The first paper released by Premier Kathleen Wynne’s Transit Investment Strategy Advisory Panel unpacked some hard truths about transit. Those truths include how the cost of transit encompasses much more than just the cost of building it, and how building transit to an area doesn’t mean that development will come.
The panel’s second paper, released late last week, takes the next logical step. It considers where new transit should be built in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area, which projects should be prioritized and why.
The right projects at the right time
To be clear, the panel isn’t suggesting that we pull out felt pens and remap the Big Move. But if the government is honestly asking taxpayers to contribute to the next wave of Big Move projects, it must be smart and responsible with everyone’s money. As a panel, we need to ensure that investments in transit provide maximum benefits and deliver tangible results, both in the short and long terms.
We need to prioritize projects where transit is most needed and where jobs are located. Serving the largest number of riders and reducing congestion most are also key priorities. And we cannot allow politically motivated pet projects to trump smart planning anymore.
For example, the Scarborough LRT was a fully funded project. The extra billions being spent to build a subway there could have gone towards rapid transit projects throughout the region, or towards a relief subway line that is badly needed to ease congestion on the over-capacity Yonge line.
Investing in short- and long-term relief
Longer-term projects — such as a relief line subway — will take time to build. The transit we need should also include short-term strategic investments to improve service and operations. These can provide relief to commuters in the immediate future, while other work continues.
One cost-effective investment is to simply add more transit vehicles to critical routes, which makes buses less cramped and reduces wait times. These are relatively low-cost investments that go a long way to build public confidence and demonstrate tangible results. Who wants to be paying new taxes while the streetcar is crammed tighter and tighter?
Twenty-five per cent of Big Move funding is allocated to municipalities for local projects. This funding should be used immediately to get people moving better rather than transit service cuts that only make the situation worse.
The introduction of all-day GO train service on the Lakeshore line, with a train every 30 minutes at a minimum, is one example of a short-term improvement in service on critical and crowded routes.
Along with more frequent service, short-term improvements can include fare integration between the Toronto Transit Commission and GO Transit as well as adding commuter stops to the Georgetown GO line — ways of modifying existing infrastructure to integrate routes, serve more riders, and provide options to over-crowded routes.
Other opportunities include providing a right-of-way for streetcars on King Street, upgrading and integrating service on GO train corridors to create a regional relief corridor, as well as funding the electrification of the Union-Pearson express and other GO lines.
Transit needs to connect and serve the whole region
Proposals to only build a few subways, rather than a full regional transit plan, come at a cost. They ignore the short-term opportunities to make improvements to the lives of commuters, as subways take a long time to build. Moreover, they foreclose on a connected network for the entire GTHA region.
The Big Move calls for a network of subways, light rail and rapid right-of way buses that are appropriate for each neighbourhood’s characteristics, such as population and employment. Light rail transit and bus rapid transit have proven to be the most cost-effective and business-supportive option for less-dense neighbourhoods. BRTs can be up and running in just a few years, transforming streetscapes and attracting development immediately — as is the case in York Region — and then converted to LRTs if ridership increases.
Taking transit investment seriously
We cannot invest in short- or long-term projects without a robust investment strategy that commits to raising enough revenue to plan for — and deliver on — a comprehensive transit network. That network should bring many kilometres of transit to the whole region, rather than just a few, short subway extensions to select areas of the city.
Building expensive transit projects without an investment strategy means all those subways would crash into a wall of debt. Ontario simply cannot take on any significant debt for new transit unless those projects have a guaranteed revenue stream to pay back financiers. Boston’s infrastructure debt spiral has forced the city to raise taxes and cut service just to pay the interest on their debt borrowed for past transit projects — let alone for building anything more.
This week, the Liberal government announced a plan to issue government-backed low-interest “green bonds" to help finance transit expansion, among other green infrastructure projects. This is an important move to help manage borrowing costs and speed up financing by making use of the province’s good credit rating. However, bonds are still borrowed money and the GTHA still has to generate revenue in order to pay them back.
Toronto should follow the lead of jurisdictions in the United States that have made smart transit funding decisions. In some cases, that includes introducing revenue streams such as sales taxes, which are used to pay back money borrowed through government-backed bonds that was used to built transit quickly.
Cities like Los Angeles as well as the state of Utah have introduced revenue tools to build rapid transit systems with broad support, including from drivers who understand the benefits of better mobility for all. That’s an optimistic counterpoint to the divisive politicking that keeps Torontonians stalled in traffic.
Follow Cherise on Twitter @CheriseBurda.
