[Johnny Au]

Exactly. The idea of need vs want seems to be a foreign concept to some.

...and the meaning of envy as well.

Note the difference between envy and jealousy:

 

[TheTigerMaster]

The idea that Toronto hasn't raised taxes isn't accurate either. The land transfer tax brings in $400 million - $500 million a year.

There's also the transit levy and hotel taxes introduced this year.

 

[kEiThZ]

However, transit funds are limited.

An obvious point that I have refuted before. I'm not interested in circular discussion. My point is simple. The "limit" is entirely self-imposed.

None on the scale of Toronto, which has an economy larger than most provinces.

Montreal and Vancouver have bigger economies than half the provinces in Canada. This is irrelevant to how federal funds are disbursed. Cities are not provinces.

Does Toronto get the kind of federal funding Quebec does?

No. And nor should it. Cities are not provinces. Federal transfers are mandated to achieve rough parity in quality of services between provinces in Canada. That's what the funds are for. Not to advantage any particular province or city. Quebec has been a have not province and got funding. When Ontario is a have-not province, it receives federal funding.

Why doesn't Toronto have the revenue tools available to other provinces?

Because it's not a province?

These cities aren't raising taxes because they want to fund transit, they're raising taxes because they're inefficiently designed suburbs.

Ottawa paid for a third of their multi billion transit plan by raising property taxes. They have 40% of Toronto's population and higher taxes already.

Aside from which, your argument would be irrelevant to most residents in this province. They have to pay taxes already. Be it for transit, gazebos or lawn bowling clubs. They aren't likely to support provincial politicians who dramatically favour one region over another. Whatever the expenditure. And that gets particularly galling to the rest of the province when the city asking for money is the richest one with the most people, most (well-paying) jobs, largest commercial taxbase and additional revenue tools not available to rest, which also happens to have relatively lower taxes. It's as though Torontonians are begging to get another Mike Harris elected by the 905 and and the rest of the province.

I saw this first hand in Ottawa. I knew several people who voiced a sense of betrayal about McGuinty, the premier from Ottawa who made Ottawa pay for a third of their transit infrastructure while Toronto got all theirs for free. Transit advocates in Ottawa were fuming. Lucky for the Liberals, there weren't other alternatives there.

The demand for transit is up across every urban area of the province now. And they all want BRTs and LRTs. So Toronto can rely only on the province. In which case, Queen's Park gets to build at its convenience. Or it can pony up and build the projects it wants. For example, Toronto could readily fund steady LRT expansion on its own and leave the province to built the expensive subways and some LRT as and when it gets funds.

The total cost of these projects doesn't come close to addressing the tax revenue imbalance.

And nor should it. No urban area in the country will ever have anything approaching even close to break even. Nature of the heartland-hinterland model.

The TTC still has the lowest subsidy of any major transit system in NA:

Ask City Council to up the subsidies. Toronto gets tons from the province. And has significant relief provided by a parallel transit system run entirely by the province: GO. No other city in the province has this.

No I woudn't, as Toronto is on par with provinces economically.

Again. Irrelevant. Toronto is not a province. And until it is, it will not and should not be treated like one.

Now, if we want to talk about regional autonomy or service coordination, I'm all for it. I've said before, I want to see Metrolinx become like TfL. Take over all transit, roads, taxi licensing, etc. in the GTA. It should be a GTA wide transport authority led by a provincial cabinet minister.

 

[rbt]

... 30% or so will see their bus ride to the station shortened considerably.

How does the bus ride get considerably shorter? It's obvious how the LRT component gets shorter and becomes a little more pleasant (IMO, every option considered over the last decade makes the trip more pleasant), but how does the Bus ride get considerably shorter (and why can't something similar be done tomorrow?)

Other than a slight change in station location (perhaps saving half a km for some bus routes?) I don't recall any other changes to street configuration.

I'll admit I mostly stopped paying attention to this proposal when it hit a pretty firm funding wall, as have nearly all significant projects waiting on city debt financing. Not even sure the city can place a BD replacement train order without assistance.

 

[Rainforest]

How does the bus ride get considerably shorter? It's obvious how the LRT component gets shorter and becomes a little more pleasant (IMO, every option considered over the last decade makes the trip more pleasant), but how does the Bus ride get considerably shorter (and why can't something similar be done tomorrow?)

Other than a slight change in station location (perhaps saving half a km for some bus routes?) I don't recall any other changes to street configuration.

I'll admit I mostly stopped paying attention to this proposal when it hit a pretty firm funding wall, as have nearly all significant projects waiting on city debt financing. Not even sure the city can place a BD replacement train order without assistance.

The bus ride would be shorter compared to going all the way to Kennedy. I was thinking of that scenario in light of your BRT proposal.

If we count the bus ride to STC or another RT station vs a ride to the new SSE subway station, then the bus rides are not shorter, some are even longer. However, total trip times will become shorter for many trips because of the express subway ride to Kennedy plus the transfer elimination.

 

[Rainforest]

No one is suggesting the DRL isn't being built directly because of the SSE.

However, transit funds are limited. Pointing out that wasteful spending on unnecessary extensions that make absolutely no practical sense diverts resources and attention from critical projects is perfectly valid.

Even an indirect connection is questionable, as DRL has been on the radar before SSE, and yet nobody tried to legislate a transit levy for DRL.

The ability to tax the income earners is limited, but the transit portion is not well defined and certainly isn't maxed out at this point. The city could be collecting a transit levy for SSE, DRL, and perhaps one more project in parallel, and the taxpayers wouldn't be too unhappy; the trick is to convince the councilors.

My gut feeling is that collecting the funds for SSE makes funding the DRL more likely, not less likely. SSE establishes a precedent of the city collecting dedicated tax for a specific transit project, and the same model can be applied for DRL once the EA is done.

Exactly. The idea of need vs want seems to be a foreign concept to some.

Well, you might be one of those. You want SSE killed, even though you don't need it, and should you succeed, that turn is likely cause a backlash and make future transit funding more difficult to get.

 

[rbt]

The bus ride would be shorter compared to going all the way to Kennedy. I was thinking of that scenario in light of your BRT proposal.

I see. Yes, that would be the case; although it's possible a dedicated BRT segment where multiple lines merge enroute to Kennedy would provide a faster trip than the subway. The 192 regularly operates above the top speed of a Toronto Rocket train.

 

[Rainforest]

I see. Yes, that would be the case; although it's possible a dedicated BRT segment where multiple lines merge enroute to Kennedy would provide a faster trip than the subway.

That would be possible; on a completely off-road busway and if there are no complaints about speed from NIMBYs whose backyards it borders.

The 192 regularly operates above the top speed of a Toronto Rocket train.

Running on a highway with a 100 kph speed limit for most of its route, no surprise The driver would risk being fined if he tried to go only as fast as subway train.

 

[syn]

An obvious point that I have refuted before. I'm not interested in circular discussion. My point is simple. The "limit" is entirely self-imposed.



Montreal and Vancouver have bigger economies than half the provinces in Canada. This is irrelevant to how federal funds are disbursed. Cities are not provinces.



No. And nor should it. Cities are not provinces. Federal transfers are mandated to achieve rough parity in quality of services between provinces in Canada. That's what the funds are for. Not to advantage any particular province or city. Quebec has been a have not province and got funding. When Ontario is a have-not province, it receives federal funding.



Because it's not a province?



Ottawa paid for a third of their multi billion transit plan by raising property taxes. They have 40% of Toronto's population and higher taxes already.

Aside from which, your argument would be irrelevant to most residents in this province. They have to pay taxes already. Be it for transit, gazebos or lawn bowling clubs. They aren't likely to support provincial politicians who dramatically favour one region over another. Whatever the expenditure. And that gets particularly galling to the rest of the province when the city asking for money is the richest one with the most people, most (well-paying) jobs, largest commercial taxbase and additional revenue tools not available to rest, which also happens to have relatively lower taxes. It's as though Torontonians are begging to get another Mike Harris elected by the 905 and and the rest of the province.

I saw this first hand in Ottawa. I knew several people who voiced a sense of betrayal about McGuinty, the premier from Ottawa who made Ottawa pay for a third of their transit infrastructure while Toronto got all theirs for free. Transit advocates in Ottawa were fuming. Lucky for the Liberals, there weren't other alternatives there.

The demand for transit is up across every urban area of the province now. And they all want BRTs and LRTs. So Toronto can rely only on the province. In which case, Queen's Park gets to build at its convenience. Or it can pony up and build the projects it wants. For example, Toronto could readily fund steady LRT expansion on its own and leave the province to built the expensive subways and some LRT as and when it gets funds.



And nor should it. No urban area in the country will ever have anything approaching even close to break even. Nature of the heartland-hinterland model.



Ask City Council to up the subsidies. Toronto gets tons from the province. And has significant relief provided by a parallel transit system run entirely by the province: GO. No other city in the province has this.



Again. Irrelevant. Toronto is not a province. And until it is, it will not and should not be treated like one.

Now, if we want to talk about regional autonomy or service coordination, I'm all for it. I've said before, I want to see Metrolinx become like TfL. Take over all transit, roads, taxi licensing, etc. in the GTA. It should be a GTA wide transport authority led by a provincial cabinet minister.

Toronto is a province from an economic perspective, without the revenue tools available to provinces.

Toronto and York Region paid for over 1/3 of the Spadina extension (closer to half). I'm pretty sure it was the same for the Sheppard Line. The Spadina and St. Clair ROWs were also paid for by the city.

You're right - Toronto has the biggest tax base and the province and country know that.

The Eglinton LRT is really a drop in the bucket when it comes to Toronto tax revenue - which is really the point here. Eglinton and the Scarborough extension are being built with tax dollars from Toronto.

I'm all for the city raising taxes to fund more expansion, but the idea that we shouldn't be against wasting money because we can just raise taxes for other projects is absurd.

 

[kEiThZ]

Toronto is a province from an economic perspective,

An irrelevant perspective that would apply to urban areas containing about 60% of the country's population. As per your argument, Mississauga, Brampton, Oshawa, Markham, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Montreal, Quebec City, Winnipeg, Hamilton, London, etc are all a "province from an economic perspective."

without the revenue tools available to provinces.

Because it's not a province.

Toronto and York Region paid for over 1/3 of the Spadina extension (closer to half). I'm pretty sure it was the same for the Sheppard Line. The Spadina and St. Clair ROWs were also paid for by the city.

The Eglinton LRT is really a drop in the bucket when it comes to Toronto tax revenue - which is really the point here. Eglinton and the Scarborough extension are being built with tax dollars from Toronto.

That's still a smaller percentage of the overall transit plan for Toronto than any other city in Ontario. Sooner or later, they will start voting in politicians who demand the same deal as Toronto. They'd be stupid not to.

I'm all for the city raising taxes to fund more expansion

You say that and always follow with:

but

So you're not really for raising revenue for transit. You just want revenue raised for projects you'll personally support (and I suspect benefit from).

 

[Hopkins123]

I'm not sure what "650,000 residents" has to do with the SSE proposal. The vast majority will not be within walking distance of the new station.

Now, if you proposed taking the same money and running 3 to 4 parallel BRT lines from the lake through to Steeles, you might get to walking distance of 30% of residents.

I don't think opponents of the subway proposal even realize what it is they are objecting to. A subway to the geographic center of Scarborough (McCowan/Ellesmere) will reduce commute times for constituents from all corners of Scarborough. And that massive 34-bay bus terminal planned for the subway extension will have BRT-lite routes radiating to all over Scarborough:

How quickly we forget.

 

[Hopkins123]

A very simple reality that a lot of people don't get - it's about density, not total population.

There can be no density without something in place to trigger population growth and intensification of development. This was Yonge and Sheppard in 1955 before the subway opened there:

And this is it today:

Development in this city correlates with subway/rapid transit expansion, whether we'd like to admit it or not. To think anything less than a subway could produce similar results is wishful at best.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I don't think opponents of the subway proposal even realize what it is they are objecting to. A subway to the geographic center of Scarborough (McCowan/Ellesmere) will reduce commute times for constituents from all corners of Scarborough. And that massive 34-bay bus terminal planned for the subway extension will have BRT-lite routes radiating to all over Scarborough:

How quickly we forget.

Missing are the buses coming in from the City of Markham and the City of Pickering and points beyond.

 

[torontologist]

Development in this city correlates with subway/rapid transit expansion, whether we'd like to admit it or not. To think anything less than a subway could produce similar results is wishful at best.

To think that a subway in Scarborough Centre would produce similar results to Yonge Street is also wishful at best. Yonge is the spine of Toronto, at its very centre. Prior to the subway, it had a fine network of streets radiating out from it that provided an ideal grid for new dense development. SCC has neither of these aspects. It is unlikely that it would achieve a level of density that would justify the investment.

 

[44 North]

There can be no density without something in place to trigger population growth and intensification of development. This was Yonge and Sheppard in 1955 before the subway opened there:



And this is it today:



Development in this city correlates with subway/rapid transit expansion, whether we'd like to admit it or not. To think anything less than a subway could produce similar results is wishful at best.

Meh, kinda dumb imo. Ignoring that we have areas without any transit infrastructure which are seeing large development, the one the that stands out for me is that Line 3 is a subway. I seem to stand alone when I say this, but by most metrics it is. Sure it can be subclassified into the light metro variety, but that doesn't really change much. Still a subway, and above Crosstown in that regard. Had it been upgraded it wouldn't be all that different than, say, Line 4: ~100m long trains on a subway line that goes nowhere near downtown - but with enough capacity in that setup to provide levels of growth that would never materialize.

Also if lots of development is what you want then logically you shouldn't support the current official SSE. I mean, it only has a single station, which will be four less than we have now with Line 3, and two less than what NYC has in that second image. A 6km stretch of 100ft deep tunnel isn't lucrative or ups property values, it's the stations.

And believe it or not, but SCC has actually seen development, with virtually all the attributes of a successful suburban centre.