[Automation Gallery]

Toronto’s transit planning: No way to run a railway
Transit planning in Toronto is a colossal, humiliating failure. It is hard to imagine how any city could make a greater hash of it.

While other major cities from Taipei to Seoul to Madrid have rolled out vast networks of rapid transit, Toronto has fallen far behind. It is 34 years this week since the last extensive subway project opened: the Spadina line going north from Bloor.

One new subway, on Eglinton West, was halted in mid-construction for lack of provincial funding. A hole was dug for a tunnel, then filled right back in again. Another project, the underused five-stop Sheppard “stubway,” dead-ends at a mall. A third, the rinky-dink, outmoded Scarborough RT, runs on vehicles that don’t hook up to the subway system

It is a clown show of the first order. Who on Earth is in charge?
A city cannot act like this and expect to build a decent transit system. Rapid transit requires long-term planning, firm, consistent leadership and huge amounts of money. Cities that do it properly come up with a plan looking decades into the future and stick to it.

Toronto? Toronto plays politics, cancels projects in midstream, draws up plans only to rip them up and delays, delays, delays. It is no way to run a railway.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...nning-no-way-to-run-a-railway/article2318311/

 

[Eug]

Someone tell McGuinty to cut a cheque for $35.00 so Moose Factory can get their population rated share of the transit pie and start on the Birch Street LRT. You have to plan for the future!

Toronto's population is about 2.7 million. The ECLRT is supposed to be $8.2 billion. That works out to about $3000 per person, which means Moose Factory (with a population of about 2500) should get a check for $7.5 million.

 

[Dan416]

I completely disagree. I'm not suggesting that they pay more fares. I'm suggesting that TTC be funded appropriately from other Regional and Provincial governments to account for the very high number of non-Toronto residents who use TTC, in comparison to Toronto residents who use other systems.

Proper integration of transit isn't going to happen without appropriate funding being provided to the agency (TTC) that would take the biggest hit.

That's a very odd piece of logic. Simply because most riders are Torontonians doesn't mean Torontonians should be subsidizing the 905ers who use TTC.

This is extremely worrying thinking. The Regions fought tooth-and-nail to eliminate the pooling of funds that went to pay for gold-plated City of Toronto services when the services we provide in the Region are anything but gold-plated.

I'm so tired of this myth that the 416 is subsidizing the 905.

 

[Paleo]

This is extremely worrying thinking. The Regions fought tooth-and-nail to eliminate the pooling of funds that went to pay for gold-plated City of Toronto services when the services we provide in the Region are anything but gold-plated.

I'm so tired of this myth that the 416 is subsidizing the 905.

Do you know where the excess education taxes collected in Toronto went when the funding formula was changed by Harris? No, of course you don't.

 

[Electrify]

Toronto’s transit planning: No way to run a railway
Transit planning in Toronto is a colossal, humiliating failure. It is hard to imagine how any city could make a greater hash of it.

While other major cities from Taipei to Seoul to Madrid have rolled out vast networks of rapid transit, Toronto has fallen far behind. It is 34 years this week since the last extensive subway project opened: the Spadina line going north from Bloor.

One new subway, on Eglinton West, was halted in mid-construction for lack of provincial funding. A hole was dug for a tunnel, then filled right back in again. Another project, the underused five-stop Sheppard “stubway,” dead-ends at a mall. A third, the rinky-dink, outmoded Scarborough RT, runs on vehicles that don’t hook up to the subway system

It is a clown show of the first order. Who on Earth is in charge?
A city cannot act like this and expect to build a decent transit system. Rapid transit requires long-term planning, firm, consistent leadership and huge amounts of money. Cities that do it properly come up with a plan looking decades into the future and stick to it.

Toronto? Toronto plays politics, cancels projects in midstream, draws up plans only to rip them up and delays, delays, delays. It is no way to run a railway.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...nning-no-way-to-run-a-railway/article2318311/

Gee is either way off or on the mark. This is one of those times it is the latter. In fact, it may be one of his best articles to date.

 

[k10ery]

Do you know where the excess education taxes collected in Toronto went when the funding formula was changed by Harris? No, of course you don't.

But then who would subsidize the costs for roads, schools, hospitals, etc. for those that choose to live in the largely vacant, rural portions of our province?

You guys want to eliminate the subsidy to rural schools and hospitals? I go out to the countryside occasionally. Let's not turn it into Mad Max out there!

Thirteen years later, the provincial education tax is STILL higher in Toronto, don't forget.

 

[gweed123]

This is a lousy way to do it from a business perspective. Given every department an equal $N without regard to actual requirements or income from that area. It might appear most fair but can really hurt the pocket book of everybody in the provice.

"Business perspective"? I didn't realize government was supposed to be run like a business.

How does it hurt everybody?

Different regions have different constraints on their economic growth. Targetting those specific constraints will best boost all growth overall. Toronto's main constraint at this time is in moving people. Building a new highway in Thunderbay (something they want) isn't going to help the jobs situation there thus no new hospital/education money (income tax revenue).

Pretty sure construction jobs are still jobs, and pretty good paying jobs at that... Not to mention the spin-off benefits of increased capacity on trade routes, etc.

Growing Toronto does mean new hostpital/education money and that does tend to get distrubuted pretty evenly; with Toronto reveiving significantly less than paid in those categories.

So, how do you improve health-care in Thunderbay? Projects like the Georgetown corridor and Union Station capacity improvements is one way to do it. It's indirect and time consuming, but it is sustainable income that does not require long term deficit spending to accomplish.

How does healthcare funding relate to transportation funding? I don't get what you're trying to get at.

That's why Toronto deserves higher than normal transportation spending at this time. FYI, a Toronto specific road toll or tax would be an acceptable way to accomplish this higher spending level but we don't seem to be able to do that.

Toronto isn't the only city in Ontario that's having trouble moving people. Yes, conditions are amplified because of the size of the region, but too many cars on the road and too little transit isn't a Toronto-specific problem, so the idea that Toronto should get more than everyone else is frankly ridiculous. I'm not saying Toronto should be getting less, I'm just saying it should be an even playing field for everyone.

If a City or Region wants to supplement their Provincial funding allotment with road tolls, gas taxes, vehicle registration tax, or property tax increases, all the more power to them. If they're willing to take those steps, they deserve every penny above and beyond what the Province gives them. But the base allotment for Provincial funding should be the same formula for everyone.

Like I said before, for a City like Toronto it means a new LRT line. For a City like Ottawa, it means new bus lanes. For a town like Perth, it means a revitalization of their Main Street.

 

[GenerationW]

"Business perspective"? I didn't realize government was supposed to be run like a business.

It should to a degree. No one wants to be in Greece's predicament.

 

[GenerationW]

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1121729--rob-ford-still-wants-to-build-a-subway?bn=1

Did anyone watch the video at the bottom of this article? Christopher Hume doesn't want any of Eglinton to be buried.

 

[allabootmatt]

I was already gobsmacked by this gong show, and then this: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-metrolinx-over-eglinton-line/article2318278/

The language in the TTC report, which is on the agenda for this week's Commission meeting, is somewhat milder than the Globe article would suggest. But the TTC itself seems to be doing its best to paint a giant bullseye on the Crosstown's funding. How hard would it be for McGuinty to say that Toronto was given a huge check for transit, no questions asked, and then started complaining about it, and that that money would go further with someone who knew what they want?

 

[Lone Primate]

It should to a degree. No one wants to be in Greece's predicament.

Well said. I think that government ought to be run as a business wherever practicable. Where services are voluntary, wherever people can afford to pay, wherever there is excess that can be taxed and turned into something for the positive good, there should be a business interest. That should be trumped by a more central principle of looking after the public good and the welfare of individuals; for example, in health care. You don't kick a man when he's down (forgive the momentary gender exclusivity ). I think the LCBO, in general, is a good idea... people get a wide variety of products because we have one of the largest single purchasers in the world; they get it at a reasonable price; and the province reaps a profit. Not everything should be done that way, but we can find sensible ones. Deficit spending should be permissible, but at the same time, kept to a minimum. I was amazed that we were able to pay down the federal debt for a dozen years or so... I honestly never thought I'd see that in my lifetime. I'd like to see more of it... when practical, of course.

 

[rbt]

"Business perspective"? I didn't realize government was supposed to be run like a business.

Well, that's up the electorate. A very large number of them consistently vote for lower taxes and for it to be a more efficient provider of services.

Becoming more efficient almost always means becoming less fair and not distributing funds evenly.

Government is what the voters create of it. If we want to reduce the deficit while increasing spending, we need to make targetted investments in various cities economies. If we don't care about reducing the deficit or don't mind cutting spending, then it really doesn't matter much.

Pretty sure construction jobs are still jobs, and pretty good paying jobs at that... Not to mention the spin-off benefits of increased capacity on trade routes, etc.

Of course, but that comes with any capital expenditure. Building a $10B hostpital complex in Moose Jaw would employ thousands of people in the area temporarily, then your left with a hugely oversized hospital that drains more than it gives.

Money is finite and it always get spent. Saying that Project X is worthwhile because it provides construction work is silly. Project Y, which is the same $ amount, will also provide roughly the same amount of construction work. This is one of the main reasons I dislike the way Metrolinx does BCAs; there are millions of alternative ways to spend that money and most of them provide the same temporary job benefit.

Toronto isn't the only city in Ontario that's having trouble moving people.

Agreed. I'm not arguing against providing funding to other locations. I'm simply stating that targetted investment is better. Cities that do not have trouble moving people (I'd put London in that group) don't need $500M in new transit infrastructure; but they could use a few more medical research centres as the current ones are above capacity.

Could London use better transit? Sure. Will it improve their current economic situation? Not proporionally to spending, no. Would the new BRT line be better for them than the research centre? Nope. Should we build London a BRT because Toronto wants a subway, and St. Catherines a mini-medical research facility because London wants a new medical reseasrch facility? Certainly not.

I have no issue with spreading funding around evenly; I have an issue with spreading each categories worth of funding around evenly and expecting economic benefit from it.

 

[sixrings]

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1121729--rob-ford-still-wants-to-build-a-subway?bn=1

Did anyone watch the video at the bottom of this article? Christopher Hume doesn't want any of Eglinton to be buried.

i love hume but i completely disagree on this one. i will say tho that i have thought about a all surface lawrence lrt before. but lawrence is nowhere near as built up as eglinton today nor will it be in 20 years.

 

[Rainforest]

^ Even Lawrence LRT would need some tunneled sections (Bathurst to Yonge, for sure); but not as long as under Eglinton.

 

[sixrings]

^ Even Lawrence LRT would need some tunneled sections (Bathurst to Yonge, for sure); but not as long as under Eglinton.

i live close to the area and i wouldnt think thats true. however it is a very rich area and the locals might complain about above ground transit. but practically speaking i wouldnt think so. bathurst and lawrence is a massive suburban plaza and so is avenue and lawrence. in between are single detached houses.