News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 1.2K     6 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 886     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
Mattamy Homes Records A Year of Accomplishments
 1.8K     0 

TTC: Sheppard Subway Expansion (Speculative)

Filip said:
I forgot exactly how Madrid built their extensions, but it had an interesting clause or so - basically all profits of the extension (or line depending on how much was built by the private sector) would go to the company, however, the company also assumes all risk. No profit - no money for the company. Although the built form of the city above is drastically different than where Sheppard is going...
Click to expand...

This model would work great if the line they were building with PPP were actually profitable. There's no way Sheppard is going to be profitable, hence why no business in their right mind would agree to any deal unless they were guaranteed their investment back (no risk). Which, in that case, the City just might as well finance it through a loan, as it would probably be cheaper than what the private company would want as ROI.
 
gweed123 said:
This model would work great if the line they were building with PPP were actually profitable. There's no way Sheppard is going to be profitable, hence why no business in their right mind would agree to any deal unless they were guaranteed their investment back (no risk). Which, in that case, the City just might as well finance it through a loan, as it would probably be cheaper than what the private company would want as ROI.
Click to expand...

Very true, which is why I alluded to the built form of Sheppard versus most of Madrid (although they do have lines that go into very suburban territory, dare I say it even moreso than Sheppard?) The DRL would be an ideal candidate for successful 'Madrid style' financing.

Anyway, what's the city (or province's) aversion to using transit bonds to expand transit? It's done nearly everywhere in the world, including the United States.
 
Filip said:
Anyway, what's the city (or province's) aversion to using transit bonds to expand transit? It's done nearly everywhere in the world, including the United States.
Click to expand...

Damn fine question. The city isn't allowed to issue such a thing at the moment (province holds those reins).

Should be able to finance the DRL against future Land Transfer Tax revenues for the corridor (within 1km of a station) just based on Condo and Office expansion. A DRL with stops at Jarvis and Spadina will surely widen the financial district both east and west as South Core will surely be near capacity by this time.
 
Filip said:
Very true, which is why I alluded to the built form of Sheppard versus most of Madrid (although they do have lines that go into very suburban territory, dare I say it even moreso than Sheppard?)
Click to expand...

I'd say so. Line 9 runs a good distance through the desert! However, completely vacant land makes for excellent development opportunities, and I'm not talking single-family tract housing.

There is a subway line under this road!
 
Last edited:
Filip said:
That's the Cercanias (suburban train) line, the subway is actually UNDER that road.
Click to expand...

To clarify, Markster replied to my post BEFORE I edited it and added the link to Goole Streetview.

He's right that Madrid didn't bury line 9 through the desert. (However, the stations often built on top of, making those "underground".)

The streetview link has line 7 running under it.

Neither of these refer to Cercanias. Though since you brought it up, it's worth pointing out that a fair amount of the Cercanias network is underground, even in "suburban" locations.
 
CDL.TO said:
To clarify, Markster replied to my post BEFORE I edited it and added the link to Goole Streetview.

He's right that Madrid didn't bury line 9 through the desert. (However, the stations often built on top of, making those "underground".)

The streetview link has line 7 running under it.

Neither of these refer to Cercanias. Though since you brought it up, it's worth pointing out that a fair amount of the Cercanias network is underground, even in "suburban" locations.
Click to expand...

Yup, the entire downtown network of the Cercanias runs in a series of tunnels under Avenida Castellana and Paseo del Prado.. There's a second tunnel built recently which swings two of the lines into Sol, effectively creating another branch for commuters through the beating heart of Madrid (imagine a GO Train station under Dundas Square).. It's quite a treat to witness the urban infrastructure of Madrid, it's just incredible.
 
gweed123 said:
This model would work great if the line they were building with PPP were actually profitable. There's no way Sheppard is going to be profitable, hence why no business in their right mind would agree to any deal unless they were guaranteed their investment back (no risk). Which, in that case, the City just might as well finance it through a loan, as it would probably be cheaper than what the private company would want as ROI.
Click to expand...

PPP is mostly a hoax. Private developers don't do anything on this major of a scale unless massive guaranteed profits are agreed on. Usually private developers will agree to help fund a project if and only if there is a clause for government to repay them and/or government to take over bad debts should problem occur.

PPP in regards to transit is mostly a smoke screen that causes major spending above and beyond direct public investment.

However, if Sheppard Subway can just get built... It won't matter in the long run. It'll be far more expensive with PPP, but as long as it's completed it is progress.
 
Brandon716 said:
PPP is mostly a hoax. Private developers don't do anything on this major of a scale unless massive guaranteed profits are agreed on. Usually private developers will agree to help fund a project if and only if there is a clause for government to repay them and/or government to take over bad debts should problem occur.

PPP in regards to transit is mostly a smoke screen that causes major spending above and beyond direct public investment.

However, if Sheppard Subway can just get built... It won't matter in the long run. It'll be far more expensive with PPP, but as long as it's completed it is progress.
Click to expand...
Actually, PPP don't need a clause for the government to take over if they have debt issues. They company just goes bankrupt and the government is stuck with the decision to bully up or let the project sink. Look at Metronet (London, UK) in 2007 that went under with C$4 billion in debt while the 'parent' companies suffered no negative on their bottom line.
 
Ed Drass said:
April 11th, 2011
"There’s a New Acronym in Town"
By John Lorinc
http://spacingtoronto.ca/2011/04/11/lorinc-there’s-a-new-acronym-in-town/
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see how this pans out with respect to public consultations. In general, I'm not really a fan of them. Yes, there are some intelligent suggestions that come from informed citizens as a result of them, but the majority of the 'suggestions' that come from them are from citizens who are pretty much telling the planners to take their plan and shove it (if you ever go to a public hearing on a controversial development, you know what I mean).

Having said that, I do think that public consultations are needed. The informed public (and I stress the informed part) should have a chance to make their valid criticisms and suggestions heard. But the process should not be bogged down by endless consultation that gives little more than a soapbox for people who would be against the project no matter what it entailed to voice their opinion. You know, the "I haven't actually read the report, but I did 30 seconds of research on the internet, and concluded that this type of project is not right for our city" crowd. The kind of crowd that us planners wish we could slap a piece of duct tape over their mouths.

Because this will be done by a PPP, perhaps they will trim the fat around the public consultation process, potentially shortening the exhaustingly long timeline between conception and the start of construction. I'm not a fan of the plan, and I'm sure the business case will be a sham, but I'm interested to see in how they deal with public consultation. Will they get bogged down with the usual soapboxers, will they filter it through to allow for informed opinions to be taken into account, or will it be a completely closed-door process? Time will tell.
 
You should have heard what the public said about the Hurontario LRT. It's a good thing the public was ignored...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top