The controversial Scarborough subway transit file is about to get a lot messier. The Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) is taking the City of Toronto to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) to contest one of the funding mechanisms being used to build the three-stop line.
BILD President and CEO Bryan Tuckey, who also has extensive experience as a land-use planner, points to ridership figures which suggest light-rail transit would be the more appropriate option to connect Kennedy Station to Sheppard Avenue East. The planned seven-stop LRT, which would have seen its $1.48 billion price tag fully covered by the province, was axed in favour of a subway costing $3.56 billion routed along McCowan Avenue. The LRT would have also stretched 9.9 kilometres instead of the proposed 7.6 kilometre subway plan.
The provincial funding which had been dedicated to the LRT has now been shifted to the subway and the federal government has committed $660 million. A 1.6% property tax levy applied to all Toronto households will raise $745 million over its 30-year lifespan, and the remaining $165 million will be covered by a citywide 10% increase in development charges that was approved in May.
Scarborough subway study area, image courtesy of the City of Toronto
BILD argues that an increase in development charges—which municipalities collect to cover infrastructure serving new development—will put an unfair burden on new homeowners who will shoulder the cost. The TTC projected 9,500 rush hour riders in the busiest direction, but the City returned with an estimate of 14,000 that it used to justify the subway. BILD says these numbers are inaccurate, inflated, and therefore, cannot be used as the basis for a development charge increase.
BILD hired consultants IBI Group to assess the bylaw and the City's ridership figures and had attempted to reach a deal with the City before the bylaw was approved. Council rejected the notion of a compromise despite warnings from City staff. A preliminary hearing is scheduled for early December.
UrbanToronto contacted transit advocate Steve Munro who shared his thoughts on Scarborough's latest transit troubles. "First off, we know that the development industry does not like paying one cent more than they have to, and preferably less, in taxes. In that sense they are no different than other taxpayers," said Munro. "However, while homeowners, for example, express their opposition by voting for politicians with vague promises to fight waste at City Hall, and hope that their 'champions' like Ford and Tory will 'do right' by them, their only recourse is at election time."
Munro explains that the citywide application of the bylaw means new homeowners downtown, where most development is focused, will be paying for a subway extension they may never use. "Everybody pays into the pot whether they directly benefit or not. There is an underlying assumption that improvements benefit the network as a whole, but when they are so infrequent and highly localized (as are subway extensions), this is not the same as a collection of works scattered around the city, or a systemic change such as the provision of more capacity on the subway," said Munro.
The Scarborough RT, image by UrbanToronto Flickr Pool contributor Bryan Bonnici
"Also, of course, development charges only cover the portion of a capital project that is required for development-induced growth, and there are many other beneficiaries (notably homeowners in areas that become more attractive) who are not touched by development charges which would kick in only if their property were actually redeveloped. Indeed, given the geographic pattern of development in Toronto for the foreseeable future, it is the buyers of new condos in the core area where most growth occurs who will pay the development charges associated with the Scarborough extension which will be little used by most of them."
Munro agrees the ridership projections which informed the development charge bylaw have been inflated for political reasons. "It will certainly be interesting to have this challenged in a venue where chest-thumping politicians don’t get to hijack the proceedings," said Munro. The projections are also flawed because they "presume that all of the increase, to whatever number might be appropriate, is actually due to development within Toronto (the scope to which the development charges apply)." Some of the subway riders would originate from Markham, and Munro notes that there is no recourse for the City to collect funding from development outside Toronto borders. Munro also believes some ridership growth will naturally occur when people shift from other modes of transportation to public transit.
"Development charges really should only pay for new demand that can be reasonably expected to arise from the development, not from other parallel factors, and by implication that the costs should be borne through broad-based revenues including from the 905 where applicable," said Munro. "The cautionary tale is that a project cannot simply invent numbers out of the air to justify taxes that are targeted at a specific group. Pretending that the subway is the 'best' option for Scarborough regardless of how the demand projections come out might continue, but charging taxes based on unsupportable figures is quite another matter."
The result of the appeal will be interesting, especially its possible impact on future evidence-based planning in Toronto. While the complete repeal of the bylaw is unlikely, the OMB could force the compromise BILD was seeking earlier in the year.
What are your thoughts on the recent turn of events in the ongoing Scarborough subway saga? Let us know by leaving a comment in the field below. You can also check out Steve Munro's complete article on the topic by visiting this link.