News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

M II A II R II K said:
The Toronto Board Of Trade came up with this.


BFpSTvNCIAAbzuy.png
Click to expand...

The Toronto Board of Trade is a group of mostly business people. Business people? Business people who recommend revenue tools (AKA taxes) for the betterment of public transit?

The Ford brothers are business people. Are they members of the Board of Trade? Maybe they were too busy coaching, and other things, when the Board were working on the recommendations?
 
gweed123 said:
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.
Click to expand...

HOW about a church building which only gets used once or twice a week... they have minimums on those as well even if they may not be needed.
 
Why is it that when the question of where to get funding for new transit comes up the only source targeted is the car driver? Most car drivers are never going to use transit, most transit riders are never going to drive.

Many motorists such as myself never drive in rush hour or drive downtown, most transit riders do use transit in rush hour and many do go downtown, if there is a problem let them pay for improvements.

I swear if a sudden and urgent lack of tennis courts was identified in Toronto motorists would be the first to know.
 
spider said:
Why is it that when the question of where to get funding for new transit comes up the only source targeted is the car driver? Most car drivers are never going to use transit, most transit riders are never going to drive.
Click to expand...
Perhaps because car drivers benefit so much already from city services, without contributing anything. Free roads, signals, etc, for which the city collects nothing from car drivers or gas taxes.

Personally, as a car driver, I'd love to pay a lot more money for transit, because I know that I, as a driver will benefit. Especially if it means road tolls, and making the roads easier to drive on.

Though I use transit as well ... as do most car owners I know who live here.
 
The keys before implementing new measures are:

1. Demonstrate that public money is spent efficiently. The current Provincial Government has not been able to do this.
2. Be honest about Costs. Ford was not able to do this for his subway projects, even though he may have been partially correct that the most efficient design was not utilized and opportunities to integrate stations with developments were not explored.
3. Explain the transit plan. Much of the Big Move remains a mystery to most people in Toronto. Based on what is started and planned, the keys to the Big Move are: a) a subway to Vaughan, the riding of the former Liberal Finance Minister, even though the expected ridership is no greater than would be expected for Sheppard or Eglinton. b) Eglinton LRT must be in-median through Scarborough between Vic Park and Kennedy and there must also be a forced transfer for those from the heart of Scarborough to the central part of Toronto. c) Sheppard must be in-median LRT through Scarborough between Vic Park and Kennedy and there must also be a forced transfer for those from the heart of Scarborough to the central part of Toronto. Based on the first 3 priorities of the Big Move, it is hardly surprising that people are reluctant to cut a blank cheque.
4. Have transit plan accepted by the people. In the last mayoralty election, none of the main candidates campaigned for Transit City. Ford won a strong mandate for subways (grade-separated transit). Council over-ruled the desires of the public in returning to the Transit City plan.
5. Ensure that money raised goes to for the intended purpose. This is rarely done by government and has yet to be discussed by the Provincial Government - the ones who will most likely collect the bulk of the money.

So although its nice to have this revenue conversation, we need to have a new election (Provincially and possibly municipally) and we must revise the Big Move plan to make it more appealing.
 
nfitz said:
Perhaps because car drivers benefit so much already from city services, without contributing anything. Free roads, signals, etc, for which the city collects nothing from car drivers or gas taxes.

Personally, as a car driver, I'd love to pay a lot more money for transit, because I know that I, as a driver will benefit. Especially if it means road tolls, and making the roads easier to drive on.

Though I use transit as well ... as do most car owners I know who live here.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of drivers who don't make that connection. They don't see the interconnectedness of the two systems (road and transit networks).

It's unfortunate, because a lot of them either don't take the time to learn the connection, or deliberately ignore the connection because it would be financially inconvenient for them if the system was equilibrated fairly.
 
spider said:
Most car drivers are never going to use transit, most transit riders are never going to drive.
Click to expand...

The world is not that simple. In reality, there is both personal preference and ability, as well as the choices available. The quality and frequency of transit, the amount and cost of parking, how frustrating and time-consuming traffic is, how close people are able to live to work -- all of these things hugely affect whether people end up being car drivers or transit riders. Or, rather, how often people choose to drive or take transit, because people can and do use both modes on a regular basis.

Given demographics and cultural trends toward walkable urbanism and related themes, one of the biggest and growing frustrations in North American cities is with transit -- how crappy the transit options are, how packed the vehicles are, and how small a part of the city they cover with good service. Many don't take transit but want to have transit they would take.
 
This plan will never be considered. Most people will see that it includes new taxes and refuse to consider the plan, even though the economic benefits are clear.

There really needs to be an aggressive education campaign about these new funding tools if we have any hope of fixing the transit issues in this city.

Also needs to be assurance that this money will be spent solely on transit in the GTA. A common concern I hear about transit taxes is that they won't be spent as the voters intended.
 
Last edited:
mpd618 said:
The world is not that simple. In reality, there is both personal preference and ability, as well as the choices available. The quality and frequency of transit, the amount and cost of parking, how frustrating and time-consuming traffic is, how close people are able to live to work -- all of these things hugely affect whether people end up being car drivers or transit riders. Or, rather, how often people choose to drive or take transit, because people can and do use both modes on a regular basis.

Given demographics and cultural trends toward walkable urbanism and related themes, one of the biggest and growing frustrations in North American cities is with transit -- how crappy the transit options are, how packed the vehicles are, and how small a part of the city they cover with good service. Many don't take transit but want to have transit they would take.
Click to expand...

Your reply, although warm and fuzzy, doesn't address the question of who pays for improved transit. If improved transit is a good thing for everyone, and I agree it probably is, why isn't "everyone" asked to pay for it through higher tax levies and fares instead of attempting to dump the entire cost on motorists alone. Many people I know will never choose transit over their car and in fact can't remember ever taking a bus anywhere.
 
TOareaFan said:
Is the plan to try and implement them all?
Click to expand...

The immediate plan is to try and implement what's left of the First Wave projects, and then implement the Next Wave projects (Yonge extension, DRL, Hurontario LRT, etc). Eventually this revenue will end up funding a substantial part of the 25 year plan.

Of course, the extra benefit that this adds is that projects can proceed through the pipeline without the worrying question of "will there be funding waiting for us at the end?" Because now, for projects like the Yonge extension, the answer is no.

But if that revenue stream is there, and barring some major political shifts will continue to be there, that just takes one worry out of the project planning.

Question though: Does anybody know if the Next Wave projects include the unfinished portions of the 4 priority Transit City lines? I mean Finch West from Finch West Stn to Yonge, SLRT extension to Malvern, Sheppard east to Meadowvale, and Eglinton LRT to Pearson? Or have those all been deferred indefinitely behind the Next Wave projects?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top