de-mobilize and then coming back in 5 years to make more mess.

Not only that, the plan was going to change the number of lanes available to traffic in key areas, like Avenue to Mount Pleasant. During construction drivers have gotten used to the street having an operational capacity of one lane in each direction for the last 5 years. Now they are going to open it back up, induce demand, then try to reduce the lanes later? That is not a great plan.

 

[Northern Light]

Not only that, the plan was going to change the number of lanes available to traffic in key areas, like Avenue to Mount Pleasant. During construction drivers have gotten used to the street having an operational capacity of one lane in each direction for the last 5 years. Now they are going to open it back up, induce demand, then try to reduce the lanes later? That is not a great plan.

I believe the previous lane count in that area was 5, and the intent is for 4 when construction wraps up.

But the bike lanes will likely be painted, rather than physically separated.

But we'll have to see.....

 

[drum118]

With the Photo Shoot today for the 3 levels of the TBM's today on the move, Pool time on the date the line will open in Dec.

 

[TorontoBun]

I think there's a reason there are double left turn lanes from Eglinton eastbound to Leslie.

As a 4-lane street that abruptly ends at Eglinton, I believe the double left turn lanes would have been to partially accommodate the frequent 54 Lawrence East , and the infrequent 51 Leslie buses as they queue to go North. With the 54 being re-routed to Science Center station, and the 51 only queuing up to turn left every 20-30 minutes. On the surface, it would make more sense for Don Mills to have double left turn lanes for those who need to go from Eglinton eastbound to Leslie northbound, especially with the LRT going below grade before and after the intersection.

 

[allengeorge]

Wow, the whole of Eglinton is a big pothole and mess, and they aren't going to fix it until 2027? The city is so poorly run. They honestly started planning for Eglinton Connects in 2012 and then 2022 rolls around and the city doesn't have funding yet???

I think this is a natural consequence of a city that has comparatively low property taxes, and whose Council/Mayorship prides themselves on keeping tax increases below the rate of inflation. Add to that massive road projects like the Gardiner that have soaked up almost all the capital budget in the transportation department and you end up with projects being staged and dragged out as long as possible in order to align with funding availability.

 

[EnviroTO]

Very true. We have one of the lowest tax rates in Ontario, but the city keeps on pumping out studies and objectives but no funding to match. They continually run to the province and federal government for everything. The rebuild of the Gardiner from Cherry to the DVP, and the waterfront streetcar connections are another bunch of those things that sit waiting long after study and approval. I can understand running to the other levels of government for health and welfare items where the citizens need assistance wherever they are, but pure city building items are things the city should have money for. They need to get real and raise taxes rather than taking a 15-20 year lead time to find the funding to accomplish anything. Maybe we should a pause on all city studies until the ones completed are paid for. Councillors and the Mayor have dreams... park it until you pay for the dreams already approved.

 

[Steve X]

Pavement that was damaged during construction will be resurfaced/milled at Mx's cost.

Eglinton Connects pays for a variety of 'enhancements' to Eglinton ranging from cycle tracks to elaborate streetscapes to some new/improved public parks/park frontages/entrances etc.

That said, I agree the work should have been seemlessly coordinated, rather than having the contractors de-mobilize and then coming back in 5 years to make more mess.

I believe the agreement was ML will resurface and rebuild the roadway adjacent to the surface portion and immediate roadway next to each underground stations. The roadway in between each station however falls under TO's problems. Which caused a fuss cause construction equipment needs to be moved around. They of course claimed that they had to travel on TO streets to even get to the site and considered regular traffic.

 

[Northern Light]

I think this is a natural consequence of a city that has comparatively low property taxes, and whose Council/Mayorship prides themselves on keeping tax increases below the rate of inflation. Add to that massive road projects like the Gardiner that have soaked up almost all the capital budget in the transportation department and you end up with projects being staged and dragged out as long as possible in order to align with funding availability.

Very true. We have one of the lowest tax rates in Ontario, but the city keeps on pumping out studies and objectives but no funding to match. They continually run to the province and federal government for everything. The rebuild of the Gardiner from Cherry to the DVP, and the waterfront streetcar connections are another bunch of those things that sit waiting long after study and approval. I can understand running to the other levels of government for health and welfare items where the citizens need assistance wherever they are, but pure city building items are things the city should have money for. They need to get real and raise taxes rather than taking a 15-20 year lead time to find the funding to accomplish anything. Maybe we should a pause on all city studies until the ones completed are paid for. Councillors and the Mayor have dreams... park it until you pay for the dreams already approved.

GTA property tax rates for 2021:

Source: https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/five-ont...highest-property-tax-rates-revealed-1.5660362

***

So forget jacking our rate up to the highest, which is arguably too high; besides which an increase of 100% plus would see pitch forks down to City Hall, let's just ask....what if we bumped the rate to just shy of the median for the GTA?, say to Brampton's 0.96%? That would equal a property tax hike of .35 or 57%. Lets be somewhat conservative though and assume we would not see the full extent of revenue increase as a result of such a move. Let's allow for 45% more revenue.
What would that equal?

Well, Property tax represents about between 35-40% of City revenue depending on the year. Again, let's take the lower of those numbers.

Applicable revenue 35% of 15B = 5.25B; now lets apply a 45% revenue increase to that number: That's 2.63B per year.

So by raising our property tax rates to slightly below the GTA median we would add about 2.63B per year.

We can play around w/the other revenues in the budget as well; but I think its important to remember a slew of those are user-fees from TTC to recreation which are regressive for low-income earners and would probably penalize desirable behaviors (taking transit, staying fit, etc)

So, setting aside road tolls or sales taxes or the like, for the moment........I would simply add revenues from increasing permit and street parking to fair market value; for purposes of a calculation for Green P spaces, we know their historic mandate has been to under-price the market by 25%; I will therefore, conservatively assume they are capable of generating another 30% in net income, which would be ~23M per year. Permits are harder to calculate as the City is less than transparent w/its data on this point; but I believe at market rates they could generate at least an extra 50M per year.

So 2.7B per year total.

How fast could we burn that off? Different post, different thread............ LOL

 

[allengeorge]

Excellent analysis @Northern Light ! You’ve taken an off-the-cuff statement and put numbers behind them.

My (additional) hot take is that the comparatively low tax rate - heck, the lowest as per your table - contributes to the high cost of land/purchase prices in the city. You are ok to overpay for a property because you expect your long-term carrying costs to be low.

 

[Northern Light]

Excellent analysis @Northern Light ! You’ve taken an off-the-cuff statement and put numbers behind them.

My (additional) hot take is that the comparatively low tax rate - heck, the lowest as per your table - contributes to the high cost of land/purchase prices in the city. You are ok to overpay for a property because you expect your long-term carrying costs to be low.

Thanks. Though I just realized I understated the revenue number substantially and have corrected that.

See above.