News   Nov 22, 2024
National Housing Day: City of Toronto and Riverdale Co-op Open Affordable Homes
 256     1 
News   Nov 22, 2024
Bauhaus Condos Rising in Toronto's Old Town
 643     4 
News   Nov 22, 2024
49-Storey Waterfront Tower Proposed at Spadina and Queens Quay
 1.6K     5 

GTHA Regional Transit Amalgamation Discussion: Superlinx/Subway Upload

crs1026 said:
The case has been made for some form of change. The status quo isn't acceptable, and there is opportunity for improvement that the current regime just isn't capitalising on.

My conclusion - the GTA needs a "sherriff" - an agency that can impose solutions on dysfunctional and uncooperative municipal operators, and maybe realign "turf" away from rigid municipal boundaries. ML has never been given legal prescriptive power to settle these issues and they tend to cycle in the bureaucracy, or back and forth to local councils. An arbitration-style format where the parties make their case could be created.
Click to expand...

Good points overall. However, this point seems to be predicated on the idea that Metrolinx has been trying in earnest to coordinate regional fare integration (and similar issues affecting multiple operators), and that municipalities have been stonewalling them. So far as I can see, that is not the case. Metrolinx has yet to enter into detailed talks with operators about regional fare integration. Broad aspirational goals have been set, but not an attempt at anything detailed. Perhaps Metrolinx should actually try to negotiate with operators, before giving them potentially unnecessary legal tools.
 
^
ML has never been given legal prescriptive power to settle these issues and they tend to cycle in the bureaucracy, or back and forth to local councils.
Click to expand...
Got to disagree vehemently on this. Metrolinx have been granted 'awesome' (in the true sense of the word) powers, some of which I quoted a few pages back, but here's an example from the very beginning of the Act: (Note the word "shall"...not 'can')
Duties of Corporation re leadership in transportation integration
6 (1) In carrying out its objects as described in clause 5 (1) (a), the Corporation shall,

(a) develop and adopt a transportation plan for the regional transportation area and plan, co-ordinate and set priorities for its implementation;

(b) fund, or arrange and manage the funding for, integrated transportation across the regional transportation area;

(c) promote and facilitate co-ordinated decision-making and investment in the regional transportation area among the governments of the municipalities in the regional transportation area and the federal and provincial governments in order to ensure the efficient and cost-effective resolution of matters of shared concern respecting transportation, including,

(i) the provision and the optimal use and location of transportation infrastructure, including highway and transit infrastructure,

(ii) the integration of transportation infrastructure, including highway and transit infrastructure, and

(iii) the integration of routes, fares and schedules of the regional transit system and of local transit systems in the regional transportation area; and

(d) promote the safety, efficiency and protection of transportation corridors.

[...]
Click to expand...
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/06g16#BK6

The question is: "Do you want Metrolinx wielding these powers?" I think it better the 'locals' form a consortium via the Mayors Association to buffer this overarching power granted to a Monolith with next to no actual accountability to anyone save for their political masters. Although now moved out of the role, as Exhibit A: Yakabuski.
It’s plain sinister how Ford’s cabinet thinks government should be a private affair
By HEATHER MALLICK Star Columnist
Fri., Oct. 26, 2018
Click to expand...
https://www.thestar.com/politics/po...ks-government-should-be-a-private-affair.html

The tweets were posted in the UT forum, both Spurr and Moore's.

Superlinx is frightening just as Metrolinx is. Not as a concept, it's so needed it's almost farcical, but as an unaccountable agency often run by tyrants. I don't counsel eliminating it, but do counsel checks and balances. And a Mayor's Committee of the affected jurisdictions is an excellent way to do that.

Addendum: Just Googling to see what the latest press is on 'Superlinx' and nothing new shows, but from a year ago, this article remains superb, and substantiates what I posted above, and more:
‘Superlinx’ is not the solution to the Toronto region’s transit woes
By CHERISE BURDA
Mon., Dec. 4, 2017
[...]
For example, the Metrolinx Act includes a tool called the Transportation Planning Policy Statement, which was created in 2008 but has never been given regulatory power. It would enable Metrolinx to prioritize evidence-based transit investments and ensure municipalities plan and pre-zone for appropriate transit-oriented densities and complete communities around transit infrastructure.

To strengthen the relationship of the Metrolinx board with regional municipal politicians, there are ideas that could be explored from other metropolitan transit systems, such as the Translink model of a Mayor’s Council.
Recommending a new super agency because Metrolinx currently lacks the tools to effectively govern is a bit like fixing a marriage by building a bigger house. It distracts from the painful job of reforming the core issues.
Creating a single powerful authority that could make decisions may sound appealing, but it will not solve our transit woes and unintended consequences could make things worse.

Cherise Burda is executive director of the City Building Institute at Ryerson University and sat on the premier’s transit investment advisory panel.
Click to expand...
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/con...tion-to-the-toronto-regions-transit-woes.html

"the Transportation Planning Policy Statement"...Oh boy, watch for that to suddenly re-appear. Again, in the right hands, it's a powerful tool. In the wrong hands, it's a weapon.

Further to "the Transportation Planning Policy Statement", from The Big Move:
[...]
- Transportation Planning Policy Statement.
A key tool to help bring about better alignment between land use and transportation is the development of a Transportation Planning Policy Statement, as described in the Metrolinx Act. A policy statement would support increased integration by ensuring municipal planning decisions are consistent with The Big Move, requiring that municipalities and Metrolinx work together to develop transportation master plans, and providing for effective planning for existing and future transportation corridors. The development of a Transportation Planning Policy Statement by the Minister of Transportation is a recommendation of the Investment Strategy.

- A key role for the federal government in delivering the plan.
There is ongoing work with local, provincial and federal partners to advance transportation infrastructure needs. Recommendation 8 in the Investment Strategy specifies that the federal government be requested to increase its commitment to implementing The Big Move. Particular consideration should be given to the adoption of a National Transit Strategy that would see the federal government contribute up to one-third of the capital costs of Next Wave transit and transportation infrastructure.
[...]
Click to expand...
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regiona...g_Move_Baseline_Monitoring_Full_Report_EN.pdf

The second 'key role' paragraph I included to buttress the possible role of the Infrastructure Bank to bolster federal participation beyond the appropriations already made. There's an odd irony in that the more the Feds participate, the less the Province has as a claim on the jurisdiction of transit matters.

With time, this bodes well for cities like Toronto chafing under the heavy hand of regimes in Queen's Park.
 
Last edited:
steveintoronto said:
^
The question is: "Do you want Metrolinx wielding these powers?" I think it better the 'locals' form a consortium via the Mayors Association to buffer this overarching power granted to a Monolith with next to no actual accountability to anyone save for their political masters. Although now moved out of the role, as Exhibit A: Yakabuski.
Click to expand...

In your view, how would the "consortium" differ from the old TATOA/GTTA approach? It failed, arguably it was the only solution worse than Metrolinx.

I'd hate to see history repeat itself.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
In your view, how would the "consortium" differ from the old TATOA/GTTA approach?
Click to expand...
The legislation to start with.

You gloss over the obvious: It was the Province that downloaded it to the GTA, it was the Province (albeit a different regime) that uploaded it, and downloaded a fresh bunch of rotten potatoes in lieu.

An Act to establish the
Greater Toronto Transportation
Authority and to repeal the
GO Transit Act, 2001

Assented to June 22, 2006
Click to expand...
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/s06016

But first, some history: (Albeit this article is itself dated)
OCTOBER 8, 2014 AT 2:10 PM

POLITICS
Understanding Metrolinx
What the agency does, who runs it, and what it means for transit in Toronto.

BY DAVID FLEISCHER
[...]
So, we’ve only had regional transit planning since 2006?

Yes and no. If you like, you can grab your favourite strong liquor and read Ed Levy’s summary of all the transit plans proposed and ditched in these parts over the past century or so.

Historically, Metropolitan Toronto actually did a pretty good job of aligning planning and transit, at least until growth began exploding outside its borders in the 1970s.

It’s kind of ironic that what got the ball rolling again was the Mike Harris government—the same people who buried an NDP-commissioned report on regional governance, killed major transit projects, and forced through the amalgamation of Toronto. Realizing that something remotely resembling the regional thinking Metro once provided was necessary, they created the Greater Toronto Services Board in 1999. It met a few times but was, by design, largely ineffectual, and it disbanded in 2001.

The McGuinty Liberals tried again, creating the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority in 2006. After passing Places to Grow, its region-wide plan for curbing sprawl, the province needed to back that up with some infrastructure, so it introduced the Metrolinx Act, which gave the agency a snazzier name (and one less likely to be confused with the Greater Toronto Airports Authority).

The agency’s first job was to come up with a transportation plan for the entire GTA—and a plan to fund it. The Big Move plan came out in 2008 and included lists of projects Metrolinx wanted built by 2023 and 2033. The entirety of the plan was estimated to cost $50 billion, or $2 billion per year over its lifespan.

Okay, so who exactly is running this thing? People I’ve heard of, right?

Probably not. Metrolinx’s first CEO was former Burlington mayor Rob MacIsaac, but now longtime public servant Bruce McCuaig holds the post. The original board was made up of local politicians, so you’d doubtless recognize some familiar faces.

Since everyone was being a bit parochial and having trouble working together (at least in the way the government wanted them to), the board was dismissed in 2009. GO Transit merged with Metrolinx, and its board took over.

The current board is chaired by Rob Prichard, who has been president of the University of Toronto, director of Torstar, and has sat on the board or run pretty much every significant corporation in the city at some point. You probably won’t recognize most of the rest of the board, although if you follow the civic scene you may know the odd name, such as Rahul Bhardwaj (president and CEO of the Toronto Community Foundation) and Anne Golden, who wrote the governance report that, as we mentioned earlier, ended up being ditched by Mike Harris.

We’re living under Metrolinx 2.0 right now, but some argue we need something more publicly accountable and divorced from partisan politics—Metrolinx 3.0, in other words.

So, they’re the ones who decide what gets built and where? Then does Toronto tell them what to do?

Metrolinx is not a transit authority, like, say, the Metropolitan Transit Authority in New York or the Chicago Transit Authority, which actually have decision-making power. What Metrolinx does is listen to local councils, run things past their staff, and pass things up to the board. The board is appointed by, and makes its recommendations to, “the Lieutenant Governor in council,” which is a fancy legal way of saying the provincial cabinet. That’s where the decision-making power resides—effectively with the premier.
Click to expand...
And note the prescient irony of this:
[...]
If Metrolinx eventually runs the show, is the TTC going to get uploaded to the province?

Metrolinx works with nine transit agencies across the region, but the TTC is the elephant in the room, carrying about 85 per cent of all riders—so you can understand that the arrangement could be a bit tricky. Metrolinx exists to make sure that people can travel, say, from Mississauga to Markham or Toronto without having to jump on five different systems, paying five different fares. Probably no one wants provincial bureaucrats figuring out details such as how often to run the 56 Leaside bus, but not very many people want see “border wars” or bureaucratic spats along the lines of the game of chicken the TTC and the province got into over the Presto card, either.

So, a full upload is probably not in the cards, but don’t be surprised if there ends up being some kind of rejigging and a look at best practices to ensure that we don’t have one city-wide system and several suburban systems, instead of a single network where each piece is actually working with the other pieces. That would be a nice change, wouldn’t it?
[...]
Click to expand...
https://torontoist.com/2014/10/understanding-metrolinx/

The difference to Metrolinx is stark! It's who the governing body would be, thus the term "Consortium". Bear in mind, I've been meticulous in not proposing to replace Metrolinx, but to *complement* it, a word I've posted a number of times now.

Let Metrolinx do what Metrolinx does. But amend the Metrolinx Act to allow *GTHA transit orgs* via their Mayors or Chairpersons, to establish pan-regional bus and lrt routes as a *co-operative venture* that's run by the consortium, with vehicles either seconded or dedicated for the purpose, akin to what MiWay and Brampton Transit now do for their express buses. (York Region, which I'm not familiar with, might also run dedicated express routes beside a local system).

The Province will undoubtedly want their finger in the pie, the Province had then best pay for their share of it. But also the *Feds* via direct funding and through the Infrastructure Bank would also have representation on the Board of this 'limited company'. (edit to add: With the demise of Greyhound in most of the nation, the Feds are showing interest in filling the void in some manner or other. There's also great political advantage in the Feds, perhaps akin to VIA, in being involved in trans-regional transit as well...in *defiance* of accepted provincial/federal jurisdiction, a whole discussion in itself)

Many details would have to be figured out, not least fare structure, and also 'leasing in' member vehicles before going to the market. This is not a unique arrangement, by any means! It's done highly successfully in other cities. As posted many times prior, I've had first hand experience with this in both San Diego and the Greater London area of the UK.

However, this is Toronto, and lately, there is a tendency to dribble down one's leg when examples are pointed out. I've posted quite a number. Translink is mentioned many times. And BC has an almost identical municipal legislative structure to Ontario.

It's examined in at least one of the extensive posts I put up last night in this string. One of the reports was from 2010, and by sponsored by Siemens, of all entities. As much as it was based on surveys, the Germans (and Austrians, Siemens has a large presence there too) and neighbouring nations have systems that are examples to the world. (Vienna immediately comes to mind).

Perhaps the GTHA and QP can learn? Perhaps not...
 
Last edited:
The Minister will be speaking to TRBOT this month.

2T0Rz8y
 
A very scary idea just hit me: what if DoFo chose Mammo the head this agency, since he will be out of job?
 
I really wish we went for the Zurich transit model, also known as a transit alliance or transit federation. All transit (trams, buses, trains, cable cars, boats, rack railways) in the Zurich canton fall under one fare and overall planning coordination system, the ZVV. The canton is equivalent in size and population to maybe Peel region, or York Region, with the city in the middle, and numerous towns and suburbs outside. Municipalities still fund their own transit, to plan for routes and frequency, and either run the service (like TTC) or contract it out (like Viva), but coordination is done by the ZVV so there aren't overlapping or competing routes. The region is divided into fare zones (generally a municipality or town will fall in one zone), and fare revenue distributed based on ridership in the zones. From the user perspective, you don't care what bus, train, or boat your getting on, as long as you have a ticket for the zone. I think you can buy a one-way (2-hour) ticket, or for twice the price, a 24-hour ticket.

In the GTA, if we had a comprehensive fare-zone or fare-by-distance mechanism, then this an integrated fare system would be possible with everyone using Presto. Of course this would be the big political obstacle, in that larger cities, like Toronto, Mississauga etc would probably have to be divided down into smaller zones. We could combine some bus services near the borders, shift more users to GO to take pressure off the subway and some buses, and allocate fares to the local transit operators based on route ridership.

https://www.zvv.ch/zvv/en/home.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zürcher_Verkehrsverbund
 
So I stumbled upon some small details that the PC's rolled out with the fall update under Bill 57 with amendments to Metrolinx Act:
Schedule 25
Metrolinx Act, 2006
The Schedule amends the Metrolinx Act, 2006. The changes made by the Schedule include the following:
The regional transportation area is expanded by adding the Regional Municipality of Niagara, Haldimand County, the County of Brant, the City of Brantford, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, the County of Wellington, the City of Guelph, the County of Dufferin, the County of Simcoe, the City of Barrie, the City of Orillia, the City of Kawartha Lakes, the County of Peterborough, the City of Peterborough and the County of Northumberland. Note that there is no change as to the municipalities mentioned in respect of the unified fare system.
The objects of Metrolinx are altered as follows:
1. The object of providing leadership in respect of an integrated, multi-modal transportation network is replaced with an object of providing leadership in respect of an integrated transit network.
2. An object, and duty, to provide other advice and services on matters related to transportation at the direction of the Minister of Transportation is added.
3. It is provided that in carrying out its objects, Metrolinx shall conform with objectives directed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council, the Minister of Transportation’s transportation plans, policies and strategies and prescribed plans and policies.
The mandatory components of the transportation plan that Metrolinx must create are altered, including by removing the requirement that the plan take into consideration all modes of transportation. It is provided that the transportation plan is subject to the approval of the Minister of Transportation, who also may amend it when approving it, as well as direct that it is to be reviewed or amended.
It is provided that the Lieutenant Governor in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Transportation, may appoint a representative who may attend meetings of the board of directors of Metrolinx.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top