Today Sat Sun
It is forcast to be Overcast at 10:00 PM EST on February 10, 2012
Overcast
4°/-13°
It is forcast to be Chance of Snow at 10:00 PM EST on February 11, 2012
Chance of Snow
-6°/-5°
It is forcast to be Chance of Snow at 10:00 PM EST on February 12, 2012
Chance of Snow
1°/-3°

16 Comments

news

The TTC’s Past, Transit’s Future

2007_07_31oldttcsign.jpg
Photo by Marc Lostracco.
With all the recent hubbub over taxes, cutting costs, and shutting down elements of the TTC, folks have been a little concerned about the fate of everyone’s favourite public transit system. While Mayor David Miller continues to passive-aggressively beg Ottawa and Queen’s Park for funding, many wonder if it’s possible to run the TTC without it. Haven’t we been a big, tough, independent city in the past? Can’t the Toronto Transit Commission operate purely on the dollar of Torontonians? By looking at the past, perhaps we can avoid some of the transit mistakes of previous governments. So let’s hop into our wayback machine and take a look at how the provincial and federal governments have helped (and hindered) the TTC.


Up until 1921, Toronto’s transit was run mostly by business moguls such as Alexander Easton and William Mackenzie. The TTC itself was created, ironically enough, by the Province in 1921. Back then it was known as the Toronto Transportation Commission and operated those new-fangled electric streetcars, and for a few decades, the TTC operated mostly on fares. During the Second World War, gas rationing made the TTC a much more affordable alternative to driving and ridership (as well as revenue) boomed. As the war came to a close, congestion grew, and streetcars proved to not be enough for our growing metropolis.
Construction began on the subway system in 1949. The project was funded almost entirely by the revenue that had been built up during the TTC’s war boom. The Yonge subway line opened in 1954—the same year that the TTC became the Toronto Transit Commission. The change of name was a result of the Province amalgamating Toronto and its then-suburbs into the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto. With this amalgamation, the TTC absorbed the transit needs of a much wider area. Suburban demands for transit caused the TTC to make a number of unprofitable and expensive routes and thus fares slowly began to cover less and less of the TTC’s operating costs. Sound familiar? While the urban planners of the post-war era brilliantly designed suburbs to be car-friendly, the automobile began to replace public transit as a primary means of transportation for citizens and ridership continued to plummet. The City and the Province stepped in with a subsidy to make up for this loss, while the federal government mostly stayed out of the TTC’s operating costs.
The federal and provincial government’s cash did help the TTC expand, however, and in 1959, provincial funding allowed for construction to begin on the University line, which was seen as a requirement for expanding the Bloor-Danforth line later on. The Province made it known that it was responsible for the line’s construction—a smiling Premier Leslie Frost broke ground on the project and Premier John P. Robarts switched tracks on when it was completed in 1963. Much like the now-threatened Sheppard line, ridership of the University line was lower than expected and the TTC eliminated night and Sunday trains in 1969, replacing them with a bus that ran up Avenue Road. This continued until 1978, when the Spadina extension opened.
2007_07_31oldstreetcarnewstreetcar.jpgIn 1972, the TTC ceased making an operating profit and depended even more heavily on funding from the City and Province for day-to-day operations. Capital funding from the province continued to help expand the subway. In 1971, the Ontario Municipal Board paid for $37.5 million of the projected $79.6 million cost of extending the subway north to Finch. Similarly, the Spadina subway also required approval and significant funding from the Province
In the mid-1980’s, Premier Bill Davis proposed the Network 2011 transit plan, which was meant to drastically improve and expand Toronto’s transit system. Again, sound familiar? However, a succession of provincial governments in the ensuing years ensured that this plan would never come to fruition. The Liberals were elected and then the NDP, both of whom couldn’t justify spending their money on a plan written by a Conservative government, so it was all but scrapped. Only the Sheppard and Eglinton West subway lines remained feasible, and in 1994 Bob Rae’s NDP government approved construction on both projects.
Alas! Once again, one party was swept out of power in favor of another. In 1995, Rae was voted out and Mike Harris came to power, cutting all capital funding of public transit. The Eglinton West project was cancelled and Mel Lastman’s baby, the Sheppard subway line, just barely held on. It finally opened in 2002 and may prove to have a shorter life than originally hoped. Throughout the 1990s, provincial funding for TTC operations continued to dip. With the formation of the megacity in 1998, more people began to rely on the TTC, and operation costs continued to increase. The same year, the Province ceased its contribution [PDF] to the TTC’s operating subsidy
In recent months—particularly since there’s a provincial election looming—we’ve heard of a lot of plans to expand the TTC. The McGuinty government’s MoveOntario 2020 sounds nice, but it is not much more than an election promise at this point. It could prove to be as effective as Davis’ Network 2011, particularly since the Conservatives and NDP lack a concrete transit-expansion plan and are likely not to continue with McGuinty’s plan if they are elected. Since Miller’s Transit City plan is encompassed within McGuinty’s, it may never see the light of day.
Until 1998 the Province had been holding the hand of the TTC for decades. The federal government has given very little to the operational needs of the TTC—something that our mayor and urban activists have voiced their frustration about in the past. While the tax credit for transit passes is a start and funding for projects such as the Spadina subway extension and MoveOntario 2020 are great as well, more needs to be done. So far, the Province and Ottawa chip in their fair share of capital infrastructure costs [PDF], yet as we now know, it’s the cost of operations that need funding. The slashes of the 1990s have led us into our current situation. It’s about time that we got back to the old ways and brought back provincial funding for TTC operations, but we need the federal government to chip in money as well. The past has shown that subway closures can be as temporary as transit improvement plans, but cooperation on the part of all levels of government may be able to eliminate the former while promoting the latter.
Special thanks to Transit Toronto for their excellent history of the TTC. Bottom photo by tysonwilliams from the Torontoist Flickr Pool.

Comments

  • guest

    Well said and great job on the research. By changing the names and some minor details, the above essay could be written about every single transit system in North America. I’ve always believed that the best way to convince government leaders is not through innovation or even a reminder of the past, but simply to constantly hammer them with what other cities are doing in the present. There is a lot of talk about how the TTC operated in the past, but I’d rather see a lot more in media about the current subsidies and funding structures for Montreal, Portland, Dallas, Boston…. There is much to be learned from the examples of others. For instance, much of the subsidy for the NYC subway is generated through the bridge and tunnel tolls collected by its parent, the MTA. What if the TTC were helped out by the GTTA collecting tolls on the 407? Ok, that cat is out of the bag but should other tolls be imposed, that’s a possible funding source. Some citiesget funding from gas taxes, others from county sales taxes. Sucks to hear it, but what if the PST was 8.5% in the GTA and that 0.5% went to public transit? Learn from your peers, Toronto.

  • guest

    If you’re operating at a loss, your at the mercy of others. If you’re a government operation, you’re at the mercy of politicians who will have other, higher, priorities.
    Get government out of TTC operations, fund it through sale of intensification rights, and then you have a functional system that captures the value that it creates. Government bailouts are always a bad idea and always cause problems. Public transit was created by these bailouts (and socialist schemers) and has been a disaster because of it.
    Hospitals that everyone use are short of cash, and will continue to have first call on resources until they are finally privatised. Transit will always be at the far back of the line and in a disastrous state until the dead hand of government is removed.

  • guest

    funding for projects such as the Spadina subway extension and MoveOntario 2020 are great
    Actually, funding for the Spadina extension is not great.
    It is an invitation to potential ruin for the city of Toronto and the TTC. It is a sop to the 905, with little prospect of upside for either Toronto or the TTC. In fact, it is certain to be a money loser for the TTC, so that Toronto will be subsidizing this money draining extension through the TTC for the express benefit of the 905.
    The fact that Toronto would be a party to this boondoggle is baffling. When looking for savings as a result of the budget crunch, the very first thing the TTC needs to look at is terminating its involvement in this impending white elephant.

  • guest

    I agree that the funding for the spadina subway is not that great. While it probably will be necessary it is not bing funded by those who will benifit the most… the developers who are in Vaughan who are now bankrolling the sprawl out there. This, like all sprawl has very little or nothing to do with urban planners; rather it is the market demand for this type of ‘lower cost’ (if you don’t throw in all the ancillary costs of living there, the houses are cheaper per square foot) and this style of living. Market demand fed the post war suburbs of yesterday and the same is happening today. This type of development has nothing to do with transit, and so transit should abandon it until the people who live there choose to make it viable for transit by intensifying. Period.
    In the meantime the province could use the tools it legislated and actually legislate affordable housing and intensification so the poor aren’t eventually punished by the high cost of oil. Because the housing is cheaper out there, people will have to choose between shelter and transportation as oil insecurity increases.

  • guest

    Get government out of TTC operations? You seemed to have missed my point. Do not even try something that no other city IN THE WORLD has accomplished. There is exactly one city transit agency that is not publicly funded, and that is Hong Kong. Toronto may be condo heaven but it cannot pull off HK levels of real estate redevelopment and has nowhere near the density. Everyone else has government funding, so the trick is not to be different but be the same. What kind of funding? What kind of government oversight? Yes, get the politicians out but also provide the needed funding which can only come from the public till.

  • guest

    Yes, lets kill the Spadina extension and any other part of transit that lets people who live outside the old city of Toronto get into it. Then they’ll all have to move here and we’ll have killed the suburb. Public transit should only be convenient and fast for those who love density and real urban living.

  • guest

    Public transit CAN ONLY be convenient and fast for those who love density and real urban living, because it’s too expensive to offer decent service to the suburbs. There’s not enough people out there. The subsidies would be astronomical. The federal government partly funding the subway line to Vaughan is not something to celebrate if you are hoping the TTC will survive as an effective transit system, because now they have an excuse to not give us any more money for a long time. And it’s sad that the money they did give us is being wasted on a project that will help only a small community of people.

  • PaulKishimoto

    @#2, #5: The point about Hong Kong’s density is valid, but that doesn’t mean the TTC should stay out of development. The Star printed an article about this a few months ago; the city may shortsightedly sell off the Islington parking lots instead of developing them itself and keeping the rent. I hate one-to-a-car commuters, too, but ultimately a mix of tolls, taxes, alternate revenue sources and cutting the payroll is going to be the most acceptable (and probably stable) way to keep the TTC afloat.
    @#4, #6, #7: The current condo boom is largely powered by the availability of public transit. Smart urban planning means building transit infrastructure before you have to tunnel under existing highrises to do it. For example, the area around Square One in Mississauga is undergoing heavy redevelopment. If there was easy rail access from there to Toronto, I can barely imagine how much faster it might grow. The entire country was settled this way; read the history of the CP Railway and look at the current population density of Canada.

  • mayuus

    As long as you continue building new subway lines for suburbanites who neither need or want public transit you will have a funding problem.
    Of course it is not just that there are fewer riders in the suburbs, but they also cost the government more to subsidize. Suburbs are not built for public transit.
    Of course we will not get a zone system, since it would be unpopular in the 905. Might help pay some public transit costs though.
    But the 905 area is very attractive to politicians from the senior levels of government, that is where the votes and money now are.
    Public transit is low priority for politicians at the senior levels of government and some city politicians who represent the older suburbs.
    The TTC is not automated to any great extent, and management does not exactly support modern marketing ideas(look how long it took to get the new multi-user Metropass) and the union members are only interested in getting the most money they can out of the TTC and doing the least amount of work. It too hard to announce stations, tell bus riders to move back,check that the Metropass is current(some of them actually give you the back of their head). And how about directions, hey most of them live in the 905, not Toronto. They drive their SUV’s into Toronto, and are not familiar with Toronto, let alone their routes. They just drive.
    Last time they cut 1/2 the surface routes in 1995, they kept all the permanent employees.
    I am sure that transit union members have a lot of worthwhile information to share about the TTC operations, but they are not interested.
    The mayor has to consult the union first before making any plans. The union members will not be limiting their salary demands.
    I understand that the TTC is actually doing a customer survey this year for the first time. Of course they never ask the customers what they think, but should the TTC encounter any problems we have to pay more and have the service cut.
    The TTC a nice place to work, but not a nice system to use.

  • musicstar

    The tax credit offered by the Conservative government has exasperated the problem. The money spent on tax credits should have been put directly in the hands of transit across the country. Instead the tax credit increased ridership, thus creating more operational costs. Not to mention that those who actually live in Toronto and cannot justify the cost of a metropass gain no tax benefit. Not also to mention that those in regions of Canada who would love to use transit but have not viable options gain no tax benefit.

  • guest

    It baffles me to no end to witness the TTC brag that they move millions a day and are strapped for cash. At 2.75 a head, how could those millions of riders not pay far more then their operating costs?

  • Gloria

    11: Because anybody who knows better doesn’t pay the cash fare. I’m guessing the vast majority of riders are regular commuters who buy tickets, tokens, or passes.

  • guest

    The TTC is strapped for cash because of subway lines being built for communities that don’t have the density to support such high-density transit!
    PaulKishimoto, I totally disagree with you about what smart urban planning is. It will take MANY DECADES before the Spadina extention will be able to justify its existence even if development keeps up, which it might not. It will be a financial leech for many years, and help so few. Maybe in a fantasy world can we afford to build subway tunnels underneath all the undeveloped land in Toronto in anticipation of the masses of people who will live there in future generations, but in the real world that’s not practical. And, by the way, the history of settling Canada by building the CP railroad offers few lessons when it comes to urban planning in Toronto for many, many reasons.
    Many people in Toronto need to get over this philosophy of “build it, and they will come”. Subway lines should only be built in areas where other forms of transit like streetcars and LRT are full to capacity. Until there’s enough people, new developments can be serviced by bus or streetcar, which are less costly, and offer more stops along their routes than subway does, offering more convenience and flexibility. The whole transit system suffers if one part of it is going to be so expensive and useless to most.
    If you want to build train lines that extend over the borders of the city into Mississauga and Vaughan, then lobby the Ontario government to expand the GO system, which is supposed to be the system that services commuters, not the TTC. The TTC is for the residents of Toronto, trying to travel within the city of Toronto.

  • PaulKishimoto

    @#13: The ‘Transit City’ plan is a good compromise between busing and subways, since light rail requires only an intermediate population density to be financially sustainable. I read some figures in a provincial report once, but can’t seem to find it online.
    NIMBYism so prevalent in the GTA that it’s not a matter of decades, but simply impossible to replace existing neighbourhoods and suburban subdivisions with high-density housing that can sustain heavy rail (subway). Who’s going to allow a high-rise apartment or condo stack to be built in their neighbourhood, if it might cast a shadow over their precious backyard pool?
    Housing is also “build it, and they will come.” The choice is between planning to build up and let people take transit, or to build out (pave over more farmland) and force them to buy cars. Selfishness aside, the only justification I can think of for the latter is to protect the auto industry, and that’s a pretty weak argument.

  • guest

    The TTC needs to have transfers with a use-by time. How many riders would spontaneously jump on and off Spadina, St. Clair, or Queen to do some shopping if they didn’t have to pay a new fare each time?
    BTW, how did the Harris amalgamation have anything to do with ridership? The TTC was already run by Metro.

  • guest

    The Spadina line expansion all the way into the Vaughn Corporate Centre, really does little in terms of mass transit.
    Yes, there should be a line at least up to York University. Why? Because a school of its size (40K + incl. faculty and support staff), are in constant need of transportation. And perhaps real estate developers will take that into consideration and create condo living around that area; now that, is density cable of supporting heavy rail transit (subway).
    But that’s where it should stop. The 905 area code (aka the Vaughn & Woodbridge pop.) care little about high density living. It’s why they all live there, SUBURBAN SPRAWL. Supported solely by the illusion that the automobile will be the way to go.
    So why are we giving them mass transit? It is nothing but a sure fire way for the TTC to force itself even further into the RED.
    “Build it, and they will come” originally was to be supported by rail, until the automakers of North America thought otherwise. And with fossil fuel continually becoming an unviable form of energy, we still don’t seem to be getting the message, that suburbia is not quite sustainable.
    So if we’re going to build it and have them come… it should be in the form of condo living, supported by light rail systems.
    This could go on for a lot longer, but lets stop here.
    You’re welcome to continue this conversation with me: kanishka.sonnadara@alliedfusion.com
    Otherwise, take care and keep working for a better place to live. Don’t hope, do it.