Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisai
And that still does nothing to solve the operational costs. Everyone gets riled up over capital costs, when they choose to cut corners, they end up spending more money on the continued maintenance of the the "cheap option"
The Mayors are also sorely mistaken if they think that they can just soak developers to get more money for higher density, because the Mayors would rather keep that money to themselves. Hence the actual land 500 meters around the stations should have been owned by Translink in the first place with Translink being the direct financial beneficiary of whatever gets built and Translink never relinquishing ownership over those properties should new transit connections be needed later..
|
How can you say the mayors are mistaken about not trusting the mayors regarding the levies? That doesn't make any sense. The mayors are the ones proposing it. Besides that, it sounds like they want the tax to be collected directly by Translink, much like the property tax. So a city can't just levy the fees and keep them, only Translink would have the power to create the special development zones and collect the fees. So it would be a new power of Translink, and a new(ish) revenue source, but similar enough to existing property taxes and not directly on the population, so I could see this getting by without needing a plebiscite.
There should come a point where Translink's operating costs become largely covered by fares. Translink just needs an adequate rapid transit network first that attracts a substantial number of riders. Once it becomes convienient to go almost anywhere in the region on transit, mode share on transit will grow. The TTC gets about 2/3 of their funding from the Fare box. Translink get's about 1/3 from the Fare box. I don't think it will take much more to get more paying riders; Evergreen, Broadway Subway, and Surrey Rapid Transit will go a long way to covering a vast majority of the region with rail transit.
Also, if you take major capital projects out of the Translink budget and fund them directly with development levies from the regional governments and subsidies from other levels, through specially created agencies (like what they do in many States), the Translink budget becomes smaller and more manageable year to year. After a few years, the increase from property taxes from the increased density should also help pay for the operations portion.
Anyway, I think this is a great idea and will meet little opposition. If developers that are adjacent to potential stations are already willing to pay for the stations themselves, then it stands to reason that the surrounding developments also benefit from the station (but aren't paying for it), so it makes sense to charge special levies on developers.
Prev
Linear Mode
