[nfitz]

So which programs have to be cut?

I'm not sure any do, really. Essentially they are reallocating $3-billion of tax revenue. If you look back to last year's budget, they forecast $116.8 billion in revenue for this fiscal year, growing to $120.5 billion for next year, and $124.9 billion for the following year. The deficit is still about $11 blilion, and was due to be balanced (with revenue increasing faster than spending) by 2017-2018. Presumably they'll simply delay balancing the budget for a year or two.

A $3 billion expenditure only represents about a 2.5% spending increase.

But really, it's a lot less as it ignores all the infrastructure currently being funded. The current budget includes various projects that would in the future be coming out of the $3 billion or so a year, such as the Spadina subway extension, York VIVA, Crosstown line, Union-Pearson Line, various other GO expansion projects, Highway 401 widening, Highway 407 extension, Highway 404 extension, Highway 400 extension, Highway 11 widening, etc., etc., etc.

Again, if you look at the current fiscal year, they show $2.5 billion being spent this year on transit infrastructure and $2 billion on highway infrastructure. That's $4.5 billion a year. If that drops to only $3 billion a year, then it would actually reduce spending.

All it really does, is create a guaranteed revenue stream for the future. Or until the next government changes it.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Sousa is still very intent on balancing by 2018. They are still saying that they are looking for new funding sources, to be announced in the budget.

 

[ehlow]

I would've thought Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal would be the first high speed rail line, not London-KW-Toronto

 

[nfitz]

Sousa is still very intent on balancing by 2018. They are still saying that they are looking for new funding sources, to be announced in the budget.

If they cut the current spending from about $5 billion to $3 billion, then doesn't that help balancing the budget?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I would've thought Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal would be the first high speed rail line, not London-KW-Toronto

Competitive races at those ridings, maybe?

AoD

 

[innsertnamehere]

no as this is an increase in money, not a decrease from the current amount. The money is supposed to start flowing ASAP. The amount may drop to 3 billion annually in 2020, but given that the province likely won't want to go 10 years without announcing any projects, even then I am doubtful. This is likely a permanent increase over the existing annual expenditures.

as for the HSR, London is much much cheaper than what ottawa would have been and can largely be done without federal help unlike Montreal and Ottawa. You are looking at 170km (less as presumably no changes will be made to Georgetown South) instead of 570km.

 

[ehlow]

If it's 200km/h then there can't be too many stops since it needs time to accelerate right? I wonder if it would stop at both Kitchener and Guelph for example.

Anyways, I'm pretty excited about the overall announcement. Especially the 15 min electric GO service, which they mentioned 10 years as a timeframe. 10 years pretty great by transit project standards!

 

[mpd618]

It seems clear to me they are talking about Toronto - Kitchener - London as regional "high" speed rail, i.e. an extension of GO Transit with track upgrades.

 

[Wrenkin]

as for the HSR, London is much much cheaper than what ottawa would have been and can largely be done without federal help unlike Montreal and Ottawa. You are looking at 170km (less as presumably no changes will be made to Georgetown South) instead of 570km.

VIA is a federal crown corporation, so I wouldn't think of it as either party helping each other. It's simply not the province's job to electrify tracks that wouldn't be used by GO (On the route to Ottawa, that's begins before Durham IIRC). I suppose if Metrolinx does electrify then some of the infrastructure would be shared--traction power substations etc, even Metrolinx only installs catenary over their track--which might affect VIA's decisions. But Ottawa is pretty far.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

If the Richmond Hill line is running electrified 15 minute all-day service, is a Yonge extension really needed? Outside of peak the Yonge line would be running 8 min headways anyway (every 2nd train short-turning at Finch), so you electrify the RH line and put BRT lanes on Yonge for those going to NYCC or Yonge-Eg.

I've already answered this on the other thread for the Yonge extension (as have others, multiple times) and the answer is YES. Here are some reasons:

1) GO goes to Union Station and nowhere else. It doesn't help someoen from RH get to Sheppard or Eglinton or Bloor or anywhere else.
2) You tacitly acknowledge this with the BRT idea. Except that anyone who has been on Yonge (or seen Metrolinx's own numbers) knows a BRT is inadquate for that stretch. Even an LRT would likely be at capacity by the time it opened, to say nothing of the 2031 horizon we're talking about.
3) The subway has been on the radar for years, the EA is done and it's approved (subject to some conditions) which puts it as high on the list as any other project, excluding the DRL which is linked to it because of capacity issues. If you look at a map or drive around it's pretty obviously one of the most obviously needed (and potentially successful) transit projects of anything in the Big Move.
4) The growth centre at RHC is contingent on all-day, two-way GO and the subway; especially the latter. For those unfamiliar with it on this thread, I'll attach a massing model, just of the Markham half. No subway, no density, more sprawl.

It's all fine and good to tweak The Big Move but constantly rewriting it (hello, Scarborough!) before even starting is counter-productive.

Anyway, this is all contingent on a lot of IFs, not the least of which is Wynne getting re-elected and we've learned that people are simply unwilling to connect getting shiny new things with paying for them so I'm skeptical about any of this happening soon anyway.

Right, this is why we need the subway....

 

[innsertnamehere]

I think Gweed is well aware of those plans. his question is that previously the plan had always been for hourly GO service to Richmond Hill, which obviously isn't adequate. but would 15 minute GO service be? thats the question and I believe the answer is yes. I think the Yonge line still needs to go to Steeles, but the extension to RHC seems rather silly now.

 

[ehlow]

I always find it interesting that there are subway plans into places where condos are planned, and people show future renderings of all these condos to justify a subway there, when large groups of existing condos don't have subway access, example the whole King West & Liberty Village area, where tons of huge condos both completed and about to be completed.

It seems reasonable that existing high-density areas should be higher priority than future plans like Vaughan or the Richmond Hill plan above, because.. the people are already there and the buildings are already built or being built.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Summary of what from my understanding is funded today:

Yellow = Subway
Black (the thicker the line the more frequent the service) = GO transit
Blue = LRT Thick line means grade seperated, thin means at grade
Orange (The thicker the line the higher the quality the right of way) = BRT


Currently existing map of Toronto's transit network for reference:

Already funded expansions:

What was funded today: (From my understanding)

Every funded expansion together:

What our map will look like when everything is finished:

 

[TOareaFan]

I always find it interesting that there are subway plans into places where condos are planned, and people show future renderings of all these condos to justify a subway there, when large groups of existing condos don't have subway access, example the whole King West & Liberty Village area, where tons of huge condos both completed and about to be completed.

It seems reasonable that existing high-density areas should be higher priority than future plans like Vaughan or the Richmond Hill plan above, because.. the people are already there and the buildings are already built or being built.

I guess the counter to that would be that those higher density areas were conceived, planned, built and sold without subways....that, in the eyes of the market, the current transit options supported the density. In the case of new density nodes, farther from the core, a transit boost is needed.

Not saying I subscribe to that....just that it is the obvious "counter" to your point.

 

[ehlow]

I guess the counter to that would be that those higher density areas were conceived, planned, built and sold without subways....that, in the eyes of the market, the current transit options supported the density. In the case of new density nodes, farther from the core, a transit boost is needed.

Not saying I subscribe to that....just that it is the obvious "counter" to your point.

My personal opinion is that we should be building transit to serve existing unserved demand, which there is a lot of, rather than trying to create new demand or create development & density using multi-billion dollar transit projects.

In the first case the demand is already there and the infrastructure will definitely be well used, because the people are there already. In the 2nd case you're spending a huge amount of infrastructure money hoping someone else will spend tons of money creating the buildings to make use if your subway, and hoping people will buy the condos and use the subway. In the 2nd scenario is a much bigger risk that your subway will be under-used, and you're attempting to create demand for a huge project when demand already exists elsewhere.