TTC: Sheppard Subway Expansion (Speculative)

[TOareaFan]

Now take the same sentence and reword it around then suddenly a DRL is quite possible...

Even if DRL is privately constructed, any potential gov't transit funding will more than likely be diverted towards a Sheppard extension.

And yeah...while no private investor would be interested in Sheppard, I can see a huge lineup of investors for a DRL, especially if it includes clauses that eliminate the King & Queen Car and replace it with buses. The DRL would actually be a subway that could be built on private dollars with little or no public funding...its ridership numbers today itself are already profitable...

Sure, but any private sector deal to build that profitable line would require that the ridership revenue from that line go directly to the owners. While this makes sense on its own, it breaks the model that all of our public transit systems operate under.....heavily used/profitable lines/service subsidize other lines which generate less cash but are deemed good from a public policy perspective.

If you/we are going to go that route you could just find a way to ring fence the revenues from the Yonge subway do a PV calc and come up with a value of that and sell those revenue streams to the market and generate billions to build whatever you wanted elsewhere.

Keep in mind, however, that is exactly what happened with the 407. The public purse built it for, what, $1.5B then offered it to the market who PV'd the expected revenues and, in an open market, the best offer was around $3B.....today, however, I think you will find that more people are critical of that than are supportive.

The hatred for the 407 deal (which on its own seems, to me, to be a pretty good deal for, both, the investor and the Province) is (IMO) what holds back PPP transactions in this province. The governments are afraid to do a deal that they fear can be painted as a "sell out" later on so they negotiate far too hard for every last penny and this creates an environment where the private sector just see deals with better profit margins elsewhere in the world.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

The 407 deal was not a good deal.
Firstly, because it was done entirely to plug a one-year hole in the budget. I believe it sold for $2B, councidentally the provincial deficit that year, not $3B.
Secondly, because the government signed an iron-clad, long-term lease and then was less than up-front about what it entailed (ie saying there was control over the tolls).

I don't think people mind paying more for better service but it was very pooly handled.

But I'd agree it's tainted the discussion how P3s could work in certain areas. It's clear that how transit is funded will have to change if any of what we need is going to get built.

 

[TOareaFan]

The 407 deal was not a good deal.
Firstly, because it was done entirely to plug a one-year hole in the budget. I believe it sold for $2B, councidentally the provincial deficit that year, not $3B.
Secondly, because the government signed an iron-clad, long-term lease and then was less than up-front about what it entailed (ie saying there was control over the tolls).

I don't think people mind paying more for better service but it was very pooly handled.

But I'd agree it's tainted the discussion how P3s could work in certain areas. It's clear that how transit is funded will have to change if any of what we need is going to get built.

Whether it was a good deal or not (my recollection was that we paid $1.5B to build it and sold it for $3B....wiki says it was $1.6B to build and $4.1B sale price....so to settle that I guess we would need to "dig")...my point was that it was an open market deal.....we as users/consumers may not like the fact that a private company has control over tolling/pricing for 99 years...we may not like what was paid for that right....but the fact is that this is what was obtained in the market....it is the price that the private sector demanded (again in an open market "bidding" situation....so if there was a better deal for the province out there that met the private sector's profit needs it would have, surely, surfaced and trumped the deal done).

As for the use of the money....that is irrelevant to whether the deal was good and is more a political matter.

The greater point, though, is I am not sure there is a PPP deal on transit that would satify the public.....they/we seem to feel that any deal done with the private sector is a rip off of the taxpayer. What they really are, is the private sector supplying capital to public projects and that capital has a cost....a cost that many taxpayers/consumers don't like.

 

[accura407]

The reason I believe DRL is a perfect candidate for a PPP project is because the overall outcome of the Canada Line shows a project built earlier than promised, on budget, and it is operating very well. It also looked at the most efficient means of operation by looking for an entirely automated operation and look at all ways to lower costs. Cut and Cover may have caused some "issues" but the short term disruption for long term gain is worth it in my opinion.

I truly believe the TTC is not operating its subway lines at the most optimal and efficient means because they are not looking out for taxpayers dollars but rather their own jobs. Natural and expected of course but in this day and age, to have so many workers operate a metro is outrageous. I do not want to privatize the TTC but I feel that a competitive force is necessary to put them in line because right now they have absolutely no real pressure to change.

Having a metrolinx built eglinton crosstown is definitely a start in showing the public how inefficient the TTC is but I think an even better demonstration would be a PPP operated DRL. The line can be built similar to the Canada Line and be automated and POP. I believe the public sector will look out for taxpayers dollars better than the TTC anyday.

People in Toronto than will be able to compare the differences in service delivery and then put the TTC in hot water and change their ways....Public entities are not bad but poorly managed and ENTITLED public entities like the TTC are like a cancer to this City. Public Transportation should always be public but a small but significant private entity is the only way this poor organization will be forced to change.

Best Example is the upcoming Garbage division in toronto. Residents east of Yonge will now know if their service is up to the same standard as the west. This will keep public accountable and the private accountable. I think its the most ingenious thing that RF has ever done in this administration.

 

[44 North]

Even as a PPP project, I still think a DRL is DOA until Sheppard has been: a) cancelled, b) finished.

A city of 2.5M undertaking four subway projects simultaneously (Eglinton, Sheppard, Spadina ext, DRL) seems like a mammoth undertaking fit only for a European city. I'd love for it to be done (well, minus the Sheppard bullsh!t); but I think it's damn near impossible.

 

[Paleo]

Stupid, yet it does exactly what you say is important? People live in the Distillery district, and many more will be living there in the near future, same for Liberty Village, and the line would also go through CityPlace where 80% of residents do not drive to work. They would all be within minutes to downtown, where most of the people living in these two communities work. It will satisfy the work related demand, and provide more incentive for businesses to move out to Liberty Village and the Distillery District, not to mention make accessing these two neighbourhoods easier for every other Torontonian.

Just making the point that a few dozen home dates and conventions don't make for good destinations that can support HRT especially if it moves the line away from the real employment centres and main streets.

Has anyone ever stated otherwise?

No one has said where the money would be coming from and most likely it would come at the expense of the bus network. The Transit City Bus Plan would have cost less than any likely Sheppard subsidy, serve many more people, and improve the situation of many more people. Cost-versus-benefit and ROI matters.

The reason I believe DRL is a perfect candidate for a PPP project is because the overall outcome of the Canada Line shows a project built earlier than promised, on budget, and it is operating very well. It also looked at the most efficient means of operation by looking for an entirely automated operation and look at all ways to lower costs. Cut and Cover may have caused some "issues" but the short term disruption for long term gain is worth it in my opinion.

I truly believe the TTC is not operating its subway lines at the most optimal and efficient means because they are not looking out for taxpayers dollars but rather their own jobs. Natural and expected of course but in this day and age, to have so many workers operate a metro is outrageous. I do not want to privatize the TTC but I feel that a competitive force is necessary to put them in line because right now they have absolutely no real pressure to change.

Having a metrolinx built eglinton crosstown is definitely a start in showing the public how inefficient the TTC is but I think an even better demonstration would be a PPP operated DRL. The line can be built similar to the Canada Line and be automated and POP. I believe the public sector will look out for taxpayers dollars better than the TTC anyday.

People in Toronto than will be able to compare the differences in service delivery and then put the TTC in hot water and change their ways....Public entities are not bad but poorly managed and ENTITLED public entities like the TTC are like a cancer to this City. Public Transportation should always be public but a small but significant private entity is the only way this poor organization will be forced to change.

Best Example is the upcoming Garbage division in toronto. Residents east of Yonge will now know if their service is up to the same standard as the west. This will keep public accountable and the private accountable. I think its the most ingenious thing that RF has ever done in this administration.

1. The Canada Line was funded mostly from public coffers.
2. Efficient and cutting costs in this case meant grossly undersized stations which will not meet future demand. People here hate Eglinton for having 60m expandable to 90m stations. There they have 40m stations expandable to 50m? What a joke.
3. St. Clair would look like a tea party compared to what would happen if you tried to push cut and cover through here.

 

[k10ery]

Whether it was a good deal or not (my recollection was that we paid $1.5B to build it and sold it for $3B....wiki says it was $1.6B to build and $4.1B sale price....so to settle that I guess we would need to "dig")...my point was that it was an open market deal.....we as users/consumers may not like the fact that a private company has control over tolling/pricing for 99 years...we may not like what was paid for that right....but the fact is that this is what was obtained in the market....it is the price that the private sector demanded (again in an open market "bidding" situation....so if there was a better deal for the province out there that met the private sector's profit needs it would have, surely, surfaced and trumped the deal done).

The price is not very important. What matters is giving up control over how 407 is used and how it is priced in future. If Mike Harris had sold you into slavery to pay his deficit, would you be saying, "Well, at least he got market price"?

 

[accura407]

1. The Canada Line was funded mostly from public coffers.
2. Efficient and cutting costs in this case meant grossly undersized stations which will not meet future demand. People here hate Eglinton for having 60m expandable to 90m stations. There they have 40m stations expandable to 50m? What a joke.
3. St. Clair would look like a tea party compared to what would happen if you tried to push cut and cover through here.

1. I am not saying the DRL has to be 100% private funding. All I am saying is that private investors would certainly be interested in this line.
2. If you have wide rail vehicles and a completely automated system, like the Canada Line has, increasing frequency would offset the need for large platforms
3. Well Today's Yonge Line would look like a tea party compared to what would happen if you do nothing. The Yonge Subway Line or the Bloor-Danforth were not built without the associated construction pains. Then people in Toronto began to feel they are entitled to superior construction means...The result is an expensive and short Sheppard Subway and an even more expensive Spadina extension.

If you want realistically build rapid transit, take the pain of a few years for the benefit of decades. No real subway line will ever be built in the GTA if every dick and harry cries that there is disruption...If that was our attitude back in the 1950's/1960's we would all be cramming onto slow Yonge & Bloor Streetcars.

The Downfall of the City of Toronto is precisely because everyone is a friggin NIMBY and can't take a little disruption for the good of the region. Just look at all the whining that happened in Weston...

416's loss is 905's gain. I will surely never live within the boundaries of the City of Toronto ever again in my life.

 

[TOareaFan]

The price is not very important. What matters is giving up control over how 407 is used and how it is priced in future. If Mike Harris had sold you into slavery to pay his deficit, would you be saying, "Well, at least he got market price"?

Probably the worst analogy I have read.

The price paid is relative to the benefits obtained. If the government of the day had said "not 99 years but 25 and you can only raise tolls once every 5 years and only with government approval" all of the bids (including the winning won) would have come in lower.

Price and what you get for it are directly related.

My intent, though, is not to, either, support nor attack the deal...just to point out how ard it is to find a point where PPPs derive financial benefit while getting public (and, therefore, political) support.....thanks for helping in that regard

 

[agoraflaneur]

The eastern side of the DRL north of bloor shouldnt be hard to justify. However the western side with the ARL will probably simply stop at bloor.

There is no ARL stop north of Bloor except at Lawrence, and with the price point of the ARL, it has no bearing at all compared to a normal subway.

I can't bear all this discussion about how it isn't possible. The DRL could be built easily if it is mostly built on the rail corridors. And in any event, we have to do it as a city.

And Acura407, why must everything be a 905 416 gain loss proposal? If the 416 loses, everyone is going to lose in the 905, too - especially when it comes to traffic congestion and moving around the GTA.

 

[Rainforest]

There is no ARL stop north of Bloor except at Lawrence, and with the price point of the ARL, it has no bearing at all compared to a normal subway.

In addition to ARL, there will be a frequent, all-stop service to Brampton at the regular GO price. With a reasonable GO / TTC fare integration, it can act as a subway line for the northern Etobicoke.

I can't bear all this discussion about how it isn't possible. The DRL could be built easily if it is mostly built on the rail corridors. And in any event, we have to do it as a city.

The hardest and most expensive section of DRL will be about 1.5 km through downtown; there is no space for that section in the rail corridor.

Though I agree that it has to be built.

 

[Rainforest]

Even as a PPP project, I still think a DRL is DOA until Sheppard has been: a) cancelled, b) finished.

or c) deferred
or d) extended by 2-3 stations and the rest is deferred

There is no need to cancel.

A city of 2.5M undertaking four subway projects simultaneously (Eglinton, Sheppard, Spadina ext, DRL) seems like a mammoth undertaking fit only for a European city. I'd love for it to be done (well, minus the Sheppard bullsh!t); but I think it's damn near impossible.

Spadina ext and Eglinton are already funded, and therefore do not block DRL in any way.

 

[GenerationW]

My stance is: we can't have our cake and eat it too. In other words, with Sheppard as our "priority" a DRL is DOA. Even if Sheppard is privately constructed, any potential gov't transit funding will more than likely be diverted towards an extension.

The Sheppard subway extension was abandoned in Mller's second term, and the DRL was still DOA. At the Sheppard and Eglinton community meetings, Giambrone said a DRL would only be possible after Transit City was completed. That could have meant waiting 15 or more years just to consider it.

I think the real tipping point to the DRL is going to be when (not if) York Region lines up support and funding for the Yonge extension. Then we'll see if Toronto meets the challenge or remains in hibernation.

 

[sixrings]

The Sheppard subway extension was abandoned in Mller's second term, and the DRL was still DOA. At the Sheppard and Eglinton community meetings, Giambrone said a DRL would only be possible after Transit City was completed. That could have meant waiting 15 or more years just to consider it.

I think the real tipping point to the DRL is going to be when (not if) York Region lines up support and funding for the Yonge extension. Then we'll see if Toronto meets the challenge or remains in hibernation.

toronto will simply make an ultimatum. "if you want the yonge extension you will have to pay for x amount of the DRL!"

if we wait ten years to start the drl there will be sl many communities downtown that the stop spacing will have to be very similar to the spacing between union and bloor. every new community will want its own station which essentially means that if people transfer to the drl to get to union they will be for sake of comfort not for sake of time.

 

[nfitz]

The Sheppard subway extension was abandoned in Mller's second term, and the DRL was still DOA. At the Sheppard and Eglinton community meetings, Giambrone said a DRL would only be possible after Transit City was completed. That could have meant waiting 15 or more years just to consider it.

I'm not sure why you are throwing a 15-year figure at it. Giambrone also used hard numbers, talking about having Transit City completed by 2020, and getting serious about a DRL starting in 2018. City Council under Miller also started a study for the DRL (still on-going as far as I know, and requested that the province consider it in the 15-year time frame, rather than the 25-year time frame the province has put it in.

The statement that the line was DOA does not seem to be correct.