[TOareaFan]

I see where you're coming from. But then again, I can see where he's coming from too. All Oakville really needs at this point is the electrification of the Lakeshore line, the BRT along Dundas St, and the BRT-Lights on Trafalgar and Bronte.

In general, both Halton and Durham are taking pretty cost-effective approaches to their rapid transit plans. Lakeshore will carry the express trips, and the Dundas & Highway 2 BRTs respectively will take more of the local load. The local rapid transit costs barely crack the billion mark in both of these regions. That's a far cry from the billions upon billions that Toronto, Hamilton York Region, and Peel Region are looking for for their transit plans.

But isn't that the point I am making....he is critcizing the $1000 per person cost on a regional basis because his part of the region has lower needs? It totally ignores, as an example, the fact that the reason his area is so well served by the current set up is because the current regional system (GO) is disproportionately serving his part of the region. So, as an example, if part of the cost of that regional plan is the $4.9B estimated to bring the other GO lines up to the same standard as the Lakeshore line he is saying "I'm all right Jack, I have my all day two way service 7 days a week. I have my parking structures built at my stations (none of which his town paid for) so why should we have to contribute to the plan that brings the rest of the region to the same level?"

Any municipality that takes that sort of position is not contributing to the regional solution and, in fact, may be making it worse.

 

[M II A II R II K]

To fix public transit in Toronto, we have to use creative techniques to convince people it's a public good worth paying for.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/edit.../how_to_make_toronto_public_transit_sexy.html

.....

• Cut holes in construction hoardings! Let people look down into our massive construction sites. Why not build viewing areas, with bleachers? Let us watch.

• Above ground, large vibrant signage should explain what’s happening below the surface. Why not have markers or flags for each boring machine, that move as the machines inch forward below? Otherwise, the work is invisible to all.

• For information to go viral, avoid technical acronyms like TBM (Tunnel Boring Machine) on twitter.

• Build a live GPS-based map of all underground boring machines, so we can see progress each day. (We currently have a static map with a disclaimer saying “the position of the Boring Machines are approximations only”.)

• Recruit celebrities! When a tunelling machine breaks through a new wall, why not have Geddy Lee, Sarah Polley or José Bautista at the wheel?

.....

 

[innsertnamehere]

I like the ideas of little implantable flags that get moved once a day, and the idea of posting notices on the side of construction hoarding, along with little viewing holes. New York does the notices, and it nicely explains what is happening at each construction site. I thought that TBM was a pretty standard term? I have seen it used in news articles quite a few times before.

 

[gweed123]

To fix public transit in Toronto, we have to use creative techniques to convince people it's a public good worth paying for.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/edit.../how_to_make_toronto_public_transit_sexy.html

I love these suggestions! Specifically for Union, it would be pretty cool to have at least a viewing platform set up, with future renderings there as well, so people can see the live action, and what the end result will be.

 

[M II A II R II K]

And can be done at low cost.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Royson James
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/201...s_the_unvarnished_truth_on_transit_james.html

 

[M II A II R II K]

Metrolinx could adopt the newly conceived Enhanced Transit Zone approach that would tax the residents that need more transit than burdening the 905ers with the same amount of tax.

 

[BurlOak]

From the Star;

Kathleen Wynne and Rob Ford at opposite ends of Toronto’s transit debate
http://www.thestar.com/news/queensp...opposite_ends_of_torontos_transit_debate.html

Ford makes the statement that “I don’t think the people are ready for a tax yet.†I recall elsewhere he used the 'at this time' in his declining to support new tax measures. I think he is coming around on this.

 

[M II A II R II K]

The Toronto Board Of Trade came up with this.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Except for the parking levee, this is exactly what I would like to see. We paid 15% sales tax for years, I'm perfectly fine moving back to 14%.

As for the gas tax, I feel it would be perfectly fine at 10 cents. I personally would prefer something closer to 5-6 cents, but I would still be fine with 10. I would be scared to see gas go over $1.50, (people would likely get angry) which would be quite possible with a 10 cent tax.

 

[nfitz]

As for the gas tax, I feel it would be perfectly fine at 10 cents. I personally would prefer something closer to 5-6 cents, but I would still be fine with 10. I would be scared to see gas go over $1.50, (people would likely get angry) which would be quite possible with a 10¢ tax.

In Ontario there's currently about 40¢/L of tax, when the price is $1.30 a litre. Vancouver has a 15¢/L gas tax.

Of course, if we add a 10¢ it will add another 1.3¢ of HST (0.5¢ for the Feds, and 0.8¢ for the province).

Perhaps the easiest thing to do is simply double the existing 14.7¢ provincial gas tax.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I would prefer a straight up 10 cent hike on gas, rather than a percentage tax, with no HST applying to the new tax. Plus it would now be .9 cents instead of .8 because of the 1% sales tax increase.

 

[TOareaFan]

This idea of new revenue tools is really getting into the public realm of discussion.

Today, NAIOP Toronto Chapter sent out an email to its members asking them to participate in a survey on the matter.

On behalf of the NAIOP Greater Toronto Chapter Government Affairs Committee we are asking you to participate in a brief survey.

The City of Toronto and Metrolinx are undertaking public consultations regarding new funding 'tools' to pay for "The Big Move" - a transportation build out in the Greater Toronto Area. The Big Move and these new 'tools' will impact you and your businesses. Your input will help inform NAIOP so we may best reflect your interests on these important matters.

All information collected through this survey will be kept confidential and only aggregate survey results will be reported by NAIOP Greater Toronto Chapter.

This is the third survey on the matter I have completed on the subject (from various places)....I get the sense that everyone accepts that these "revenue tools" are coming and all are keen on making sure they are lobbying for the right mix as opposed to lobbying against the concept.

 

[W. K. Lis]

The gas tax should not be a fixed amount, but percentage. However, electric vehicles would not use gas, so would end up being exempt. Hybrid vehicles, would end up paying a less portion compared to their use of the roads.

A regional sales tax is acceptable, but only if it is formally restricted to transit. I can see some anti-transit politician redirecting the funds to some "emergency".

The parking space levy should be part of the parking fees, and should not be passed onto customers. End free parking and have the users of the parking slot pay for their use.

 

[gweed123]

The gas tax should not be a fixed amount, but percentage. However, electric vehicles would not use gas, so would end up being exempt. Hybrid vehicles, would end up paying a less portion compared to their use of the roads.

A regional sales tax is acceptable, but only if it is formally restricted to transit. I can see some anti-transit politician redirecting the funds to some "emergency".

The parking space levy should be part of the parking fees, and should not be passed onto customers. End free parking and have the users of the parking slot pay for their use.

I think it should be up to the individual business (or mall/plaza owner) to decide whether or not they want to swallow the cost of the parking space tax, or if they want to pass it onto the customer. As long as they pony up the dough, I really think it's up to them how they decide to pay for it.

And as I mentioned before, I think if a parking space levee is adopted, there will be a court challenge within a year. The City can't mandate minimum parking space rates for commercial properties, and then tax them on the spots that they mandated. If a business figures they need 20 spots, but the by-law mandates 30 spots, why should the business be forced to pay the cost of construction AND a yearly tax on those extra 10 spots that they didn't even need?

If that Parking Space Levee does get adopted, the City needs to make minimum parking space amounts need to become guidelines, not a requirement of Site Plan approval.