STAFF REPORT Insert TTC logo here FOR INFORMATION

Chief Executive Officer’s Report – March 2017 Update

Date: March 22, 2017

To: TTC Board

From: Chief Executive Officer

Summary

The Chief Executive Officer’s Report is submitted each month to the TTC Board, for information. Copies of the report are also forwarded to each City of Toronto Councillor, the City Deputy Manager, and the City Chief Financial Officer, for information. The report is also available on the TTC’s website.

Financial Summary There are no financial impacts associated with this report.

Accessibility/Equity Matters There are no accessibility or equity issues associated with this report.

Decision History The Chief Executive Officer’s Report, which was created in 2012 to better reflect the Chief Executive Officer’s goal to completely modernize the TTC from top to bottom, has been transformed to be more closely aligned with the TTC’s seven strategic objectives – safety, customer, people, assets, growth, financial sustainability, and reputation.

Issue Background For each strategic objective, updates of current and emerging issues and performance are now provided, along with a refreshed performance dashboard that reports on the customer experience. This information is intended to keep the reader completely up-to-date on the various initiatives underway at the TTC that, taken together, will help the TTC achieve its vision of a transit system that makes Toronto proud.

Contact Vince Cosentino, Director – Statistics, [email protected], Tel. 416-393-3961

Attachments Chief Executive Officer’s Report – March 2017 Update

Chief Executive Officer’s Report

Toronto Transit Commission March 2017 Update

Introduction Table of Contents

The Chief Executive Officer’s Report, which was created in 2012 to better 1. TTC Performance Scorecard and reflect our work to completely modernize the TTC from top to bottom, has Critical Projects Dashboard 02 been transformed to be more closely aligned with the TTC’s seven strategic objectives – safety, customer, people, assets, growth, financial sustainability, 2. CEO Commentary 09 and reputation. For each of these objectives, updates of current and emerging issues and performance are now provided, along with a refreshed 3. Performance Update performance dashboard that reports on the customer experience. This information is intended to keep you completely up-to-date on the various 3.1 Safety & Security 16 initiatives underway at the TTC. It is a work in progress that will continue to 3.2 Customer 20 evolve over the coming months and will help us achieve our vision of a transit system that makes Toronto proud. 3.3 People 40 3.4 Assets 42 One of our seven strategic objectives, Reputation, involves creating an organization that is transparent and accountable, well-regarded by 3.5 Financials 49 stakeholders and peers, and in which employees are proud to play a part. Through my monthly commentary, I will keep you up-to-date on the key 4. Critical Projects 70 activities that I and my management team are involved in as we work to transform the TTC.

About the cover:

Flobell Asaba Ndesan, was recognized as the 2016 Employee of the Year at the Rewards and Recognition Gala, which took place on Andy Byford February 23, 2017 at the Arcadian Loft. Chief Executive Officer Andy Byford believes that ‘Good companies Toronto Transit Commission recognize that world-class customer service and lasting culture change can only be Our Vision: A transit system that makes Toronto proud. delivered if their employees are engaged, motivated and inspired to excel’.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 1

1. TTC Performance Scorecard & Critical Projects Dashboard

Toronto Transit Commission CEO Report – March 2017 Update 2

TTC Performance Scorecard

Latest Current Key Performance Indicator Description Measure Current Target Status Annual Trend Page

Safety and Security

Lost Time Injuries Injuries per 100 Employees Jan 2017 3.34 2.59 17

Customer Injury Incidents Injury Incidents per 1M Boardings Jan 2017 1.05 1.04 17

Offences against Offences per 1M Boardings Jan 2017 0.54 0.65 18 Customers Offences against Staff Offences per 100 Employees Jan 2017 0.26 0.28 18

Customer: Journeys TTC Customer Trips Jan 2017 39.6M 40.4M 21

2017 y-t-d TTC Customer Trips 39.6M 40.4M NA 21 to Jan

PRESTO Customer Trips Jan 2017 4.12M 1.57M 22

Wheel-Trans Customer Trips Jan 2017 297K 311K 22

2017 y-t-d Wheel-Trans Customer Trips 297K 311K NA 22 to Jan Customer: Satisfaction Customer Satisfaction Score Q4 2016 77% 72% 23

Customer: Environment

Station Cleanliness Audit Score Q4 2016 74.5% 75% 27

Bolded target values indicate the KPI target is under development. On Target Target at risk at current trend Off Target Interim target is based on the comparable prior period.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 3

Latest Current Key Performance Indicator Description Measure Current Target Status Annual Trend Page Bus Cleanliness Audit Score Q4 2016 88.4% 90% 28

Subway Cleanliness Audit Score Q4 2016 91.3% 75% 28

Streetcar Cleanliness Audit Score Data will be available Q1 2017

Customer: Service Performance

Subway

Yonge-University Delay Incidents Q4 2016 2,112 1,791 29

Delay Minutes Q4 2016 4,516 3,653 29

Trains per Hour in AM Peak Jan 2017 23.8 25.5 30

Bloor-Danforth Delay Incidents Q4 2016 2,513 1,596 31

Delay Minutes Q4 2016 4,138 3,340 31

Trains per Hour in AM Peak Jan 2017 23.7 25.5 32

Scarborough Delay Incidents Q4 2016 166 156 33

Delay Minutes Q4 2016 1,216 927 33

Trains per Hour in AM Peak Jan 2017 12.0 12.0 34

Bolded target values indicate the KPI target is under development. On Target Target at risk at current trend Off Target Interim target is based on the comparable prior period.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 4

Latest Current Key Performance Indicator Description Measure Current Target Status Annual Trend Page

Sheppard Delay Incidents Q4 2016 324 129 35

Delay Minutes Q4 2016 1,126 311 35

Trains per Hour in AM Peak Jan 2017 10.9 10.9 36

Streetcar On-Time Departure Jan 2017 74.6% 90% 37

Short Turns Jan 2017 769 753 37

Bus On-Time Departure Jan 2017 80% 90% 38

Short Turns Jan 2017 951 1,782 38

Wheel-Trans % Within 10 Minutes of Schedule Jan 2017 92.3% 90% 39

People

Employee Absence Absenteeism Rate Jan 2017 7.67% 6.50% 41

Assets: Vehicle Reliability

Subway

319,405 300,000 T1 Mean Distance Between Failures Jan 2017 43 km km 486,419 772,485 TR Mean Distance Between Failures Dec 2016 43 km km

Bolded target values indicate the KPI target is under development. On Target Target at risk at current trend Off Target Interim target is based on the comparable prior period.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 5

Latest Current Key Performance Indicator Description Measure Current Target Status Annual Trend Page Streetcar

3,115 4,500 CLRV Mean Distance Between Failures Jan 2017 44 km km 1,528 3,500 ALRV Mean Distance Between Failures Jan 2017 44 km km 9,572 35,000 New Streetcar Mean Distance Between Failures Jan 2017 45 km km 14,474 13,200 Bus Mean Distance Between Failures Jan 2017 46 km km 12,964 12,000 Wheel-Trans Mean Distance Between Failures Jan 2017 46 km km

Assets: Equipment Availability

Elevators Percent Available Jan 2017 99.2% 98% 47

Escalators Percent Available Jan 2017 97.1% 97% 47

Financials Year-End TTC Revenue Actual vs. Budget $1,196M $1,242M Section 3.5 2016 Year-End TTC Operating Expenditure Actual vs. Budget $1,682M $1,737M Section 3.5 2016 Year-End Wheel-Trans Revenue Actual vs. Budget $7.1M $7.0M Section 3.5 2016 Year-End W-T Operating Expenditure Actual vs. Budget $125.5M $123.7M Section 3.5 2016

Bolded target values indicate the KPI target is under development. On Target Target at risk at current trend Off Target Interim target is based on the comparable prior period.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 6

Latest Current Key Performance Indicator Description Measure Current Target Status Annual Trend Page Year-End Capital Expenditure – Base Actual vs. Budget $832M $1,119M Section 3.5 2016 Capital Expenditure – Year-End Actual vs. Budget $364M $720M Section 3.5 TYSSE 2016 Year-End Capital Expenditure – SSE Actual vs. Budget $26M $133M Section 3.5 2016 Operator Efficiency Crewing Efficiency Jan 2017 87.01% 87.15% 59

Bolded target values indicate the KPI target is under development. On Target Target at risk at current trend Off Target Interim target is based on the comparable prior period.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 7

Critical Projects Dashboard Current as of March 2017 | Next Update in May 2017 CEO Report

The dashboard below provides a quarterly snapshot in time of the health status for major programs and projects that comprise the TTC project portfolio. The programs and projects, referred to hereafter as 'projects', have been included in the dashboard due to their magnitude and/or strategic significance. Collectively, the dashboard comprises 52% of the base capital program and 100% of the fully funded expansion projects.

Dashboard data will be refreshed quarterly. The CEO Reports for March, May, August, and November will include a dashboard update as well as one-page project performance updates (see Section 4 of this CEO Report) for each of the projects listed in the dashboard. Major changes necessitating an immediate update will be discussed in Section 2 – CEO Commentary.

Cost (millions) Schedule Outlook to Completion Strategic Project Actual Projected End Date Objective Budget Start Date LTD % Cost % Approved Revised Cost Risk Schedule Scope Bus Fleet & Facilities Vehicles: Purchase of Buses * Assets $466 $252 54% $460 99% Ongoing Q4 2019 GGGG Facilities: McNicoll Bus Garage Growth $181 $9 5% $181 100% Q4 2012 Q4 2019 Q2 2020 GGGG Management Systems: VISION (CAD/AVL) Customer $115 $10 9% $115 100% Q1 2014 Q4 2020 Q1 2020 GGGG Streetcar Fleet & Facilities Vehicles: Purchase of New Streetcars Assets $1,187 $553 47% $1,187 100% Q2 2009 Q4 2019 YGGY Facilities: Leslie Barns Growth $516 $485 94% $523 101% 2008 Q4 2015 Q4 2017 GGGG Track: Surface Track * Assets $580 $253 44% $588 101% Ongoing Q4 2018 Q4 2019 GGGG Subway Fleet & Infrastructure

Vehicles: Purchase of Subway Cars Assets $1,167 $1,119 96% $1,167 100% Q2 2011 Q4 2016 Q1 2017 GGGG

Stations: Easier Access III Assets $655 $262 40% $774 118% 2006 Q4 2025 YYGY

Facilities: TR / T1 Rail Yard Accomodation ** Assets $985 $168 17% $986 100% 2010 Post 2025 GGGG

Track & Tunnels: Subway Track * Assets $505 $147 29% $497 98% Ongoing Q2 2018 Q1 2017 YGGG Signals: Automatic Train Control (ATC Line 1-YUS) Assets $563 $266 47% $563 100% Q2 2009 Q4 2019 GGGG

Expansion

Toronto-York Spadina Subway Extension (TYSSE) Growth $3,184 $2,583 81% $3,184 100% Q2 2008 Q4 2017 GGGG

Scarborough Subway Extension Growth $3,305 $30 1% $3,305 100% Q4 2013 Q4 2023 Q4 2026 RYRR Management Systems PRESTO Customer $47 $29 62% $47 100% Q4 2012 Q4 2017 YGGY Financial SAP $63 $24 37% $63 100% Q1 2014 Q3 2019 GYGG Sustainability *These projects are ongoing in nature. The performance data presented reflects the 10-year funding envelope only. **A portion of required scope for this project is currently not in the approved budget. The projected cost and the end date reflect the total scope.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO Report – March 2017 Update 8

2. CEO Commentary

Ambassadors join together to serve our customers Bolded target values indicate the KPI target is under development. On Target Target at risk at current trend Off Target Interim target is based on the comparable prior period.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 9

CEO Commentary and Current Issues

General Overview

This month's report includes data to the end of January 2017.

In response to Commissioners’ feedback for greater visibility of major projects, the project dashboard has been moved to the front of this report to sit just behind the performance scorecard.

The dashboard shows sustained progress across our mega projects and also provides a visual indication of just how much the TTC is delivering concurrently, as we drive to the finish line of our first five year plan. I have said before that the TTC is doing in five years what many would take twice that time to achieve: a complete modernization of its infrastructure, processes and culture – all delivered by the Corporate Plan that we developed back in 2012.

As we approach the end of Quarter 1, 2017, we are well placed to achieve the overriding objectives that I have set for this year, namely delivery of our mega projects and a year-end scorecard that shows each measure above or at target - or at the very least, on an improving trend.

Safety & Security

We continue to work closely with law enforcement agencies to monitor the prevailing global security situation.

The initiative to reduce instances of staff assault on surface routes has been made permanent following initial success. As a reminder, TTC Special Constables are boarding bus routes on a trial basis to offer visible presence to reassure customers and staff.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 10

Customer: System Performance

Subway and surface performance was a mixed bag but many targets show improving trends.

Back in 2014, I set the operational teams a challenge to reduce delays (minutes and incidents) by 50% over five years. Using 2014 as the base year, subway delay incidents show an 18.9% reduction, year-to-date and subway delay minutes a 41% reduction, again, year-to-date.

These improvements will continue as the effects of infrastructure and vehicle renewal take hold – but also because we are maintaining a relentless focus on the “basic” of transit operation.

Financials

On the financial side, of particular note, the 2016 year-end net Operating Budget surplus (operating expenses less revenue less City Operating Subsidy) is approximately $10 million. Capital expenditures were below budget in 2016 for a host of reasons (see Section 3.5).

Customer journeys (ridership) to the end of February were 1.7 million (2.1%) below budget and 0.7 million (0.9%) below the 2016 comparable actual. While these results are a continuation of the TTC’s soft ridership growth trend, they compare favourably with negative ridership trends that exist for many transit agencies across North America. These trends are discussed in more detail on page 54 of this report.

Delivery of Major Projects

• TYSSE

On February 28, York University became the second station to achieve “Substantial Performance”, hard on the heels of Downsview Park. I am still hopeful that a third station (Vaughan Metropolitan Centre) will hit this milestone in quarter 1, and this would mean that 50% of our stations are basically finished.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 11

I continue to monitor this project very closely including meetings with contractor CEOs as required. A CEO “Countdown Meeting” has been established to provide direction and assurance that everything remains on course for line opening by year-end.

The project remains on target for the key milestone to energize tracks by the end of March and we are currently undertaking gauge checks with a specially equipped test train to ensure that the line is clear for testing and commissioning to commence

Senior Management discussions and issue resolutions continue with our General Contractors to progress commercial matters.

• PRESTO

43 stations and 62 entrances are now fitted with new style PRESTO gates. A series of software patches and tweaks have improved the reliability of these devices and similar interventions are driving up availability of vehicle fare readers and station self-service machines.

Every month, the Deputy CEO and I meet formally with our counterparts at Metrolinx to review system performance and to progress delivery of other equipment that is key to PRESTO completion.

• Automatic Train Control

I was very pleased to witness the second on-site trial of the new ATC software during a recent planned closure of Line 1. Two trains were once again locked into the test area and it was exhilarating to witness the test train accelerate, coast and stop, in line with the target speed generated by the ATC software.

No show-stoppers were identified and the project continues on schedule and on budget, both for phase 1 (Dupont to Wilson this Fall) and Phase 2 (TYSSE opening this December).

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 12

• New Streetcar Deployment

At the time of writing, 32 new vehicles are on property and available for service. Vehicle 33 has just shipped from Thunder Bay, thereby keeping track with the latest delivery schedule from Bombardier (reproduced below).

My streetcar team has significantly increased the availability of new vehicles for service and it is now common for 31/32 vehicles to be in service, leaving one back for maintenance and/or staff training.

Deliveries per Month Summary

Yr\Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total 2017 021132324787 40 2018 377687736787 76 2019 5 7 6 8 7 6 8 3 7 1 58

• Culture Change

I was delighted to recognize the 2017 TTC Employee of the Year in an awards evening earlier this month. Flobell Asaba Ndesan was rightly lauded for the program he developed and delivered to improve fire safety across the subway. At that same gala, we recognized winners for the Leadership, Customer Service, Safety, Teamwork and Innovation categories.

Another sign of culture change and TTC renewal came when we wecomed our first three graduates to the newly inaugurated Graduate Trainee Program. A key output of our People program, this will provide leaders of the future in areas such as Customer Service, Engineering and Finance. From a highly competitive external competition, our three successful intakes will now undertake a two year development program, mentored along the way by experienced, senior TTC managers. We are delighted to have got this program under way as it is one of many ways in which we are building solid foundations for the future.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 13

In the last four weeks, the Executive held four Employee Town Halls with the wider leadership group to ensure that the whole team understands and embraces the work that we need to do in the fifth year of our plan. These sessions included high level results of our most recent Employee Engagement Survey.

• Accessibility Matters

Work continues to progress well on our current Easier Access projects.

Andy Byford Chief Executive Officer, Toronto Transit Commission

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 14

Page intentionally left blank

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 15

3.1 Safety & Security

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 16

Safety and Security

Lost-Time Injuries Customer Injury Incidents

6 2.5

2016 2017 2016 2017

5 2.0

4 1.5

3

1.0 2

Injuries per per 100 Employees Injuries

0.5

1 Injury IncidentsBoardings per 1 Million Vehicle

0 0.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

The lost-time injury rate (LTIR) decreased in January 2017. The customer injury incident rate decreased in January However, the rate of 3.34 injuries per 100 employees was 2017. The rate of 1.05 injury incidents per 1 million vehicle 29% higher than the corresponding rate of 2.59 for January boardings was 1% higher than the corresponding rate of 2016. 1.04 for January 2016.

The moving annual LTIR to the end of January 2017 was The moving annual customer injury incident rate to the end 3.57, which was 22% higher than the corresponding rate of of January 2017 was 1.23, which was 8% lower than the 2.93 to the end of January 2016. corresponding moving annual rate of 1.34 to the end of January 2016. The observed changes in the trend are partly due to the inherent variability in the data from month to month. The observed changes in the trend are partly due to the inherent variability in the data from month to month.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 17

Offences Against Customers Offences Against Staff

1.0 0.6

2016 2017 2016 2017 0.5 0.8

0.4

0.6

0.3

0.4 0.2 Offences per 100 Employees per Offences

Offences per 1 Million Vehicle Boardings Boardings Vehicle 1 per Million Offences 0.2 0.1

0.0 0.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Total offences against customers decreased in January Total offences against staff decreased in January 2017 to 2017 to 0.54 offences per 1 million vehicle boardings, which 0.26 offences per 100 employees, which was 7% lower than was 17% lower than the corresponding rate of 0.65 for the corresponding rate of 0.28 for January 2016. January 2016. In the month of December, the Transit Enforcement Unit Patrol Actions are generated monthly to direct Transit began targeted deployment on surface routes, as the first Enforcement Officers to specific locations at specific times, phase of its data-driven initiative to support operating based on recent data, in an effort to deter violent offences personnel. Following the success of the first phase, targeted against customers. deployment on surface routes will continue in 2017.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 18

Page intentionally left blank

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 19

3.2 Customer

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 20

Customer: Journeys

TTC: 2016 Actual vs. 2015 Actual TTC: 2016 Actual vs. 2016 Budget

12 12

2016 2017 2017 Budget 2017 Actual

11 11

10 10 Average Weekly Journeys (Millions) Journeys Weekly Average Average Weekly Journeys (Millions) Journeys Weekly Average

9 9 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

There were 39.6M customer journeys (ridership) taken during There were 39.6M customer journeys taken during January January 2017, which was 1.3M (3.2%) less than the 40.9M 2017, which was 0.8M (2.0%) less than the budget of 40.4M journeys taken during January 2016. journeys.

The annual number of customer journeys taken to the end of Average weekly ridership has been below budget for 22 of January 2017 was 535.3M, which was 0.8M (0.1%) more than the past 23 months. the 534.5M annual journeys taken to the end of January 2016.

Average weekly ridership in January 2017 was below the prior year comparable for the third consecutive month.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 21

Customer: Journeys

PRESTO: 2016 Actual vs. 2015 Actual Wheel-Trans: 2016 Actual vs. 2016 Budget

1.5 110 2016 2017 2017 Budget 2017 Actual

1.2

100

0.9

90

0.6

80 Average Weekly Journeys (Millions) Journeys Weekly Average 0.3 Average Weekly Journeys (Thousands) Journeys Weekly Average

0.0 70 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

There were 4.12M customer journeys (ridership) taken using There were 297K customer journeys taken during January the PRESTO Farecard in January 2017, which was 2.55M 2017, which was 14K (4.5%) less than the budget of 311K (162%) more than the 1.57M journeys taken during January journeys. 2016. Average weekly ridership was below budget for the first time The annual number of customer journeys taken to the end of in 29 months. January 2017 was 31.41M, which was 17.89M (132%) more than the 13.52M annual journeys taken to the end of January Note: 2016. Wheel-Trans ridership is not included in TTC ridership totals.

Note: PRESTO ridership is included in TTC ridership totals.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 22

Customer: Satisfaction

Customer Satisfaction Score

90

2015 2016

85

80

75 Customer Satisfaction Score Score (%) Satisfaction Customer

70

65 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter

At the start of 2016, perceptions of overall customer satisfaction with the TTC (bus, streetcar and subway) remained high, with eight in ten customers being satisfied (Q1 2016: 79%; Q2 2016: 80%). Despite the decline in scores in Q3 2016, when a less comfortable ride (hot subway cars) had a negative effect on perceptions of trip duration and wait time, which ultimately led to lower overall satisfaction scores (70%), customer perceptions improved significantly in Q4 2016, with 77% of customers being satisfied with their most recent trip on the TTC. Closing out 2016 with an overall average satisfaction score of 77% is in line with the average satisfaction score in 2015 (77%). The average for the last two years has been significantly higher than the previous years’ annual average of 74%.

This return to high perceptions of overall customer satisfaction in Q4 2016 was witnessed across all modes of ridership: subway riders’ overall satisfaction increased significantly from 69% in Q3 2016 to 78% in Q4 2016; bus riders’ satisfaction scores increased significantly from 68% in Q3 2016 to 77% in Q4 2016; and, while not statistically significant, streetcar riders’ satisfaction scores increased from 69% in Q3 2016 to 72% in Q4 2016.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 23

Perceptions of overall customer satisfaction are driven by numerous service attributes that are measured across all three modes: bus, streetcar and subway. The top three key drivers across all three modes were the same: wait time, comfort of the ride and trip duration.

The areas of highest customer satisfaction in Q4 (≥80%) include:

• Helpfulness of maps and signs at station (subway) • Cleanliness of station (subway) • Ease of getting to train platform (subway) • Ease of using or paying for fare (subway, bus, streetcar) • Personal safety during trip (subway, bus, streetcar) • Maps and information inside the vehicle (subway) • Quality of stop announcements (subway, bus, streetcar) • Ease of hearing announcements (bus, streetcar) • Helpfulness of announcements (bus, streetcar) • Helpfulness and appearance of operator (bus, streetcar)

Pride in the TTC remained consistent wave-to-wave and year-over-year, with 71% of customers agreeing they are proud of the TTC and what it means to Toronto. Perceptions of value for money remained consistent wave-to wave, with nine in ten customers indicating they received average or better value for money on their last trip (Q4 2016 & Q3 2016: 91%; Q4 2015: 92%).

Customer satisfaction with Wheel-Trans services continued to be very high in 2016 (88%; a significant increase from a high score of 85% in 2015 and 2014) and was consistent across all vehicle types (Wheel-Trans bus, accessible minivan and sedan taxi). Pride in the TTC and what it means to Toronto also remained very high among the majority of Wheel-Trans customers (89%).

Customer: Charter

The Customer Charter is designed to track promises and improvements that benefit customers, while holding TTC’s management to account if they’re not met. The progress against these commitments is reported to the TTC Board quarterly and posted on ttc.ca.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 24

2017 Customer Charter

The 2017 Charter includes 37 time-bound commitments which include:

a) Promises around Wheel-Trans and introducing new No-Show and Late Cancellation policies. b) Launch an Anti-Harassment campaign and a Safety and Security app. c) Open the Line 1 Toronto-York Spadina Subway Extension with six new fully accessible modern stations including: two new TTC bus Terminals, three new TTC commuter parking lots with 2800 spaces, and direct transit connections with GO Rail, GO Bus, York Region Transit buses including Viva. The stations will feature modern architecture with sustainable design features including: LED lighting, bird-friendly glass, green and cool roofs and landscaping designed to manage water run-off. Other station amenities will include Wi-Fi, covered bicycle storage, new Presto fare gates and new self-service Presto machines in service. The bus network along the corridors will be redesigned to serve the new stations. d) Continue with the PRESTO rollout by having PRESTO-enabled fare gates at all entrances at 43 subway stations. e) Start phasing out legacy fare media as the PRESTO rollout nears completion. This milestone leads one step closer to the full adoption of PRESTO. f) Complete Wi-Fi for 100% of our stations. g) Open a new second exit/entrance at Woodbine station and open two new elevators as part of the Easier Access program, making the station accessible. h) Open three new elevators at St. Clair West station and two elevators at Coxwell station, making the stations accessible. i) 300+ new buses in service to replace aging buses. j) Work with Bike Share Toronto to incorporate docking stations at a minimum of five TTC stations. This will offer customers a great solution for the first and last mile of their journey. k) Work with the Bombardier to have a minimum of 40 additional new low-floor, accessible streetcars on property.

For further details on the TTC customer charter, visit ttc.ca.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 25

Customer: Engagement

Meet the Managers

Meet the Managers sessions enable customers and managers to interact on a personal level. This allows managers to gain additional insight into the challenges and opportunities experienced by customers while travelling on the TTC.

The Meet the Managers sessions for 2017 are at the following stations:

March 23 – Yorkdale; April 27 – Spadina; May 25 – Eglinton; June 22 - Bloor-Yonge; July 13 - Scarborough Centre; August 10 - St. Clair West; September 21 – Kipling; October 19 – Dufferin; November 16 – Woodbine; December 14 – Coxwell

Customer: Fares

PRESTO

The PRESTO rollout continues across the TTC.

• 43 stations and 62 entrances now have our new paddle-style fare gates. Fare gate installation will continue throughout 2017. • Later this spring, new Self-Serve Reload Machines will begin to be installed in various subway stations. • A recent software upgrade that was deployed to the existing Self-Serve Reload Machines in the subway stations has improved the reliability of these devices. • Additional upgrades are planned for the self-serve machines, card readers on the buses and fare gates, which are expected to further improve the performance of these devices and continue to enhance the customers’ experience with PRESTO.

Customer: Highlights

Customer Liaison Panel - Youth Representation

On February 21, 2017, the TTC Board endorsed the addition of two youth members as part of the Customer Liaison Panel. For the purpose of the Panel, youth is defined as ages 13 to 24. It was recommended to have an outreach program where youth members are mentored by current Customer Liaison Panel member(s). Recruitment for the two youth members and six general members will be completed in the next couple of months, with a start date in July 2017.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 26

Customer: Environment

Station Cleanliness

80

2015 2016 Target

77

74 Cleanliness Audit Audit Cleanliness Score (%)

71

68 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Performance in Q4 2016 stayed at 74.5%, which was slightly below target and below the performance in Q4 2015. Stations improvements and fare lines under construction to facilitate installation of the new faregates negatively impacted the cleanliness score.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 27 Customer: Environment

Vehicle Cleanliness – Bus Vehicle Cleanliness – Subway

95 95

2016 Target 2016 Target

90

90

85

80

85 Cleanliness Audit Audit Cleanliness Score (%) Cleanliness Audit Audit Cleanliness Score (%)

75

80 70 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter

The bus cleanliness audit score increased in Q4 to 88.4% but The subway cleanliness audit score increased in Q4 to 91.3%. remained below target. This score was an average of pre- Performance achieved target for the fourth consecutive quarter service, in-service and post-service vehicle cleanliness scores. and it was the highest result throughout 2016. Pre-service bus cleanliness audit score was above 95%. Both areas of improvement, walls and ceilings, were Areas for improvement in Q4 include the bus exterior body and addressed in Q4. Other areas of improvement in the future wheel cleanliness. Inoperable wash racks and road salt usage include windows and floors. Currently, windows are due to weather conditions have prevented Q4 cleanliness addressed during the Major Clean cycle (every 1-2 months scores from further surpassing Q3 results. As an interim depending on fleet size) and floors are addressed every 14 measure, the cleaning contractors are hand-washing bus days during the Floor Wash cycle. exteriors. Note: Note: Prior year comparative data will be available effective Q1 Prior year comparative data will be available effective Q1 2017. 2017.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 28

Customer: Service Performance

Subway

Line 1: Delay Incidents Line 1: Delay Minutes

2,400 5,500

2015 2016 Target 2015 2016 Target

2,200 4,750

2,000 4,000

Number of Delay NumberMinutes Delay of Number of Delay NumberIncidents Delay of

1,800 3,250

1,600 2,500 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter The number of delay incidents decreased in Q4 to 2,112; The number of delay minutes increased in Q4 to 4,516. however, performance was still above target by 18%. It has Performance did not achieve target for the second consecutive stayed above target for the fourth consecutive quarter. quarter.

Speed control-related incidents accounted for 28% of all Speed control-related incidents accounted for 28% of all incidents; staff is continuing to work with the vendor to reduce incidents but only 1% of the total delay minutes, since they these incidents and improvement is expected in early 2017, after were resolved quickly. Passenger related delay minutes, software modifications to the system. With increases in track level however, accounted for 51% of the total delay minutes in Q4, trespassing and continued high levels of emergency alarms, with significant increase in disorderly customers, track level passenger-related incidents accounted for 41% of all incidents. trespassers and unsanitary cars.

Note: Note: The 2016 target is based on a 20% or more reduction in delay The 2016 target is based on a 20% or more reduction in delay incidents from the 2014 quarterly average baseline. minutes from the 2014 quarterly average baseline.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 29

Line 1: Trains per Hour in Morning Peak

35

2016 2017 Target

30

25

20 per Hour Number of Average Trains

15 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

The daily average number of trains per hour (TPH) in the morning peak service period increased in January to 23.8, or 93% of what was scheduled. Overall monthly performance continued to remain below target.

As this measure focuses on the AM peak period, any delay incidents in that time frame have a negative impact on our ability to meet this capacity target. A number of initiatives have been undertaken to address this and greater consistency is anticipated in 2017.

Note: Data are based on weekday service from Monday to Friday.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 30

Line 2: Delay Incidents Line 2: Delay Minutes

4,000 6,000 2015 2016 Target 2015 2016 Target

3,000 5,000

2,000 4,000

Number of Delay NumberMinutes Delay of

Number of Delay NumberIncidents Delay of

3,000 1,000

0 2,000 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter

The number of delay incidents decreased in Q4 to 2,513 but The number of delay minutes decreased in Q4 to 4,138 but performance continued to remain above target. performance continued to remain above target.

Speed control-related incidents accounted for 46% of all Although there was a significant increase in the number of delay incidents; as in Line 1, staff is continuing to work with delay minutes resulting from passenger-related incidents the vendor to reduce these incidents and improvement is (17.3% year-over-year), delay minutes resulting from expected in early 2017, after software modifications to the Fire/Smoke (Plan B) incidents decreased significantly, as the system. Reductions in the Fire/Smoke (Plan B) incidents approach to this issue continued to show positive results. were offset by an increase in passenger-related incidents. Note: Note: The 2016 target is based on a 20% or more reduction in delay The 2016 target is based on a 20% or more reduction in minutes from the 2014 quarterly average baseline. delay incidents from the 2014 quarterly average baseline.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 31

Line 2: Trains per Hour in Morning Peak

35

2016 2017 Target

30

25

20 per Hour Number of Average Trains

15 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

The daily average number of trains per hour (TPH) in the morning peak service period increased in January to 23.7, which was 93% of what was scheduled. Performance continued to remain below target.

A number of switch and signal incidents that occurred in the AM peak period adversely affected the throughput results on those days, which negatively impacted the overall results for the period.

This measure is expected to return to stronger performance in 2017; expectations should be tempered that there will only be improvements, however, instead of achievement of the target of 100% of scheduled service.

Note: Data are based on weekday service from Monday to Friday.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 32

Line 3: Delay Incidents Line 3: Delay Minutes

300 3,000 2015 2016 Target 2015 2016 Target

225 2,250

150 1,500

NumberMinutes Delay of Number of Delay NumberIncidents Delay of

75 750

0 0 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter

The number of delay incidents decreased in Q4 to 166; The number of delay minutes increased in Q4 to 1,216.

however, performance was above target for the third Performance did not achieve target for the first time in three

consecutive quarter. quarters.

Incidents related to rolling stock and VOBC time-out have The increase was largely due to rolling stock- and

consistently comprised the largest proportion of delay infrastructure-related incidents, as the corresponding delay

incidents and this remained unchanged in Q4. Passenger- minutes have more than doubled year-over-year. Of note is

related incidents, however, have reduced in Q4. that if one incident involving a broken power rail, which

accounted for 27% of the total delay minutes, was excluded,

Note: the target would have been achieved in Q4.

The 2016 target is based on a 20% or more reduction in delay

incidents from the 2014 quarterly average baseline. Note:

The 2016 target is based on a 20% or more reduction in delay minutes from the 2014 quarterly average baseline.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 33

Line 3: Trains per Hour in Morning Peak

16.0 2016 2017 Target

14.0

12.0

10.0

per Hour Number of Average Trains

8.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

The daily average number of trains per hour (TPH) in the morning peak service period increased in January to 12.0, or 100% of what was scheduled. Overall performance achieved target for the first time in seven months.

When combined with a headway performance of 98.5%, this represents a very reliable level of service.

Note: Data are based on weekday service from Monday to Friday.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 34

Line 4: Delay Incidents Line 4: Delay Minutes

350 1,200 2015 2016 Target 2015 2016 Target

300 900

250

600

200 Number of Delay NumberMinutes Delay of

Number of Delay NumberIncidents Delay of

300 150

100 0 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter

The number of delay incidents increased for the third The number of delay minutes increased substantially above

consecutive quarter in Q4 to 324. Performance continued to target in Q4 to 1,126, primarily due to One-Person Train remain above target. Operation.

The majority of the delay incidents were related to the Delay minutes due to One-Person Train Operation were a introduction of One-Person Train Operation. It must be noted short-term issue, with most of the delays occurring in the first

that this increase in delay incidents was not unexpected ten weeks of One-Person Train Operation program; significant without compromising safety standards. The bulk of those improvements have been already made since then. Longer delay incidents were in the first ten weeks of the program term issues, such as delays from Fire/Smoke (Plan B)

launch and delay incidents have already begun to return to incidents, have continued to improve, especially in Q4. normal levels. This measure is anticipated to decrease in

2017. Note: The 2016 target is based on a 20% or more reduction in delay Note: minutes from the 2014 quarterly average baseline. The 2016 target is based on a 20% or more reduction in delay incidents from the 2014 quarterly average baseline.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 35

Line 4: Trains per Hour in Morning Peak

12.0

2016 2017 Target

11.5

11.0

10.5

per Hour Number of Average Trains

10.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

The daily average number of trains per hour (TPH) in the morning peak service period increased in January to 10.9, or 100% of what was scheduled. Overall performance achieved target for the first time in four months.

The initial increase in delay incidents related to the implementation of the One-Person Train Operation has abated and service is expected to return to target in the coming periods.

With a relatively low number of delay incidents, it is anticipated that morning peak trains per hour will remain relatively high. Along with good headway adherence, overall service quality remains consistently strong.

Note: Data are based on weekday service from Monday to Friday.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 36

Streetcar

On-Time Performance Short Turns

100 4,000 2016 2017 Target 2016 2017 Target

80

3,000

60

2,000

40 Time Departures (%) Departures Time

- Number Short of Turns On 1,000 20

0 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Performance in January increased for the fourth consecutive The number of short turns decreased in January to 769; month to 74.6%, but continued to be below target. however, performance continued to remain above target (unfavourable). Enhanced focus on route performance, completion of construction on the Queen Street route and converting the Renewed focus on route management has resulted in Bathurst route to bus service have contributed to the improvements in the on-time performance, reducing the need improvement in the performance. for short turns.

Note: Note: This KPI measures adherence to scheduled (-1 to +5 minutes) Data are based on all seven days of service from Sunday to departure times from end terminals. Saturday.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 37

Bus

On-Time Performance Short Turns

100 6,000

2016 2017 Target 2016 2017 Target

90 4,500

80 3,000

Time Departures (%) Departures Time -

Number Short of Turns On 70 1,500

60 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Performance in January increased to 80% but continued to be The number of short turns in January decreased to 951. below target. Performance was below target (favourable).

On-time performance was marginally above last year's, due to The number of short turns decreased, due to better route the impact of Metrolinx’s construction on Eglinton Avenue. management, increased trip time and fewer delays from snow.

Note: Note: This KPI measures adherence to scheduled (-1 to +5 minutes) Data are based on all seven days of service from Sunday to departure times from end terminals. Saturday.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 38

Wheel-Trans

Punctuality

100

2016 2017 Target

95

90

85 Within 10Minutes ScheduleWithin of (%)

80 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Performance in January increased to 92.3%, which was the highest level achieved in the past three years. The improvement was due to better tracking of schedule adherence, combined with adjusted trip times and process improvements in deployment of extra resources in the event of service delays. Overall performance was above target.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 39

3.3 People

Graduate Development Leadership Program Interns from left to right: Anastassia Chouryguina - Customer Development & Service Delivery Program Swasini Sudarsan - Engineering & Operations Program Victor Tang - Financial Management Program Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 40

People

Employee Absence

12.0 2016 2017 Target

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0 (%) Rate Absenteeism

2.0

0.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

The absenteeism rate for January 2017 was 7.67%, which is a significant decrease from the rate of 8.59% for December 2016.

The TTC executive team met last month with representatives from Employee Relations and Occupational Health to discuss the increase and challenges with managing employee absenteeism. The meeting focused on both short- and long-term strategies to curb the absenteeism rate. The CEO directed a renewed focus on absenteeism during performance evaluations with staff, clarification of roles and responsibilities in attendance management, and direction to front-line managers about their rights and obligations when managing an employee’s absenteeism.

The TTC is exploring long-term options for improvements by reviewing our current attendance management practices, redeploying managerial resources, and analyzing the KPI data for areas of improvement. Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 41

3.4 Assets

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 42

Assets: Vehicle Reliability

Subway

T1 Train: Mean Distance Between Failures (MDBF) TR Train: Mean Distance Between Failures (MDBF)

600,000 1,200,000

2016 2017 Target 2016 2017 Target

450,000 900,000

300,000 600,000

Mean Distance Between Failures (km) Failures Between Distance Mean Mean Distance Between Failures (km) Failures Between Distance Mean 150,000 300,000

0 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

The MBDF decreased in January to 319,405 kilometres but performance 2017 data will be available once the 2017 target is set.

was above target for the third consecutive month.

The T1 Accelerated Door Overhaul program was completed in 2015. Door pocket guides are being overhauled, with an estimated completion at the end of 2016. Master controller upgrades are estimated to be completed in Q4 2016. The T1 fleet is undergoing a refreshing of the HVAC system. Although this particular equipment issue does not directly cause delay incidents, it remains a substantial performance issue.

Maintenance and engineering staff are collaborating to ensure that the standard inspection and door set-up programs are robust. Long-term design solutions include a PLC Door Control System, a Door Interlock Rebuild Program, and a new cab seat prototype design.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 43

Streetcar

CLRV Streetcar: Mean Distance Between Failures (MDBF) ALRV Streetcar: Mean Distance Between Failures (MDBF)

8,000 4,500

2016 2017 Target 2016 2017 Target

6,000 3,500

4,000 2,500

Mean Distance Between Failures (km) Failures Between Distance Mean Mean Distance Between Failures (km) Failures Between Distance Mean 2,000 1,500

0 500 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec The MDBF increased in January to 3,115 kilometres. Overall The MDBF decreased in January to 1,528 kilometres. performance was below target for the seventh consecutive month. A Performance continued to remain below target. A turnaround turn-around trend has not been established yet due to the continued trend has not been established yet for the 32-year old equipment deterioration of the 37-year old fleet. Reliability improvement work will and out-of-sync maintenance, in anticipation of retirement starting focus on streetcars that are not in the condition-based retirement in 2015. schedule. The three areas of most frequent failures (traction controls, The three areas of most frequent failures (traction controls, sanders sanders plugging up in service and the door system) reflect plugging up in service and the air system) reflect seasonal impacts on seasonal impacts on equipment. Shortage of parts (purchased or equipment. Shortage of parts (purchased or rebuilt) has improved. rebuilt) has improved.

It is anticipated that performance will improve in conjunction with the TTC Board’s approval of a funding request to maintain the non- It is anticipated that performance will improve in conjunction with overhauled CLRVs in a state of good repair. the TTC Board’s approval of a funding request to maintain the non-overhauled ALRVs in a state of good repair. Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 44

New Streetcar: Mean Distance Between Failures (MDBF)

60,000

2017 Target 2016

45,000

30,000

Mean Distance Between Failures (km) Failures Between Distance Mean 15,000

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

The MDBF increased in January to 9,572 kilometres.

Contractual KPI will be included upon the acceptance of the sixtieth new streetcar and attainment of specified fleet mileage. Upon acceptance of the sixtieth LFLRV, the reliability target is 35,000 km between chargeable defects due to delays equal to or longer than five minutes.

Bombardier's LFLRV mileage is calculated according to each calendar month, whereas the CLRV and ALRV mileage is calculated according to the TTC's financial period.

Of the 13 failures reported in January 2017, seven of them were door- related. A plan is in place to create a reference car ("golden car") to ensure manufacturing and set-up quality is consistently maintained to reduce downtime.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 45

Bus Wheel-Trans

Bus: Mean Distance Between Failures (MDBF) Wheel-Trans: Mean Distance Between Failures (MDBF)

16,000 15,000

2016 2017 Target 2016 2017 Target

14,000 13,500

12,000 12,000

Mean Distance Between Failures (km) Failures Between Distance Mean Mean Distance Between Failures (km) Failures Between Distance Mean 10,000 10,500

8,000 9,000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

The MDBF increased in January to 14,474 kilometres. The MDBF increased in January to 12,964 kilometres. Overall Performance achieved target and it was 8% higher than the performance achieved target and it was 11% higher than the performance in December 2016. performance in December 2016.

Garage technical staff will continue to focus on quality repairs Inclement weather in December resulted in increased driveline, and analysis of repeaters as well as heating and cooling brakes and heating system issues. systems. Maintenance facilities staff have also completed the State of Good Repair program on 360 buses since starting in early July 2016 and performed post-repair circle checks to improve bus pull-out and minimize disruptions to service.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 46

Assets: Equipment Availability

Elevators Escalators

100 98.0

2016 2017 Target 2016 2017 Target

99 97.5

98 97.0 Availability (%) Availability

(%) Availability

97 96.5

96 96.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Performance in January increased to 99.2% and continued Performance in January increased to 97.1% and achieved to remain above target. target.

Maintenance activities were completed as planned and Maintenance activities were completed as planned and scheduled. scheduled.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 47

Page intentionally left blank

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 48

3.5 Financials

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 49

Financials

This section provides detailed information about the TTC and Wheel-Trans Operating Budgets and the TTC Capital Program.

TTC Operating Budget

2016 Year-End Results

The revenue, expense, and subsidy amounts shown in the following table are preliminary and subject to audit. The final 2016 audited financial statements are scheduled to be presented to the TTC Audit and Risk Management Committee on May 29, 2017.

(millions) Projection Budget Variance 2016 TTC Operating Budget Customer Journeys (Ridership) 538 553 (15) Revenue $1,196.2 $1,242.1 ($45.9) Expenses $1,682.1 $1,736.7 ($54.6) Subsidy Required $485.9 $494.6 ($8.7) Subsidy Available* $493.6 $494.6 ($1.0) Subtotal: Surplus before funding for CLRV/ALRV overhaul $7.7 - $7.7 and refurbishment (March 23, 2016 TTC Board Report) *Budget included a planned $1 million draw from the TTC Stabilization Reserve held by the City of Toronto. This draw was not required to meet the TTC’s actual subsidy requirement. As a result, this $1 million will be left in the TTC Stabilization Reserve for future use.

The preliminary surplus (before CLRV/ALRV overhaul and refurbishment funding) of $7.7 million (or 1.6%) includes the following significant revenue and expense budget variances.

Passenger Revenues: $49.4 million decrease

The ridership shortfall of 15 million rides below the target of 553 million, combined with unfavourable changes in the fare mix, resulted in a passenger revenue shortfall of $49.4 million.

Other Revenues: $3.5 million increase

Primarily due to higher than expected commuter parking revenues resulting from the deferral Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 50

of commuter parking lot rehabilitation work and the later than originally planned closure of the Wilson West lot. Other favourable impacts include increased revenue from Outside City Services and higher interest income.

Employee Benefits: $24.7 million decrease

Lower healthcare expenses account for the majority of these savings. Results were also lower than budget for Long-Term Disability and WSIB costs.

Labour: $17 million decrease

Workforce gapping and marginally lower than budget average labour rates, are the key factors behind the lower labour expenses.

Diesel: $7.5 million decrease

A more favourable fuel consumption rate than anticipated (partially due to the milder winter weather experienced earlier this year), accounts for most of this positive impact. The average price per litre was also marginally lower than budget.

Depreciation: $5.4 million decrease

Based on lower than anticipated capital asset acquisitions, the corresponding depreciation expense for 2016 will also be lower than originally expected.

Leasing Expenses: $4 million decrease

Requirements are lower than originally anticipated.

Bus Warranty Recoveries: $2.0 million expense decrease

Higher than budgeted bus warranty recoveries resulted in a $2.0 million reduction in net expenses.

Accident Claim Settlements: $5.5 million increase

Primarily due to the settlement of a large claim early in the year; cash payments for the settlement of accident claims exceeded budget.

Stabilization Reserve Draw: $1 million decrease

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 51

The budget included a planned $1 million draw from the TTC Stabilization Reserve held by the City of Toronto. This draw was not required to meet the TTC’s actual subsidy requirement

Other: $0.5 million increase

All other projected changes in other expenses add up to this unfavourable variance.

Impact of funding for CLRV/ALRV overhaul and refurbishment funding

On March 23, 2016 the TTC Board approved a capital overhaul of 30 CLRV vehicles and refurbishment of critical mechanical, pneumatic and electrical components to maintain non- overhauled CLRV and ALRV vehicles in a state of good repair. This work was subsequently approved by City Council at the June 7-9, 2016 meeting. Total costs were estimated at $34.1 million. This work commenced in 2016 and $4.1 million in capital costs have been incurred and a further $4.2 million in operating costs were incurred in 2016. Funding for the full CLRV overhaul and refurbishment and the ALRV refurbishment requirements are recognized in the TTC’s 2016 preliminary results and a formal request will be made to request the City of Toronto to place the remaining $25.8 million in a reserve to fund required CLRV overhaul and refurbishment and ALRV refurbishment in future years.

The impact of this funding is summarized as follows:

(millions) Projection Surplus before funding for CLRV/ALRV overhaul and refurbishment (from above) $7.7 Add funding for CLRV/ALRV overhaul and refurbishment as per March 26, 2016 TTC Board report. $34.1 (Includes $4.2 million for operating refurbishment work completed in 2016). Less Contribution to Capital for CLRV overhaul ($4.1) Surplus before contribution to City Reserve for future CLRV/ALRV refurbishment and overhaul $3 7 .7 Request to City of Toronto to establish reserve for future CLRV and ALRV overhaul and refurbishment * ($25.8) Surplus available to the City of Toronto $11.9 *Of the remaining $25.8 million, $5 million is for the capital overhaul of CLRV vehicles and the remaining $20.8 million is for the operating refurbishment of the non-overhauled CLRV and ALRV vehicles.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 52

TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION 2016 OPERATING BUDGET - INCOME STATEMENT

Period 12: 5 Weeks Twelve Periods to

November 27 to December 31, 2016 December 31, 2016

($000s) Over/(Under) Over/(Under) Over/(Under) Over/(Under) Actual Budget Budget Budget % Actual Budget Budget Budget % TOTAL REVENUES 106,410 112,798 (6,388) -5.7% 1,196,160 1,242,128 (45,968) -3.7% TOTAL EXPENSES 169,134 179,256 (10,122) -5.6% 1,712,441 1,770,615 (58,174) -3.3% Less: Long-Term Employee Benefits (40,354) (37,540) (2,814) Less: Long-Term Accident Claims 6,290 - 6,290 Add City Special Costs 3,688 3,681 7 OPERATING SUBSIDY REQUIRED in 2016 485,905 494,628 (8,723) -1.8% CITY OPERATING SUBSIDY AVAILABLE 493,627 493,627 - 0.0% DRAW FROM STABILIZATION RESERVE - 1,001 (1,001) -100.0% SHORTFALL / (SURPLUS) (7,722) - (7,722) 100.0%

REVENUES: Passenger Revenues 100,136 107,214 (7,078) -6.6% 1,125,893 1,175,300 (49,407) -4.2% Outside City & Charters 1,362 1,454 (92) -6.3% 17,500 16,319 1,181 7.2% Advertising 2,331 2,331 - 0.0% 27,975 27,974 1 0.0% Rent Revenue 975 924 51 5.5% 10,850 11,095 (245) -2.2% Commuter Parking 681 653 28 4.3% 10,093 9,275 818 8.8% Other Income 925 222 703 316.7% 3,849 2,165 1,684 77.8% TOTAL REVENUES 106,410 112,798 (6,388) -5.7% 1,196,160 1,242,128 (45,968) -3.7%

EXPENSES (LABOUR & NON-LABOUR) CEO's Office 3,719 3,697 22 0.6% 36,655 38,709 (2,054) -5.3% Engineering, Construction & Expansion Group 951 455 496 109.0% 3,689 4,382 (693) -15.8% Corporate Services Group 8,690 7,273 1,417 19.5% 66,057 69,639 (3,582) -5.1% Strategy and Customer Experience Group 2,943 1,970 973 49.4% 19,692 20,867 (1,175) -5.6% Operations Group 29,267 30,187 (920) -3.0% 289,510 293,808 (4,298) -1.5% Service Delivery Group 72,724 73,088 (364) -0.5% 728,328 738,207 (9,879) -1.3% Employee Benefits 27,357 34,380 (7,023) -20.4% 317,270 339,140 (21,870) -6.4% Vehicle Fuel 6,919 7,849 (930) -11.8% 77,037 84,556 (7,519) -8.9% Traction Power 4,411 4,595 (184) -4.0% 53,104 54,371 (1,267) -2.3% Utilities (Hydro, Natural Gas, Water) 2,511 2,771 (260) -9.4% 25,675 25,939 (264) -1.0% Taxes and Licences (37) 287 (324) -112.9% 2,903 3,261 (358) -11.0% Depreciation (2,440) 3,024 (5,464) -180.7% 27,985 33,448 (5,463) -16.3% Accident Claims & Insurance (1,857) 3,031 (4,888) -161.3% 30,626 31,384 (758) -2.4% Non-Departmental Costs 13,976 6,649 7,327 110.2% 33,910 32,904 1,006 3.1% TOTAL EXPENSES 169,134 179,256 (10,122) -5.6% 1,712,441 1,770,615 (58,174) -3.3% Less: Long-Term Employee Benefits (40,354) (37,540) (2,814) 7.5% Less: Long-Term Accident Claims 6,290 - 6,290 100.0% Add City Special Costs 3,688 3,681 7 0.2% OPERATING SUBSIDY REQUIRED in 2016 485,905 494,628 (8,723) -1.8% CITY OPERATING SUBSIDY AVAILABLE 493,627 493,627 - 0.0% DRAW FROM STABILIZATION RESERVE - 1,001 (1,001) -100.0% SHORTFALL / (SURPLUS) (7,722) - (7,722) 100.0%

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 53

TTC Ridership Update

Factors Influencing Ridership Growth

Many transit agencies across North America are struggling to understand why ridership growth has softened over the past two years. While there are numerous internal and external factors that can affect ridership, the most common reasons cited by agencies include a weakening economy, slow employment growth, low gasoline prices, and ridesharing services. Of note is that all of these factors are generally beyond the control of transit agencies and could potentially have a long-lasting impact on ridership growth.

The TTC has identified and continues to monitor the following main reasons for its softening ridership growth: downgraded local economic growth forecasts, shifting employment patterns (disproportionate growth in part-time and temporary jobs), declining Metropass sales, and delayed achievement of new ridership from service enhancements.

TTC Ridership Growth Trends

Ridership for 2016 was 538 million, which was 15 million (2.7%) below budget. Ridership growth has slowed, increasing 0.1% in 2016 and 0.6% over the past two years (2015/2016).

The TTC’s softening ridership trends were first reported to the TTC Board in March 2016 and at various times throughout the remainder of the year. While ridership growth has slowed, the TTC’s trends compare favourably with most other agencies in Canada and the United States. Ridership data for external transit agencies in Canada and the U.S., as detailed below, indicate that since 2015, ridership growth has slowed considerably with many agencies experiencing ridership declines.

External Benchmarking

National

In 2016, aggregate ridership for each of Canada (excluding TTC) and the U.S. decreased 1.4%. Over a two-year period (2015/2016), ridership decreased 2% in Canada and 2.8% in the U.S. In contrast, TTC ridership increased over both time periods: 0.1% in 2016 and 0.6% in 2015/2016.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 54

Canada and U.S. – Selected Agencies

For 15 selected transit agencies across Canada and the U.S., 2016 growth rates ranged from 2% to -6.8%, with an unweighted average of -1.5%; the TTC ranked fifth-highest at 0.1%. Over a two-year period (2015/2016), growth rates ranged from 3.9% to -9.5%, with an unweighted average of -2.9%; the TTC ranked second-highest at 0.6%.

Major Multi-Modal Agencies

Large-scale, multi-modal (combinations of heavy rail, light rail, bus) agencies are often the most relevant comparators to the TTC. For eight major multi-modal agencies in Canada and the U.S., 2016, growth rates ranged from 0.3% to -6.5%, with an unweighted average of - 2.0%; the TTC ranked third-highest at 0.1%. Over a two-year period (2015/2016), growth rates ranged from 0.6% to -9.5%, with an unweighted average of -3.6%; the TTC ranked highest at 0.6%.

The major multi-modal agency growth rate rankings are as follows:

2015: Boston +0.3%; New York +0.2%; TTC +0.1%; Montreal -0.2%; Chicago -2.3%; Philadelphia -3.2%; Los Angeles -4.1%; Washington, D.C. -6.5%

2015/16: TTC +0.6%; New York 0%; Montreal -1.2%; Boston -1.4%; Chicago -1.9%; Philadelphia -6.1%; Los Angeles -9.0%; Washington, D.C. -9.5%

Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) Agencies

For nine agencies in the GTHA, 2016, growth rates ranged from 9% to -5%, with an unweighted average of 0.9%; the TTC ranked fifth-highest at 0.1%. Over a two-year period (2015/2016), growth rates ranged from 13.2% to -9.5%, with an unweighted average of -0.3%; the TTC ranked fourth-highest at 0.6%. Of note is that the municipal transit agencies with higher growth rates than the TTC (Brampton, Mississauga, York Region) are also expanding their service networks.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 55

Wheel-Trans Operating Budget

2016 Year-End Results

The revenue, expense, and subsidy amounts shown in the following table are preliminary and subject to audit. The final 2016 audited financial statements are scheduled to be presented to the TTC Audit and Risk Management Committee on May 29, 2017.

(millions) Projection Budget Variance 2016 Wheel-Trans Operating Budget Customer Journeys (Ridership) 3.929 3.690 0.240 Revenue $7.1 $7.0 $0.1 Expenses $125.5 $123.7 $1.8 Subsidy Required $118.4 $116.7 $1.7 Subsidy Available $116.7 $116.7 - Surplus/(Shortfall) ($1.7) - ($1.7)

The preliminary shortfall of $1.7 million is largely driven by the growth in ridership experienced in 2016. Demand for service was 6.5% higher than budgeted and 11% above the comparable 2015 results. The increase of 239K (6.5%) customer journeys was the result of existing customers utilizing the service more frequently due to improvements in on-time performance and added resources in the Reservations area to accommodate more trip requests, and the fact that new customers were joining at a rate of roughly 900 per month.

Overall expenses increased by about $1.8 million and revenues were higher by about $0.1 million as a result of these additional customer journeys. To minimize the costs of the additional trips, service was delivered through less-expensive contracted taxis. Partially offsetting the increase in expenses were reductions in diesel fuel and employee benefits (for the same reasons noted under the TTC Operating Budget section), savings from lower bus maintenance costs, lower accident claims settlements, and workforce gapping.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 56

WHEEL-TRANS OPERATING BUDGET - INCOME STATEMENT

PERIOD 12 Period 12: Five Weeks Full Year Nov 27 to Dec 31, 2016 2016 ($000s) Over/(Under) Over/(Under) Actual Budget Budget Actual Budget Budget REVENUES: Passenger Fares 631 579 52 ## 7,119 6,954 166 # EXPENSES: CONTRACTED TAXI SERVICE 5,013 3,859 1,154 ## 54,450 47,808 6,642 #

BUS SERVICE: Operators 2,342 2,654 (312) ## 25,222 25,972 (750) # Divisional Staff 69 58 11 ## 645 584 61 # Mobile Supervision 120 117 3 ## 1,234 1,166 69 # Dispatch 279 369 (90) ## 3,467 3,553 (86) # Equipment Maintenance 1,850 1,359 491 ## 13,872 13,658 214 # Vehicle Fuel 214 325 (111) ## 2,692 3,689 (998) #

ADMINISTRATION: Senior Manager's Office 282 74 208 ## 886 706 181 # Reservations 266 296 (30) ## 2,601 2,823 (222) # Taxi Administration 38 31 8 ## 348 318 30 # Customer Service 176 345 (168) ## 1,933 3,253 (1,320) #

Lakeshore Garage Costs 66 156 (90) ## 1,144 1,367 (224) # Employee Benefits 1,346 1,572 (225) ## 12,776 14,101 (1,325) # Non-Departmental Costs 987 539 448 ## 4,297 4,667 (370) #

TOTAL EXPENSES 13,049 11,752 1,297 ## 125,567 123,666 1,901

OPERATING SUBSIDY REQUIRED IN 2016 118,447 116,712 1,735

OPERATING SUBSIDY AVAILABLE IN 2016 116,712 116,712 0

SHORTFALL/(SURPLUS) 1,735 - 1,735

PASSENGER TRIPS (000s) 364 308 56 3,929 3,690 239

UNACCOMMODATED RATE (%) 0.41 0.55 (0.14) 0.41 0.50 (0.09)

SUBSIDY PER TRIP ($) 34.13 36.29 (2.16) 30.78 32.13 (1.35)

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 57

Approval of the 2017 TTC and Wheel-Trans Operating Budgets

On November 21, 2016 the TTC Board approved the TTC and Wheel-Trans Operating budgets with a combined budget shortfall of $61.5 million. This shortfall assumed that the City would accept the capitalization of hybrid bus batteries ($8.5 million) and would address depreciation ($29 million) via City capital funding. These requests were subsequently not approved by City Council, bringing the shortfall to $99 million.

This shortfall was addressed primarily through the provision of $95 million in higher than anticipated TTC & Wheel- Trans operating subsidy. The remaining $4 million was cut from the 2017 budget through the removal of 3 “new and enhanced initiatives”, saving $4.4 million, offset by a $0.4 million reduction in the planned Stabilization Reserve draw.

The 3 “new and enhanced” initiatives removed from the budget were: 1. 18 dedicated watchpersons intended to provide dedicated attention to the approach and management of train traffic, saving $1.3 million. 2. 13 positions intended to enhance signal, track and traction power reliability, saving $1.2 million 3. Dedicated funding for the Station Transformation training (training program and collector backfills), saving $1.9 million.*

The actions taken are summarized in the following table:

Action ($ millions) Combined Budget Shortfall, as approved by the Board on November 21, 2016 $61.5

Items not approved by City Council Request to capitalize hybrid bus batteries 8.5 Request to address depreciation via City capital funding 29.0 Funding for 18 dedicated watchpersons (1.3) Funding for 13 positions to enhance signal, track and traction power reliability. (1.2) Funding for Stations Transformation training (1.9)

Additional Operating Subsidy provided by City of Toronto Restoration of the TTC Operating and Wheel-Trans subsidies to 2016 level. (15.8) Additional TTC Operating Subsidy (Over 2016 level) (53.2) Additional Wheel-Trans Operating Subsidy (Over 2016 level) (26.0)

Adjustment to TTC Stabilization Reserve Draw 0.4

Net Shortfall upon City Council approval of budget 0.0

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 58

Operator Crewing Efficiency

87.4

2017 Target 2016

87.3

87.2

Crewing Efficiency (%) Efficiency Crewing 87.1

87.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Operator crewing efficiency decreased in January to 87.01%; performance remained below target. Crewing efficiency has been below target due to the large numbers of buses replacing streetcars. This is due both to vehicle size and longer distance to streetcar routes from bus divisions.

Note: Crewing efficiency is defined as the ratio of scheduled hours to pay hours.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 59

TTC Capital Budget

2016 Year-End Results

The capital expenditures shown below are preliminary and subject to audit. The final 2015 audited financial statements are scheduled to be presented to the TTC Audit and Risk Management Committee on May 29, 2017.

(millions) Projection Budget* Variance 2016 TTC Capital Budget Base Program $831.5 $1,118.7** ($287.2) Toronto-York Spadina Subway Extension (TYSSE) $364.2 $719.6 ($355.4) Scarborough Subway Extension (SSE) $26.2 $133.0 ($106.8) *Budget excludes additional carry forward spending on Base Program ($101.7M), TYSSE ($69.6M), and SSE ($22.5M) as approved on May 3, 2016. **2016 Budget has been adjusted for 30 CLRVs Overhaul (+$4.4M), Easier Access (+$0.05M) and Leslie Barns (-$0.685M) as approved by Council on June 7, July 12, and October 5, 2016, respectively, for Base Program (see program explanations below for more information).

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 60

2016 Base Program: Month-to-Month Budget Tracking

$200

$150 $136

$100

$91 $60 $86 $77 $77 $78 $50 $57 $64 $57 $49 $3 $0 -$8 -$10 -$9 -$23 -$22 -$33 -$31 Monthly -$50 -$40 -$40 Variance (Budget VS -$73 Actuals) -$100 Jan/Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Monthly Variance Monthly Actual Monthly Budget

Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: December 31, 2016

2016 Base Program: Cumulative Budget Tracking

$1,200 Budget vs. Actual Expenditure at 1,118.7 Year End 985.6 $1,000 889.8 802.6 704.2 $800 831.5 614.9 $600 526.2 695.7 422.0 609.3 342.3 531.7 $400 455.0 257.3 Variance at Year End 405.9 348.6 (For an explanation of the projected $200 164.4 284.9 228.0 variance, please see the next page) 91.3 151.2 $0 -73.1 -$200 -106.1 -114.3 -137.1 -177.6 -209.0 -249.2 -270.9 -280.5 -289.9 -287.2 -$400 Jan/Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Cumulative Budget Cumulative Variance Cumulative Actual Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 61

Base Program Expenditures: $287.2 million under

The 2016 budget for base capital programs was underspent by $287.2 million. This underspending was mainly attributable to variances for the following programs:

Subway Track: $5.3 million under

The Subway Track variance is primarily due to revised 2016 cost estimates in the Subway Track Rehabilitation and Subway Turnout programs. In addition, part of the ongoing Davisville Area Rehabilitation Program (DARP) consulting fees and work slippages were deferred from 2015 to 2016.

Communications: $8.5 million under

The variance is due to scope/schedule changes to Train Door Monitoring to align with future TR purchase, deferral of Radio Replacement due to VISION integration and contract dependency and procurement process, deferral of CCTV due to new requirements for intrusion detection systems and VMS procurement, deferral of Station PA and Intercom systems due to Station Transformation initiative, deferral of SCADA RTU to 2017 due to procurement and manufacturer delays, and deferral of Cable Replacement scope due to reassessment of scope for cable emergency.

Signal Systems: $12.5 million under

The variance is mainly due to Cable Replacement & Yard Interchange Signal Upgrades: slippage due to engineering resources allocated to Eglinton Ancillary Room Relocation; Speed Control System: slippage as a result of ATC project changes, issue of Stop-Work order to Thales and ongoing refinement of SCS product to reduce nuisance emergency brake incidents; Workcar Advanced Warning: the scope of this project will be updated to address Track Level Safety initiative to develop modular work zone system; SRT Loop Cable Axle Counter Improvement: work on this project will cease at the end of 2016 to be consistent with the 10 years SRT life extension scope; Wilson Yard Resignalling: revised phasing due to new interface to mainline CBTC; Signaling of Davisville Yard: revised schedule due to updated ATC Project staging, moving off South Yonge to Spadina section.

Finishes: $2.4 million over

The variance is primarily due to Roofing Rehabilitation - slippage of Hillcrest Subway Operation Building, advanced work for Finch Station roofing and funds advanced to cover additional funds required at Hillcrest Subway operations.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 62

Equipment: $6.5 million under

The variance is due to Subway Escalator Overhaul project - work deferred to future year due to workforce unavailability; Wheel Monitoring System - due to procurement, installation of communication and power supply lines as well as commissioning of the station work deferred to 2017 and Escalator Replacement Program as some of the work at various locations will slip to the future while awaiting decision on an overhaul strategy.

Streetcar Network Upgrades and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT): $2.0 million over

The variance is mainly due to Streetcar Network Upgrades (+$1.8M) – slippage from Queen Street Upgrades and advanced construction work on St Clair and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) - Spadina Subway to York University/Steeles Avenue (+$0.2M) - funds advanced from future years to complete artwork/landscaping and public realm improvements.

On Grade Paving Rehabilitation Program: $3.0 million under

Variance is due to increase in estimated expenditures in 2015 – Work progressed faster than anticipated in 2015 at Malvern Garage & Eglinton Bus Roadway; re-tender of Finch Station Commuter Lots.

Bridges and Tunnels: $14.2 million under

Variance is due to the following projects:

• Tunnel and Station Leak Remediation - reduced due to revised cost estimate; • Structure Rehabilitation Program - reduced due to revised cost estimate; and, • Maintenance of Joint/TTC Toronto Transportation Bridges – probable was reduced due to submitted revised schedule by the City. • Structural Paving Rehabilitation Program - Advanced work to 2016 for St. Clair Streetcar Loop Platform to coincide with planned Streetcar service interruption.

Leslie Barns Project: $22.0 million over

The variance is due to prior year slippage which includes delay of substantial performance for Leslie Street Connection Track and delays in commissioning which impacted the value of progress payments for Leslie Barns.

Note: The 2016 budget for Leslie Barns was reduced by $0.685 million as a result of a budget transfer from Leslie Barns to Economic Development and Culture – EDC’s Art Services (Public Art); approved by Council on October 5, 2016. Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 63

Toronto Rocket/T1 Rail Yard Accommodation: $14.3 million over

Increase in estimated expenditures for Keele Yard Retrofit, Wilson Yard Expansion Contracts and Rail Amalgamation Study.

Facility Renewal Projects: $7.5 million under

Variance is due to deferred construction work and difficulties in design work.

Purchase of Buses: $12.0 million under

Variance is due to the following: • Accelerated delivery of buses in 2015, and; • Cost estimate change to the 2016 bus order.

Bus Overhaul: $19.4 million under

Variance of ($19.4M) is due to: Bus Overhaul Project: (-$19.6M) caused by slippage of bus overhauls to 2017 resulting from delayed deliveries of various bus components; Hybrid Components: (+$0.275M) due to 2016 contingency funds accelerated to 2015 to offset increased quantities required in AC Traction Motors, Generators & Propulsion Control System. Overage a result of planned to actual quantity variance due to the fix on fail nature of program making it hard to predict; and AODA TTC Requirements: (+$0.113M) as a result of a combination of change in scope and timing, as well as cost estimate changes and foreign exchange adjustment.

Purchase of Subway Cars: $3.7 million over

Variance is due to slippage of vehicle deliveries from 2015 to 2016 due to additional scope (4-car conversion and Train Door Monitoring prototyping on Sheppard Line) and the delay on de-icing system deliveries from Bombardier. Furthermore, allowances for future project change requests slipped from 2016 to 2017 and escalation allowances slipped from 2015 to 2016 & 2017.

Subway Car Overhaul: $24.8 million under

Variance is mainly due to slippages and scope changes for the Train Door Monitoring (TDM) project in the Sheppard line from T1 train to TR train, T1 scope was cancelled and the increased scope on TR has deferred the completion date to 2019; the installation of Friction Brake Electronic Control Unit (FBECU) component has also been deferred from 2016 to 2017 due to longer prototyping period under T1 15 year overhaul; the TR and T1 AODA were Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 64

delayed due to the late Board approval and material supply issues from Bombardier; the TR 7 year overhaul is under due to the delay in equipment purchases and hiring of workforce in 2016; T1 CCTV project is also under because priority was given to the T1 AODA project considering the car availability for revenue service, new scope of T1 HVAC overhaul was added to T1 20 year overhaul program.

Purchase of Streetcars: $131.7 million under

Staff is working with Bombardier to address the issues and delays surrounding the LRV order. Based on Bombardier's proposed schedule of April 25, 2016, the number of cars for 2016 was reduced from 50 to 16 compared to last year's approved budget. The cash flows and projections for 2016 have been adjusted to reflect what is currently known based on Bombardier’s revised, unsubstantiated delivery schedule and other projected expenditures.

Streetcar Overhaul: $1.8 million over

Variance is due to slippage of 3 ALRVs from 2015 (+$1.1M); advancement of work from future years for the AODA project (+$0.4M) to complete the vehicle installations (the exact number of vehicle installations is under review).

Note: 2016 new project - 30 CLRV Overhaul was approved by Council on June 7, 2016, based on recoverables from Bombardier due to delayed deliveries of the new LFLRVs (+$4.4M).

Purchase of Rail Non-Revenue Vehicles: $7.5 million under

Variance is mainly due to deferral of Vacuum Excavator project to future year as priority was given to workcar Automatic Train Protection (ATP) prototyping project.

Shop Equipment: $6.7 million under

Variance is due to slippages to 2017 because of longer than expected tendering process and lead time for expensive equipment such as the T1 Test Equipment and the TR Truck Press; and the delivery delays for 2016 purchases.

Revenue and Fare Handling Equipment: $21.8 million under

The variance is mainly due to Turnstile Replacement ($20.6M) as only 36% of the required new faregates (376 purchased in 2016 out of 1033 total required) were manufactured and received by TTC in 2016. During the course of 2016, PRESTO changes to the planned civil works and installation schedule resulted in delays to the manufacture and procurement of the Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 65

new faregates. PRESTO was unable to support civil works and installation of the new faregates at all entrances of the initial 41 stations in 2016 and, therefore, only 376 out of 1033 new faregates were required for the “main entrances” at the initial 41 stations in 2016. In addition, the original 2016 budget also assumed the new faregates for the remaining 26 stations would be purchased in 2016 and installed within Q1 of 2017. However, PRESTO has also been delayed in issuing a contract for the civil works associated with the remaining 26 stations and therefore, the procurement of the new faregates for the 26 remaining stations was also delayed into 2017.

Computer Equipment and Software: $8.9 million under

Variance is due to SMS SOGR Project not started due to the need to put a new project manager and project team in place; Customer Facing Information Screens (CFIS) Project milestone payment delayed due to four contracts taking longer than anticipated to award; ITS Infrastructure Projects delayed or not yet started due to a lack of resources as a result of office space limitations and the availability of subject matter experts (SMEs).

SAP – ERP Implementation System: $3.6 million under

Variance is due to a late start by IBM due to prolonged contract negotiations and award timeline. The other contributing factor is an anticipated later start of Wave 2.

Vision Program (CADD/AVL System): $14.9 million under

Variance is due to a delay in vendor approval by the Board which has moved a $13.5M milestone payment and $1.4M in final design approval delayed until February 2017.

Other Service Planning: $5.2 million under

The variance is mainly due to three projects: Platform Modification to Accommodate Artic Buses: TTC and City are still working on achieving a consensus on the scope and delivery of the project at various locations, required to meet TTC objectives; Transit Priorities and Opportunities to Improve Transit Service projects: Considerable amount of work will slip from 2016 to 2017 because of external approvals (City Transportation Services, Toronto Hydro, etc.) that are required for these projects to proceed and; Automated Passenger Count: delivery of some APC materials and services slipped to 2017 from 2016.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 66

Toronto York Spadina Subway Extension (TYSSE) : $355.4 million under

The variance was primarily due to deferral of facilities and systems construction work and timing of commercial settlements including holdback releases.

Scarborough Subway Extension: $106.8 million under

Scarborough Subway Project (-$91.4M): Variance was due to delays in the Environmental Assessment (EA) process and the rebaselining of the project scope.

SRT Life Extension (-$15.4M): The variance was due to slippage from 2015 and three cancelled closures requested by the City which impacted Subway Infrastructure work. The preliminary result of SRT structural assessment showed that SRT would need extensive structural repairs; therefore, TTC is waiting for a recommendation from Bombardier/CAD Rail Industries while maintaining existing work and structural repairs to keep the SRT service in a state of good repair (note: there are only 28 SRT cars in revenue service).

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 67

Approval of the 2017-2026 TTC Capital Budget

The 2017-2026 TTC Capital Budget was approved by City Council on February 15, 2017, as submitted and approved by the TTC Board on November 21, 2016. This included an identified need of $9.44 billion for the Base Capital Budget over the next 10 years compared to available funding of $7.0 billion resulting in a funding shortfall of $2.44 billion. This shortfall was accommodated through the identification of four unfunded projects totaling $1.953 billion - which are unable to proceed until funding sources have been secured and a $482 million capacity to spend reduction as shown in the following table:

Unfunded and Capacity to Spend Reductions 2017 to 2026 ($millions) Unfunded Projects: Fire Ventilation Upgrade $163 Purchase of Subway Cars $1,185 Purchase of Buses $244 Purchase of 60 LRVs $361 Total – Unfunded Projects $1,953 Capacity to Spend Reductions $482 Total $2,435

For 2017, a budget of $1.3 billion was approved, net of $298 million unfunded and capacity to spend reductions. Staff is proceeding with project work in accordance with these approvals and progress against the plan, available funding and future needs will be reviewed and updated during the upcoming 2018-2027 Capital Budget process.

Toronto-York Spadina Subway Extension (TYSSE)

City Council approved the 2017-2026 Capital Budget for the Toronto-York Spadina Subway Extension with a 2017 cash flow of $545.057 million and 2018 of $160.225 million for an estimated final cost of $3.184 billion.

Scarborough Subway Extension

The TTC’s 2017-2026 Capital Budget includes an estimated final cost of $3.56 B for the SSE, including the SRT Life Extension and Demolition. Of the $3.56 B, City Council has approved $194.629 million to date.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 68

Page intentionally left blank

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 69

4. Critical Projects

Pioneer Village Station is 96% complete, as the TYSSE nears completion and a December 2017 opening.

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 70

Purchase of Buses March 2017 CEO Report

Performance Scorecard Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016) Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status G G G G 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion G G G G Budget: $78.6 $78.6 $257.7 $465.6 Actual: $66.7 $252.2 Accomplishments Projected: $66.7 $460.2 -107 Buses delivered from the total order of 108 buses Actual Variance: -$11.9 -$5.5 -100 buses have been commissioned as of Dec.31/16 Projected Variance: -$11.9 -$5.4

2016 Variance: $11.9 million under (10.5M) for delivery of buses accelerated into 2015(WO6750) Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan +3.6M for outstanding payments to WO6274,from 2015 deliveries 1.No risk is anticipated. Continue to receive and +0.4M for outstanding payments to WO6572,from 2015 deliveries commission buses being delivered in 2016 (5.4M) for cost estimate changes EFC Variance: $5.4 million under Variance is due to cost estimate changes.

Schedule Status Milestone 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone / Target 2012 2013 2014 2015 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 20242023 Date Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 Replacement 40ft LF Clean Diesel Buses- 95 buses Q4 2012  2 Replacement 60ft LF Clean Articulated Diesel Buses- 11 buses Q4 2013  Today 3 Replacement 60ft LF Clean Articulated Diesel Buses- 141 buses Q4 2014  4 Replacement 60ft LF Clean Articulated Diesel Buses- 1 bus Q1 2015  5 Replacement + CSI 40 ft. LF Clean Diesel Buses- 55 + 24 buses (+26 buses) Q4 2015  6 Replacement + CSI 40 ft. LF Clean Diesel Buses- 108 buses Q4 2016  7 Replacement + CSI 40 ft. LF Clean Diesel Buses- 97 + 4 buses Q4 2017 8 Replacement + CSI 40 ft. LF Clean Diesel Buses-85 + 25 buses Q4 2018 9 Replacement + CSI 40 ft. LF Clean Diesel Buses- 90 + 25 buses Q4 2019

Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: March 07,2017

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 71

VISION(CAD/AVL) March 2017 CEO Report

Performance Scorecard Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016) Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status Y G G Y 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion G G G G Budget: $22.5 $22.5 $25.4 $115.4 Actual: $7.5 $10.1 Accomplishments Projected: $7.5 $115.4 -Preliminary Design accepted -System Prototyped on 2 buses and Roadshow Actual Variance: -$15.0 -$15.3 -Project Binder accepted delivered for Key Stakeholders Projected Variance: -$15.0 $0.0 -Final Design received still being reviewed with vendor -Construction of OCC in progress 2016 Variance: $15.0 million under Variance is due to delay in awarding the contract for the CAD/AVL system Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan payment milestones moved from 2016 to 2017 1.Schedule for Construction of Centralized Control 1.Dedicated Project Manager assigned for the Centre to be established, alternative interim planning for design and construction of the Operation Control EFC Variance: $0 Million deployment may be required. Centre. 2.Construction in progress on schedule for completion March 2017

Schedule Status Milestone 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone / Target 2015 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Date Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 RFI Issued Q1 2015   2 RFI Vendor Presentations Q1 2015   3 RFP Issued Q2 2015  4 Technical Evaluation Completed Q4 2015   Today 5 Contract Award Q1 2016  6 Design Initiated Q1 2016  7 Preliminary design received Q2 2016  8 Final Design received from vendor Q4 2016  9 Factory Acceptance Testing Complete Q2 2017  10 Proof of Concept Complete Q3 2017 11 Bus Installs Complete Q4 2018 12 Streetcar Installs Complete Q1 2020

Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: March 08,2017

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 72

McNicoll New Bus Garage March 2017 CEO Report

Performance Scorecard Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016) Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status G G G G 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion G G G G Budget: $2.3 $2.3 $8.6 $181.0 Actual: $2.4 $9.4 Accomplishments Projected: $2.4 $181.0 -Design-Build contract awarded December 20, 2016 Actual Variance: $0.1 $0.9 to Buttcon-Eastern Joint Venture Projected Variance: $0.1 $0.0

2016 Variance: $0.1 million over Increase in expected expenditures for current year. Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan 1. Several scope items remain unfunded, including 1. BTL(Below the Line) project created to capture EFC Variance: $0 million motions passed by TTC Board and City Council. unfunded scope items. Optional pricing for some unfunded items obtained through RFP. December 2016 Board Report granted authorization to proceed with work to fulfill Council motions and to adjust budget to suit.

Schedule Status Milestone 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone / Target 2015 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Date Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 RFPQ Completed Q3 2015   Today 2 RFP Issued Q1 2016  3 Contract Award Q4 2016   4 Commence Construction Q3 2017  5 Construction substantially complete (SP) Q2 2020 

Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: December 31,2016

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 73

Purchase of New Streetcars March 2017 CEO Report

Performance Scorecard Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016) Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status Y G G Y 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion Y G G Y Budget: $174.9 $174.9 $684.2 $1,186.5 Actual: $43.2 $552.5 Accomplishments Projected: $50.1 $1,186.5 - 32 cars are now available for service. Training of Actual Variance: -$131.7 -$131.7 Operators and maintenance staff is ongoing. - The 33rd car (4434) is expected to be accepted by Projected Variance: -$124.8 $0.0 TTC at the end of March 2017.

2016 Variance: $124.8 million under Variance is primarily due to delays in the delivery of streetcars. The number of Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan cars for 2016 was reduced from budgeted 50 cars to 16 cars. In addition, 1. Union labour strike action in Bombardier's Thunder 1. Work with Bombardier on engineering and Contract Options were not executed as planned by the year end because Bay plant from July to Sept. 2014 impacted the vehicle production process control improvements. pricing has not yet been agreed to. delivery schedule. 2. Closely monitor production quality check gates, 2. Poor manufacturing quality in Bombardier's Sahagun, offer engineering and program oversight, as well as EFC Variance: $0 million Mexico plant, as well as production and supply chain on-site modification program support when issues in Thunder Bay continue to affect vehicle quality warranted. and the delivery schedule. 3. Overhaul and maintain legacy streetcars to 3. Bombardier provided an updated delivery schedule maintain safe and reliable streetcar service. on January 23, 2017 which confirmed 40 LFLRVs, for a 4. Pursue liquidated damages and cost recovery total of 70, will be available on property by year end. provided for in the Contract as a result of delays to The total deliveries per year are the same as the draft vehicle delivery. June 10, 2016 schedule, however the monthly 5. Continue to demand an updated DPS for all deliveries have changed and the 204th vehicle is to be manufacturing sites to the end of the project in order delivered by October 2019 rather than December 2019. to understand and plan for the impacts of these 4. Bombardier provided a partial, contractually deliveries on TTC resources, including those of required, Detailed Project Schedule (DPS) on January Transportation, Service Planning, Maintenance, 20, 2017 for the Thunder Bay plant. A full DPS has Training and Engineering Departments. been promised but is still outstanding.

Schedule Status Milestone 2014/ 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone / Target 20182019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Date 2015 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 Interim Solution Available Q3 2014  2 PRESTO Interim solution available for Streetcar Launch Q3 2014   3 First New Streetcar Launched on Spadina Q3 2014   Today 4 Leslie Carhouse Storage Required Q4 2015   Substantial Completion 75% of Cars deployed (Car #163- based on 5 Q1 2019 January 23, 2017 delivery schedule)

6 204 Cars deployed (based on January 23, 2017 delivery schedule) Q4 2019

Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: March 08,2017

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 74

Leslie Barns March 2017 CEO Report

Performance Scorecard Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016) Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status G Y G G 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion G G G G Budget: $33.1 $33.1 $486.7 $516.0 Actual: $55.1 $484.7 Accomplishments Projected: $55.1 $523.5 - Frieze wall installation completed Actual Variance: $22.0 -$2.0 Projected Variance: $22.0 $7.5

2016 Variance: $22 million over Prior year slippage. Includes delay of Substantial Performance for Leslie Street Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan Connection Track and delays in commissioning which impacted the value of 1.Construction Claim 1.Arbitration process in place. progress payments for Leslie Barns.

EFC Variance: $7.5 million over Cost estimate increase

Schedule Status Milestone 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone / Target 2015 2021202020192018 202420232022 2025 2026 2027 Date Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 Leslie Street open to general traffic Q3 2015    2 Leslie Barns partial handover to Operations Q4 2015     Today 3 Leslie barns full handover to Operations Q1 2016  4 Leslie Street landscaping complete Q4 2017 

 Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: December 31,2016

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 75

Surface Track March 2017 CEO Report

Performance Scorecard Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016) Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status G G G G 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion G G G G Budget: $32.9 $32.9 $248.5 $580.3 Actual: $30.9 $253.4 Accomplishments Projected: $30.9 $588.1 - All track rehabilitation projects, with the exception of Exhibition Loop, Actual Variance: -$2.0 $4.9 were completed as per schedule in 2016. - Executed the replacement of worn rail at 15 car stop and curve Projected Variance: -$2.0 $7.8 locations. The total scope for the 2016 SOGR program amounted to the 2016 Variance: $2.0 million under rehabilitation of 2,432 DTM (double track metres) of tangent track and YE 2016 variance is due to project deferrals to 2018 of the Harvey Shop 5,710 square metres of STW track. tracks beneath transfer table which is awaiting EC&E space utilization study; Roncesvalles Pit Track deferral to 2018 to coordinate with Carhouse modification project and Roncesvalles Carhouse to 2019 to align with the King/Queen/Roncesvalles intersection area modification Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan project . 1. The delay in the completion of Leslie Barns has resulted in the deferral 1. Due in the LFLRV delivery schedule, the following The above deferrals were partially offset by the extra expense related of planned rehabilitation work for Roncesvalles and Russell yards in projects are deferred: to Russell Yard - Sout End Modification Improvements project that it is still order to maintain the requisite storage capacity for the existing fleets, as - Russell Yard Tracks 08-22 deferred to 2018 ongoing plus some deferred expense for CNE that was completed in well as the anticipated new streetcar deliveries. - Roncesvalles Pit Track deferred to 2018 February 2017. - Roncesvalles Carhouse S curve tracks 1-28 deferred to 2. The delivery delay of the new low floor streetcars (LFLRV) and the 2019 EFC Variance: $7.8 million over resulting extension of legacy fleet required for passenger service has - Russell Yard north ladder deferred to 2018 The Deputy CEO confirmed an increase to the Surface Track budget for prolonged storage demands at Roncesvalles and Russell yards which - Harvey Shops transfer table tracks deferred to 2018 the modification to the King St./Queen St./Roncesvalles Ave. area has lead to the deferral of the track rehabilitation work at these yards. pending results of EC&E facility utilization study. modification which is scheduled for 2019 ($7.1m) and the ongoing expense for Russel Yard to be finalized in 2017.

Schedule Status Milestone 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone / Target 2015 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Date Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 C.N.E. Loop (Design) Q4 2015  2 Russell Yard - South End (Track) Q4 2015  3 Roncesvalles Southwest - Design and Layout Q3 2015  Today 4 College and Spadina Q2 2015  5 Bloor Loop and Spadina Q2 2015  6 Bay Street Q2 2016  7 King/Adelaide & Charlotte Q2 2016  8 Roncesvalles Southwest Corner - Construction Q3 2016  9 Russell Yard - South End Modification Improvements Q2 2017 10 The Queensway - Modifications (Design Only) Q4 2016  11 College and Bathurst Q3 2016  12 College and Lansdowne Q3 2016   13 Richmond St.-East of Yonge St. to York St. Q4 2016  14 Car Stops-Ongoing State of Good Repair(SOGR)program Q4 2016   15 Neville Loop Q4 2016  16 St. Clair Ave. W-Bathurst to Tweedsmuir Q4 2016  17 CNE Loop-Construction Q1 2017  18 Dundas and Parliament Q2 2017 19 Dundas and Victoria and Dundas Square Q4 2017 20 Queen and Coxwell Q4 2017 21 Queen and McCaul Q4 2017 22 Lake Shore Blvd-Humber Loop to Dwight Ave Q4 2017 23 Wellington St-Yonge to York Q4 2017 24 The Queensway-Parkside Bridge to Humber Loop Q4 2017 25 Humber Loop Q4 2017 26 Car Stops & Curves-Ongoing State of Good Repair(SOGR)Program Q4 2017 27 Wellington St-Church St. to Yonge St. Q1 2018 28 Roncesvalles Pit Track Q4 2018 29 Russel Yard Tracks 8-22 Q4 2018 30 Harvey Shop Tracks Beneath Transfer Table Q4 2018 31 Russell Yard North Ladder Q4 2018 32 Roncesvalles Carhouse S-Curve Tracks 1-28 Q4 2019 Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: March 08,2017

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 76 Purchase of Subway Cars March 2017 CEO Report

` Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016) Performance Scorecard Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status G GGG 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion G GGG Budget: $24.2 $24.2 $1,153.8 $1,166.9

Actual: $28.0 $1,118.7

Accomplishments Projected: $28.0 $1,166.9 -Completed Base and Specified Options 1A and 1B -Updated Maintenance Manuals and Splice of Last Car of orders reliability goal of 480,000 miles Mean Distance Train #82 for "4-Car Consist". Actual Variance: $3.7 -$35.0 between failures. -Issuance of Purchase Orders for Cab Door Controller, Projected Variance: $3.7 $0.0 -Completed shipping of last ATC Hardware-Ready Platform Side Detection and YMSS and completed Final Trainset for Option 1A. Design Review for Train Door Monitoring System. -Final Acceptance and availability of 80 Train Sets for -Completed written confirmation of TTC's exercising of operational service. Specified Spares and Special Tools and Test Equipment for Option 1C and "4-Car Consist" Trainsets. 2016 Variance: $3.7 million over Variance is primarily due to the transfer of the escalation and contingency Key Issues and Risks allowance for project changes to 2017 along with the Milestones related to Management Action Plan delivery and installation of De-icing system and 4-Car Consist rescheduled 1.Production quality and design change requirements to 1. Continue to monitor production quality. to 2016 and 2017. improve on vehicle manufacturability, functionality, 2.The Carbuilder has provided an updated delivery reliability and maintainability continue to present schedule on October 15, 2015 that the TTC accepted on EFC Variance: $0 million challenges to the delivery schedule. November 30,2015 for accelerated "4-Car consist Train . 2. Production issues have caused TS #81 Preliminary Set delivery". Therefore, the schedule and cashflow Acceptance (PAC) delivery to Feb. 2017 and Final presented in this report are updated. Acceptance (FAC) to March 2017 and TS #82 PAC and 3.The Board approved on July 11,2016 the Commercial FAC forecasted to March 2017. offer for Train Door Monitoring System-Phase 2 and Yard Maintenance Support System (YMSS) Phase 1 for full system integration and testing. 4.Contract Amendment was issued Dec. 2016 for accelerated delivery of one 4-Car Trainset, TS #80. TS #81 6-Car train has arrived at Wilson Carhouse and is currently under commissioning testing. However, testing and delivery schedules could be impacted by weather conditions.

Schedule Status 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone / Target Milestone Date 2013 2014 2015 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 Train #1 to #39 ready for service Q3 2013  2 Train #40 to #60 (Option 1B) ready for service Q1 2015   Today 3 Train #61 to #70 (Option 1A) ready for service Q4 2015   Train #72 to #75(advancement of 4-Car consist) ready for service on 4 Q2 2016 Line 4  5 Train #71, TS#76 to #79,TS#81 (Option 1C) ready for service Q1 2017 

6 Train # 80 to #82(remaining 4- Car consist) ready for service Q1 2017 

Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: March 08,2017

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 77

Easier Access Phase III March 2017 CEO Report

Performance Scorecard Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016) Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status G G G G 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion Y Y G Y Budget: $35.0 $35.0 $261.2 $655.2

Actual: $35.1 $261.5

Accomplishments Projected: $35.1 $774.3 - Elevators E2 and E3 at St. Clair West put into service -Contract to make Royal York station accessible $0.1 $0.3 December 2, 2016. awarded December 21, 2016. Actual Variance: - Contract to make St. Patrick station accessible awarded Projected Variance: $0.1 $119.1 December 1, 2016.

Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan 2016 Variance: $0.1 million over 1. Property acquisitions impacting several 1. Concept designs are being completed early to locations. identify property requirements as early as possible. EFC Variance: $119.1 million over 2. Increased complexities/staging, property 2. Designs are being advanced to accommodate the $117,600k Cost estimate change at various locations (as requested in the requirements at future locations. additional time that may be required to address the 2017-2026 budget), $1,173k Scope Transfer, $372K external funding for art. 3. Higher than expected estimated costs due to increased complexities at future locations. increased complexities/staging, property 3. Additional funds requested in the 2017-2026 budget. requirements, scope changes, power upgrades, utilities, escalation.

Schedule Status 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone / Target Milestone Date 2015 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 St. Clair West- subway to bus/ streetcar only(E2&E3) Q4 2016   2 Ossington Q3 2016   3 Woodbine Q2 2017  4 Coxwell Q4 2017 5 Dupont & St. Patrick Q4 2018 6 Royal York,Wilson,Yorkdale,King,Runnymede & Wellesley Q4 2019 7 Sherbourne,Bay,Chester & College Q4 2020 Today 8 Keele,Spadina,Lawrence,Lansdowne & Donlands Q4 2021  9 Greenwood Q4 2022  10 Castle Frank,Christie,High Park & Summerhill Q4 2023 11 Rosedale,Museum & Old Mill Q4 2024 12 Glencairn,Warden and Islington Q4 2025 

Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: December 31,2016

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 78

TR/ T1 Rail Yard Accommodation March 2017 CEO Report

Performance Scorecard Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016) Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status G G G G 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion G G G G Budget: $38.2 $38.2 $149.9 $985.2

Actual: $52.5 $167.9

Accomplishments Projected: $52.5 $985.5 -Achieved Substantial Performance of Contract C1-38 - Achieved Contract Completion of Contract AW1-5 Actual Variance: $14.3 $18.0 "Wilson Carhouse North Expansion" on October 5, "Tie in Track 33 to 43" on December 22, 2016 - Awarded Contract S5-59 "Davisville Carhouse Expansion East Side" on December 1, 2016 Projected Variance: $14.3 $0.3

2016 Variance: $14.3 million over Increase in estimated expenditures for Keele Yard Retrofit, Wilson Yard Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan Expansion Contracts and Rail Amalgamation Study. None N/A EFC Variance: $0.3 million over Wilson Complex TR Training Centre and EDD Enclosure Alterations transferred from project 584X

Schedule Status Milestone 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone / Target 2015 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Date Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Greenwood Yard-Track Conversion and South Fence 1 Q1 2016 Replacement(GR1-46),(GR65-10 & GR1-41 Combined)  2 Wilson Yard Site Services Stage I(A18-15) Q2 2016   Today 3 Wilson Yard Site Services Stage II(A18-20) Q2 2016  4 Wilson Carhouse North Expansion(C1-38) Q3 2016   5 Keele Yard Retrofit (B4-36) Q1 2017  6 Wilson Yard Tie in Tracks 33-43(AW1-5) Q4 2016  7 Wilson Yard-Consolidated Rail Amalgamation Study(G85-329) Q2 2017  8 Wilson Carhouse-Access Stairwell at Tracks 9/10(C1-46) Q3 2017  ` Wilson Yard Tie in Carhouse North Ladder Tracks(Tracks 2-15) 9 Q4 2017 /AW1-4  10 Wilson Yard CCTV for Yard Control(A80-24) Q4 2018 11 Wilson Yard T&S Building Renovation(AW1-3) Q4 2018 12 Wilson and Davisville Yards-Friction Bumping Posts(G60-266) Q4 2018   13 Wilson Yard Conversion of ATC Track Q4 2018 14 Davisville Carhouse Expansion East Side(S5-59) Q4 2018 15 Kipling Station Track Expansion(F65-10) Q4 2019 Greenwood T&S Building Renovation & Carhouse Pendent Retrofit 16 Q4 2019 (GR1-51),(GR1-40 & GR60-25 combined) 17 Davisville T&S Building Renovation(S5-60) Q4 2020 18 Wilson Carhouse Tracks 15 and 16 Expansion and Alterations(C1-42) Q4 2020  Greenwood Carhouse Tandem Wheel Lathe with Wireless 19 Q4 2021 Shunter(GR1-53) 20 Wilson Yard Signalling and System works Q4 2021 21 Future Works Post 2025  

Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: December 31,2016

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 79 Subway Track March 2017 CEO Report

Performance Scorecard Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016) Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status G G G G 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion Y G G G Budget: $28.6 $28.6 $166.7 $504.8

Actual: $23.4 $147.4

Accomplishments Projected: $23.4 $497.1 BD Line 2 - Parliament Curve WB - restraining rail and Actual Variance: -$5.2 -$19.3 expansion joint replacement. YUS Line 1 - Finch Double Crossover - major maintenance of switches. Projected Variance: -$5.2 -$7.7

YUS Line 1 - Sheppard Double Crossover - major maintenance of switches. 'YUS Line 1 - Downsview Double Crossover - major 2016 Variance: $5.2 million under maintenance of switches. The Subway Track variance is primarily due to slippage of work from prior year for Track Rehabilitation and Turnout replacement programs offset by revised costs for 2016 thus resulting in a negative variance in cash flow.

EFC Variance: $7.7 million under Decreased revised estimates for WO6622(Track Rehabilitation Project) and Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan WO6628(Turnout Replacement Project). 1.Reduction in available labour resources due to 1.None: compliance to exemption is required. decrease in the exception of Employment Standard 2,3. Requested additional budget for grinding in Act(ESA) restrictions. 2017 and onwards. 2. Rail Grinding- Corrugation is occurring at higher rate 4. Platform gap study - board report in Dec 2016 than current grinding can correct. 3. Noise and vibration complaints divert work from SOGR. 4. Platform gags/AGAT may change track maintenance standard in platform areas.

Schedule Status Milestone 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone 2015 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Date Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 Subway / SRT Track Replacement Program(Ongoing) Q1 2017  2 Subway/ SRT Turnout Rehabilitation Program(Ongoing) Q1 2017  3 MOWIS Upgrade Q1 2017  Today 4 Rail Vehicle Based Inspection System(Finite) Q1 2017  5 Subway Rail Grinding Q1 2017

Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: March 09,2017

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 80 Automatic Train Control "Line 1-YUS" March 2017 CEO Report

Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016) Performance Scorecard Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status G G G G 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion G G G G Budget: $56.3 $56.3 $291.4 $562.8

Actual: $56.5 $266.3

Accomplishments Projected: $56.3 $562.8 -Dynamic testing of 10 TR trains -Phase 2 (TYSSE) Construction-88% complete Actual Variance: $0.2 -$25.1 -Successful completion of 4 closures for ATC -1 Sessions of ETTF(Engineering Test & Training -Commissioned St. Clair West Change over cubicle Facility)system testing of POC software held Projected Variance: $0.0 $0.0 -Phase 1 Construction-95% complete

Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan 2016 Variance: $0 million 1. Having all work cars equipped for first ATC 1. Clear strategy, dedicated expert team and "plan commissioning. B". EFC Variance: $ 0 million 2. Maintaining delivery of TR's for service as WY is 2. Simplify design, integrated work stream. upgraded. Alternative migration strategy. 3. Platform and tunnel clearances for dynamic testing- 3. Working with TYSSE for decision markers by TYSSE. March 31,2017. 4. Culture and training. 4. Stakeholder management and robust training. 5. Loss of key staff. 5. Staff retention plan.

Schedule Status Milestone 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone 2015 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 20252024 2026 2027 Date Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 ETF Proof of Concept (Track#42 Wilson Yard) Q4 2015  2 ATC Phase #1 Commissioning (CX) (Yorkdale- Dupont) Q3 2017 3 ATC Phase #2 CX (Vaughan Metro Centre- Sheppard West) Q4 2017 4 ATC Phase #2A CX (Wilson Yard - Sheppard West) Q4 2017 5 ATC Phase #2B CX (Vaughan Yard- Remainder) Q3 2018 Today 6 ATC Phase #2C CX (Shep W. incl. W. yard S. Hostler- Yorkdale) Q3 2018 7 ATC Phase #3 CX (Dupont- Bloor) Q1 2019 8 ATC Phase #4 CX (Bloor- Eglinton) Q3 2019 9 ATC Phase #5 CX (Lawrence- Finch) Q4 2019

Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: February 28,2017

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 81 Toronto-York Spadina Subway Extension

March 2017 CEO Report

Performance Scorecard Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016)

Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status Y G Y Y 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion G G G G Budget: $700.3 $700.3 $2,958.5 $3,184.2

Actual: $324.4 $2,582.6

Accomplishments Projected: $324.4 $3,184.2 -Downsview Park - Achieved Substantial Performance - HWY 407 - Continued installation of bus terminal as of 10-Feb-17, work focuses on deficiencies. suspended ceiling and curtain wall. Actual Variance: -$375.9 -$375.9 - Finch West - Completed framework for installation of - VMC - Continued T&C, completed Vent Fans ceiling panels, continued curtain wall framing. testing, preparation for SP targeted for 31-Mar-17. Projected Variance: -$375.90 $0.0 - York University - Achieved Substantial Performance - Finch W. Substation – energized AC power. as of 28-Feb-17, work focuses on deficiencies. - Completed York U. SCADA PICO Testing. - Pioneer Village - Continued installation of weathering - TTC/TYSSE boundary is ready for train crossings steel ceiling panels, completed Vent Fans testing. when required. 2016 Variance: $375.9 million under Amounts presented include holdbacks and other project applicable cost. Actual Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan data based on end of December 2016 costs. Variances include contingency amounts which have not been applied. 1. Project Schedule - not following the reset schedule. 1. Close monitoring, meetings, workshops, use 2. Station Commissioning - Several contractors have targeted acceleration and incentives. EFC Variance: $0 million difficulties implementing the commissioning 2. Close cooperation and coaching, additional Project final cost tracking on budget requirements. support. 3. Commercial - Commercial issues affecting 3. Working w/contractors(claims design construction progress. backlog),claims resolution plan. 4. Design Issue Responsiveness - Backlog of late and 4. Expedited design issues resolution, contain change new design changes. requests. 5. Station and Systems Interfaces - Station readiness 5. Weekly coordination meetings, handover for follow-on Systems contractors. milestones, expedite work on deficiencies. 6. Resolution of Third Party issues - Obtain Site plan 6. Expediting authority approval processes with City approval which is required for Final Building permit. Leadership. 7. Escalators Testing and Commissioning. 7. Schindler to provide work plan/acceptance criteria. 8. Commissioning of Station Fire Alarm Systems. 8. Collaboration with Operations for verification. 9. Identify and resolve dynamic envelope clearance 9. Horizontal adjustments issued, vertical adjustments to be confirmed. Gage car test forecast for March 11

Schedule Status

Milestone 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone 2015 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Date Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

1 Downsview Park(Sheppard West Station (SP) ) Q1 2017 2 Finch West Station (SP) Q3 2017 3 York University (SP) Q1 2017 4 Pioneer Village(Steeles West Station (SP)) Q2 2017 5 Highway 407 ( SOP) Q3 2017 6 Vaughan Metropolitan Centre Station (SP) Q1 2017 Running Structures 7 North and South Tunnel 2015  Today 8 Trackwork Q1 2016  9 Special Trackwork Q1 2016  10 Tunnel Drop Shaft Closures(SP) Q3 2017 11 Tunnel Outfitting and Finishing(SP) Q1 2017 12 Traction Power (SP) Q1 2017 13 Train Control (signals,incl. testing) Q3 2017 14 Communications and Integrated Controls Q3 2017 15 Commissioning Q4 2017

Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: January 31,2017

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 82 Scarborough Subway Extension March 2017 CEO Report

Performance Scorecard Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016)

Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status R Y R R 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion R Y R R Budget: $110.8 $110.8 $136.3 $3,305.0

Actual: $19.4 $30.5

Accomplishments Projected: $19.4 $3,305.0 -Project team is proceeding with design, based on the Actual Variance: -$91.4 -$105.8 recommended McCowan alignment Projected Variance: -$91.4 $0.0

2016 Variance: $91.4 million under Variance is due to delay in the Environmental Assessment(EA) process and Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan the rebaselining of the project scope. 1.As approved at the July 13/16 City Council meeting, 1.Mitigating delays where possible. EFC Variance: $0 million City Planning's Scarborough Transit Plan results in rebaselining the SSE project scope from a three station Kennedy to Sheppard expansion, to a one stop extension from Kennedy to Scarborough Centre. 2.TTC has worked with the City to identify the preferred alignment as McCowan, with Triton bus terminal. 2.Geotechnical and survey fieldwork, as well as many design activities, have resumed. 3.EFC was approved in 2013 based on 0% design. Based on scope confirmation through the EA process, the project budget and schedule will be confirmed as design is developed to the 30% stage, factoring in delivery strategy and risk.

Schedule Status Milestone 2014/ 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 20262025 2027 Date 2015 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 EA Consultant Contract Award Q3 2014  2 Tunnel Design Contract Award Q4 2014  Today 3 Project Management Consultant Award Q1 2015   4 Station Design Consultant Award Q2 2015   5 System Design Consultant Award Q2 2015   6 Geotechnical Consultant Award Q2 2015   7 Environmental Assessment(EA) Q4 2017 8 1st Public Consultation Held Q1 2015   9 2nd Public Consultation Held Q2 2015   10 3rd Public Consultation Held Q1 2016   11 4th Public Consultation Held Q2 2016  12 TTC Board/P&GM/Council Q1 2017 13 Transit Project Assessment Process(TPAP) Q4 2017 14 Scarborough Subway Extension Begin Service Q4 2026

Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: March 09,2017

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 83 PRESTO March 2017 CEO Report

Performance Scorecard Budget Update (as of October 01, 2016)

Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status Y G Y Y 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion Y G G Y Budget: $9.5 $12.7 $30.0 $46.9

Actual: $8.7 $29.2

Accomplishments Projected: $12.7 $47.0 -69 Subway Stations PRESTO Enabled -Completed Bus Roll-out Actual Variance: -$0.8 -$0.8 -Faregates installed at 46 Subway Stations (at least one entrance per station) -Completed PRESTO rollout for Legacy Streetcars Projected Variance: $0.0 $0.1

Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan 2016 Variance: $0 million . 1. Civil Works contract to complete faregate installation 1. Leverage exisitng construction processes; 2. Labour Strategy for PRESTO Installation work activity Reviewing procurement options EFC Variance: $0.1 million over 3. PRESTO channel distribution/support strategy 2. Identify negotiations options. Operational Variance is due to Calenderization 4. Strategy for Limited-Use-Media changes in subway 5.Development of Full Service Vending Machines 3. Developed conceptual scope in 2016. 6.Performance of Devices Incremental roll-out in 2017. 4.Develop short list of options. TTC policy review regarding cash paying customers. PRESTO technical/financial review. 5. Maintain some level of station sales until production machine available. Leverage existing vendor device. 6. Software releases to address device issues.

Schedule Status Milestone 2014/ 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Date 2015 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 Start PRESTO Rollout on Spadina Q4 2014  2 Interim Solution Available Q3 2014   3 Interim Solution for Streetcar Launch Q4 2014   Today 4 PRESTO Subway Stations for 2015 Pan AM Games- Wave 1 Q2 2015  5 PRESTO Implementation on Legacy Streetcar Q4 2015  6 PRESTO Implementation on buses Q4 2016  7 PRESTO Implementation on Wheel Trans(TTC Buses/Contracted Vans) Q4 2016  8 PRESTO Implementation on New Streetcars Q4 2019 PRESTO Payment functionality at all Subway Stations(at least one 9 Q4 2016 entrance)  PRESTO Full Deployment(PRESTO payment functionality at all 10 Q4 2017 entry/payment points) 

Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: March 09,2017

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 84 SAP March 2017 CEO Report

Performance Scorecard Budget Update (as of December 31, 2016) Schedule Cost Scope Overall Risk (millions of dollars) Year to Lifetime to Estimated Current Status Y G G Y 2016 Date Date Final Cost Outlook to Completion G Y G G Budget: $21.2 $21.2 $25.2 $63.4

Actual: $17.6 $23.7

Accomplishments Projected: $17.6 $63.4 - Realization Phase for Wave 1 began January -All Process Design Definition documents for Wave -$3.6 -$1.5 10,2017. 1 are now complete for all of HR, Finance, Payroll Actual Variance: -Employee Service Centre work started. and Benefits. Functional Specification documents '-Information sessions were delivered for ITS, Human are still being reviewed by the TTC legacy team, Projected Variance: -$3.6 $0.0 Resources, Finance and Payroll. and expected to be complete the last week of February Key Issues and Risks Management Action Plan - Additional resources were required to be provided in -Expedite GTA testers recruitment (2 filled /7 2016 Variance: $3.6 million under January from both outside and within the TTC vacant) Variance is due to late start of IBM contract. organization to fulfill SAP Program resource needs. -Business has provided JD to backfill and expected Test preparation phase has been impacted directly in expedite hiring EFC Variance: $0 million schedule and cost due to missing resources as we still try to fill positions.

Schedule Status Milestone 2016 2017 No. Phase / Milestone 2015 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Date Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 Award Program Management Contract Q2 2015   2 Wave 1/Release1 team in place Q3 2015    Today 3 Program Management team in place Q4 2015     4 Award System Integrator (SI) Contract Q1 2016   5 Wave 1 - Core HR / Payroll / Finance (Release 1) Q4 2015   6 Wave 1 - Core HR / Payroll / Finance (Release 2) Q4 2017 7 Wave 1 - Core HR / Payroll / Finance (Release 3 & 4) Q4 2017 8 Wave 1 - Core HR / Payroll / Finance (Release 5) Q4 2017 9 Wave 2-Workforce Management Q4 2017 10 Wave 3-Budgeting,AP/AR, Procurement Q4 2017 11 Wave 4-Integration-Facilities Management Q3 2018 12 Wave 5-Integration-Bus Maintenance Q1 2019 13 Wave 6-Integration-Rail Maintenance Q3 2019

Legend  Completed as planned  Completed Late  Completed w/Impact on Critical Path Unless stated otherwise, data is current as of: February 17,2017

On Schedule Tracking behind Schedule Poses Risk to Critical Path Reporting frequency: Quarterly

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 85 Page intentionally left blank

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 86

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 87

For further information on TTC performance, projects, and service, please see www.ttc.ca

Andy Byford Chief Executive Officer Toronto Transit Commission

Toronto Transit Commission CEO’s Report – March 2017 Update 88