News   Apr 18, 2024
 715     0 
News   Apr 18, 2024
 6.7K     2 
News   Apr 18, 2024
 2.5K     4 

GTHA Regional Transit Amalgamation Discussion: Superlinx/Subway Upload

That's a reasonable structure (though I don't know if you need new names and branding).

It's hard to conceive of how such an agency would be properly funded, is the real thing. It's easy to say "provincial and municipal" but that's very vague. I think you probably need a baseline of funding from the provincial general revenue, obviously + farebox and then it's kind of a mystery. You almost certainly need road pricing and/or other revenue tools that feed directly - and only - into the agency. I think that's fundamental. How municipalities pay in is another matter but there can be some sort of formula for that.

I'd consider a Peel transit merger if someone could guarantee that 53 "Kennedy" service levels were more likely to increase to 7 "Kennedy" levels as opposed to it going the other way. ....as an example.

What I would like to see is the establishment of a baseline standard for service (i.e. "route Type A must have a frequency no greater than X per hour during peak periods, and Y per hour outside of peak periods, with a service span no less than X AM to Y PM") that would be followed across the board. This would be funded by the Province through some sort of a dedicated income tax levy in the GTHA for transit.

If a municipality wanted certain routes that operate within its borders to go above that minimum service level for that route type, it could opt to provide additional funding that Metrolinx sub-agency, who would in turn use that money to increase service levels. That would be funded from municipal property taxes.

So in theory, a municipality could offer zero tax dollars to Metrolinx and still receive base level service. However, if they see transit as a priority, they could pony up the dough to increase service to a level they would like to see for their residents. So with your example TOareaFan, Brampton could say "The base level service on this route is 30 mins, but we would like to improve it to every 15 minutes. Metrolinx, how much would it cost to do that?"

Totally. With Superlinx, I foresee 905 communities immediately complaining that they don’t get service as good as Toronto. Then funding will be diverted away from Toronto to support 905 transit. Given that the vast majority of trips are in Toronto, this would have a net negative impact on transit services.

To address your point, under the model I propose above it would be Toronto taxpayers alone shouldering the 'extra burden' of having greater-than-base frequencies. If only the base level of service is covered by the Province, then everything on top of that is up to the municipality.
 
My point wasn't very profound. I just think people in Toronto look to London and say "hey, they have one operator for the entire region, why don't we?" They base this on seeing the roundel on everything, but the reality is quite different.
That's the salient point though! For commuters/travellers, it is seamless, even if the reality is a collection of entities using the "roundel"...some of them (mostly) privately funded and operated, but still within the collective fare structure. It's a shining example (albeit not perfect, but very workable) of what Presto could be along with another step of integration to not only transfer from one system to another, but for those same systems to actually share *through routes* on their services. Same bus, different jurisdictions. Besides QP being run on spite at this point in time, the opportunity is there for Metrolinx to identify 'transit highways' and offer an added financial incentive, perhaps upgraded vehicles and tweaks to the GTHA to facilitate *cross regional expresses*.

I'm struggling to define this, I'm going to dig for an existing example, Sandag does this in San Diego County, City and surrounding munis, and runs the Trolley, and highway buses all as separate entities, but all under the same ticketing system. NYC and regions also do similar I believe.

Just read @gweed123 's post above. He's onto something very similar! I think we're starting to find common ground here where very little existed in this string just two days back.

I'll comment on Gweed's post after digging more. We need some working examples to link to and reference.

Addendum: Vancouver and Montreal might be/are examples of this, albeit Sandag presages both, and this is a stunningly successful model that the GTHA *might* be able to emulate, *in addition to GO Transit* and complementary to it:
Mission Statement

The 18 cities and county government are SANDAG, the San Diego Association of Governments. This public agency serves as the forum for regional decision-making. SANDAG builds consensus; makes strategic plans; obtains and allocates resources; plans, engineers, and builds public transportation, and provides information on a broad range of topics pertinent to the region's quality of life.

Who makes up SANDAG?

SANDAG is governed by a Board of Directors composed of mayors, councilmembers, and county supervisors from each of the region's 19 local governments. Supplementing these voting members are advisory representatives from Imperial County, the U.S. Department of Defense, Caltrans, San Diego Unified Port District, Metropolitan Transit System, North County Transit District, San Diego County Water Authority, Southern California Tribal Chairmen's Association, and Mexico. Policy Advisory Committees assist the Board of Directors in carrying out the agency’s work program. The Board of Directors is assisted by a professional staff of planners, engineers, and research specialists. Recruitment for a new SANDAG executive director is underway, with the process to include public involvement.
[...]
https://www.sandag.org/index.asp?fuseaction=about.home

I recommend a reconnoitre of their index:
https://www.sandag.org/index.asp?classid=13&fuseaction=home.classhome

As per "That's the salient point though! For commuters/travellers, it is seamless, even if the reality is a collection of entities using the "roundel"...some of them (mostly) privately funded and operated, but still within the collective fare structure. " here's an excellent example:

When the project was announced, TfL's initial budget was £25 million; they announced this would be entirely funded by private finance.[13]
Emirates Air Line (cable car)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emirates_Air_Line_(cable_car)

Note: a premium is charged on top of regular Oyster fare.
 
Last edited:
First things first. Create a Superlinx strictly for the GTAH and with fare integration for GO that serves other areas like Barrie/KW.

Vancouver is an example of how one body can run an entire metropolitan transit system very effectively. Planning is done on a metro-wide bases but individual frequencies and services are determined just like they are in Toronto...……..demand. This is why Vancouver gets far better service than Langley or anywhere else in metro for that matter. All Superlinx would have to do is set ridership standards based on usage applying across the region and base it`s frequencies and service on that regardless of where the buses/GO/subways would run. This isn`t rocket science and certainly isn`t revolutionary. People are reasonable and you won`t find anyone in Burlington or Ajax asking for the same service levels of downtown Toronto.

The fare integration under a Superlinx would be frightfully easy, zone based. Zones would generally be broken down into the current regions with some exceptions like Keswick in the extreme north of York Region. Everyone pays the same fare their 1,2,3,4, 5 zone fares which includes all services including GO {or at a minimum RER}. A 5 year old in Vancouver could tell you how much it costs to go from White Rock to North Van while in Toronto it requires a Math degree.
 
^ On Vancouver, even Seattle is looking to learn: (Pics and Maps removed for brevity)
With three fully-built light-rail lines and an interconnected bus network, Vancouver’s transportation system is like Seattle’s, just a couple of decades in the future. But the Canadian city differs in its rock-solid commitment to building housing right on top of transit.

By
David Gutman
Seattle Times staff reporter

[...] Metro Vancouver — which comprises Vancouver and 23 surrounding cities and towns — is a region being built, more and more, around its thriving and ever-expanding light-rail system.

As the Seattle region embarks on its own multi-decade light-rail expansion, and as local transportation officials try to dissuade solo car commuting, our neighbor to the north provides one glimpse of what a regional rail system could look like, with housing and land-use plans to match.
[...]
“There’s different attitudes about density than in Seattle, that’s for sure,” said Kevin Desmond, CEO of TransLink, the agency in charge of transit and roads in Metro Vancouver. “But if you’re going to manage congestion, which is getting worse and worse in Seattle, you’ve got to get people nearer to transit.”

Desmond would know. Before joining TransLink in 2016, he ran bus service in Seattle as general manager of King County Metro.

“I don’t know that there’s any comparison in North America, where station area after station area has huge towers and in some cases have developments that envelop the stations,” Desmond said. “It all fits in with the land-use plan that this region has to densify around transit.”

Throughout the region, 146 developments are being built close enough to a SkyTrain station or track that they need special permission from the rail agency.
In 2012, there were only two such developments.

“There’s this misnomer that density breeds congestion,” said Guy Akester, the director of real estate for TransLink. “But it’s the urban sprawl, that really low density, single-family neighborhoods that you have to get in your car to do everything, that causes really bad congestion.”
[...]
Heavy bus use
For anyone who relies on Seattle buses, or even more established but flailing subway systems in other American cities, SkyTrain is, well, different.

Its three lines cover 50 miles of track and have no drivers, the biggest fully automated train system in the world.

Seattle’s light-rail trains come every six minutes during rush hour, and every 10 to 15 minutes otherwise. They can’t touch SkyTrain.

During peak hours, trains come every 100 seconds. During off-peak hours they come every three minutes. Even at the ends of the Canada and Expo lines, when the track branches in two to reach more suburban communities, a train is never more than six minutes away.

“Traffic and parking are so bad downtown,” said Cathy Yin, 32, who takes SkyTrain between the two jewelry stores she works at in Richmond and downtown Vancouver. “I save a lot of time.”

But even with a built-out rail system, buses in Vancouver still carry nearly 65 percent more people than SkyTrain.

The 99 B-Line, which serves the University of British Columbia, is the most-used bus line in North America outside of Mexico City. It has 56,000 daily passengers.

At any given stop on the route, more than 250 B-Line buses arrive every weekday.
[...continues at length with maps and comparisons...]
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattl...while-vancouver-b-c-figured-it-out-years-ago/

(If you have an ad-blocker, the site will request you except it, and ironically, this article, with my minimal filters on, doesn't display any ads)
 
Yes Vancouver has done a great job of building high density housing at SkyTrain stations but like all things Vancouver it looks great on a postcard but the reality is quite different. A huge amount of these condos are hardly lived in as they are bought by Chinese to flip or local ex-Chinese passport buyers to do the same. Many of these condos sit empty or are more temporary rental units till they get kicked out when the unit is resold. In Brentwood where they are building like crazy it`s shocking {go to zolo or Vancouver housing collapse facebook} to see how many that were bought 2 years ago are back on the market now that the building is complete with massive price gains.

Also note that these are exclusively condos as there have been no rentals built anywhere even close to a SkyTrain station in 20 years. They can make more money building condos and the land value even by Vancouver standards is astronomical so they can`t make sense. The areas around SkyTrain stations have the highest rents and condo prices and are generally high income districts so the people who need transit less are getting more while the transit dependent have to move further out and away from a SkyTrain station.

Hundreds of older rental units near stations have been torn done or `renovicted` to make way for expensive and soon to be flipped condos. Just last year Burnaby council passed it`s long term planning of Metrotown focusing on more condos in the area knowing that this will result in the destruction of 1500 rental units and up to 3,000 renters being turfed out. Vancouver is the last place cities should emulate when it comes to housing.
 
^Much the same could be said for Toronto. Before this dissolves into a discussion on housing, here's some perspective *in spite* of your claims:
Metro Vancouver Leads Canada and the US in Transit Ridership Growth
March 28, 2018

TransLink first in ridership growth by more than two per cent

March 29, 2018

VANCOUVER, BC —Metro Vancouver saw more public transit ridership growth than anywhere else in Canada and the US last year according to latest statistics from the American Public Transit Association. Our region has experienced a 5.7 per cent year over year growth in the number of boardings on the system.

Metro Vancouver is among only four urban areas with populations over one-million which saw ridership growth last year:

  1. Metro Vancouver: 5.7%
  2. Phoenix, AZ: 3.5%
  3. Seattle, WA: 2.3%
  4. Montreal, QC: 2.3%
We can attribute this to a number of factors including economic growth in the region, high gas prices and the addition of the Millennium Line Evergreen Extension. Improvements underway as part of Phase One of the Mayors’ 10-Year Vision include:

  • A 10 per cent increase in bus and a 15 per cent increase in HandyDART service.
  • More frequent service on Expo, Millennium and Canada Lines.
  • SeaBus service at least every 15 minutes all day, every day.
  • [...]
  • https://www.translink.ca/About-Us/M...a-and-the-US-in-Transit-Ridership-Growth.aspx
  • [*]All modes of public transit in the region saw an increase last year, except the West Coast Express, which saw a 5.5 per cent decrease in the number of boardings. The Expo and Millennium lines saw the biggest increase of 12 per cent over 2016. Bus ridership was up by 3.2 per cent, Canada Line was up 6.3 per cent, SeaBus saw a 7.3 per cent increase and HandyDART was up by 1.8 per cent.

    Buses have the greatest ridership by far. In 2017, the bus system in the region saw 247 boardings compared to a combined 151 million on all three SkyTrain lines.

    TransLink is attributing the increase to a number of factors, including economic growth in the region, high gas prices and the addition of the Evergreen extension to the Millennium Line. As well, the transit company has undertaken other improvements as part of Phase One of the Mayor’s Council on Regional Transportation 10-Year Vision. TransLink highlighted recent improvements, such as: a 10 per cent increase in bus and a 15 per cent increase in HandyDART service; more frequent SkyTrain service on all three lines, and; an increase in SeaBus service to at least every 15 minutes all day, every day.
    [*][...]
  • https://www.vancourier.com/news/met...han-any-other-region-in-canada-u-s-1.23245535
West Coast Cities are Putting Toronto to Shame When It Comes to Transit Ridership

Other cities are enjoying a ridership boom, but Toronto is struggling to just keep the riders it has. What could we learn from other cities?

BY ALEX GATIEN, AND JESSICA BELL

[...]
Meanwhile, transit use in Toronto has effectively flatlined. The first three months of 2017 (data for the first six months of the year isn’t available yet) saw average daily TTC ridership minutely increase by 0.06 per cent, or about 115 times smaller than Vancouver’s growth rate. The TTC’s lacklustre 2016 ridership growth rate of 0.7 per cent attracted some media attention, but little of the kind of comparative analysis with other cities that could provide us with applicable lessons for the TTC.


Internally, the TTC seemed unwilling to engage in the necessary soul-searching. TTC spokesperson Brad Ross dismissed 2016’s disappointing figures, and incorrectly explained that “[c]ompared with transit systems across North America, all of which have seen a softening of ridership, the TTC is doing well.” In maintaining ridership the TTC does compare favourably to cities like Washington, D.C., which saw transit use plummet in 2016 as a result of massive service cutbacks and catastrophic reliability problems. But quite plainly, cities like Vancouver and Seattle have not only bucked the trend of declining transit use but excelled. So, what are they doing right, and what should Toronto emulate?

The recipe for success is fairly straightforward. Vancouver and Seattle have both built new infrastructure and improved service on existing routes.
[...]
https://torontoist.com/2017/08/west-coast-cities-putting-toronto-shame-comes-transit-ridership/

Looking at transit success and failure - The Globe and Mail
Transit Expansion and How Vancouver Compares

And so on...

Obviously Van is doing something right, and Toronto isn't. And Van is just one of many cities that is.

Ah yes, Tepid Tory will roll out yet another announcement on his SmartyTrack disappearing station trainset, and rebuild the Expressway in his own image,
and put in his thumb, and pull out a plum, and say, "What a good boy am I! "...
 
I never said Vancouver wasn`t doing anything right. The SkyTrain system is very good, extensive, and the bus service frequent and reliable. The system is light years ahead of where it was when I moved here in 1990 while Toronto`s has hardly budged. That said much of the increase is due to having almost no freeways, horrid regular roads, the highest gas prices in NA, and astronomical insurance rates. I have a PERFECT driving record and yet pay $1850/year to insure my 2016 Nissan Micra. Due to the price of gas, insurance, and having no money left after paying their sky high rent or mortgage payments have any money left to own or drive a car. Also suburban Vancouver is generally more densely populated than other cities but again that has noting to do with good planning or transit but rather no one {including people making more than $120k} can even dream about owning a SFH. New 2 bedroom 1500sq feet townhomes in far flung Cloverdale start at $620k.
 
$1850 a year? hahaha, try $3840 to insure a Subaru sedan (a former coworker of mine had this actual scenario) in Mississauga. $200-300 (and even more) monthly auto insurance payments are common in the GTA. Sorry, just can't take anyone outside Ontario complaining about auto insurance seriously.
 
@ssiguy2 You keep throwing out reasons to debase a learning comparison of Toronto to Vancouver and then state that you're not. BC is considered to be the average highest cost for auto insurance in Canada, but Greater Van to GTA is not much difference. It's a chimera!

And so is the cost of housing:
And:
Toronto just passed Vancouver as Canada's most expensive place to ...

There might be good reasons that a Van vs Toronto transit comparison isn't linear, the two you state aren't. The lay of the land might be, since Van is hemmed in by geographical features, and elevated construction is dictated by soil conditions in many cases, and therefore much cheaper to build. Toronto and region have been avoiding elevated, making things very pricey and difficult by insisting on "subways, subways, subways". One comparison not linear is West Coast Express to GO Transit. GO is increasing, WCE is decreasing. That could be for a multitude of reasons. Worth discussing.

Just tripped across this Googling, as I believe bus ridership is well up in Van, and falling in many North Am jurisdictions. By @ShonTron
The secret behind Brampton’s transit success
ANALYSIS: Public transit ridership is stagnating across North America, but in Brampton, it’s on the rise. Here’s why

Published on Jan 08, 2018
by Sean Marshall

Brampton, population 600,000, is a fast-growing city northwest of Toronto. It boasts a charming downtown core that predates Toronto’s post-war growth, but, like so many other suburban communities, it is made up primarily of subdivisions with single-family homes, big-box retail outlets, and business parks full of nondescript warehouses and industrial malls. Its wide, six-lane roads are jammed with cars and trucks. But Brampton has what most suburbs don’t: a thriving local transit system.

In October 2015, in a divisive 6-5 decision, Brampton City Council rejected provincial funding for a segment of the planned Hurontario-Main LRT that would have connected downtown Brampton — and its GO station — with Port Credit in Mississauga. The project had the support of Brampton’s mayor, Linda Jeffrey, but prominent residents, such as former Premier Bill Davis and members of the local business community opposed it, claiming the LRT would disrupt the historic downtown core and cause traffic congestion, and raising concerns about the cost of operation. Some observers, such as writer Noreen Ahmed-Ullah, saw the divisive vote as evidence of a conflict between Brampton’s older white establishment and its younger South Asian and Black residents. As things stand now, the light-rail line — which begins construction in 2018 — will terminate in Brampton’s south end, at Steeles Avenue. The city is now studying alternative, less direct routes to bring the light-rail line into the downtown core.

But when it comes to local transit, the city is exceeding expectations and bucking a worrying trend across Ontario and North America, where ridership is stagnating. In 2016, the Toronto Transit Commission’s ridership grew by only 0.1 per cent: in 2016, total ridership was 538 million. In Hamilton, ridership dropped by 1.8 per cent, or 435,000 trips, despite some service improvements. In Burlington, the drop was five per cent. MiWay (Mississauga Transit), GO Transit, and York Region Transit did see modest ridership increases, but in Durham Region — another fast-growing suburban area — ridership fell by 1.1 per cent.

In 2016, though, Brampton Transit’s annual ridership rose to 23.1 million, an increase of 9.2 per cent over 2015. Between January and October 2017, ridership was up by nearly 19 per cent over the same months from the previous year. The projected annual ridership for 2017 is 27.2 million.

This impressive feat cannot simply be explained by population growth. The city’s population increased by 13.3 per cent from 2011 to 2016: during the same period of time, Brampton Transit ridership increased by 41.6 per cent.

So why has Brampton Transit performed so well compared to its peers?

[...continues with graphs, map and more text...]

If other municipalities want to repeat Brampton Transit’s success and reproduce its record ridership increases, the path forward is clear: Commit to transit expansion in the municipal budget. Offer more frequent service, and guarantee a minimum level of service on major routes. Provide useful connections to major transit hubs and post-secondary institutions, even if that means extending service well beyond municipal boundaries. Adjust service regularly to meet demand. And develop a network of rapid, reliable express routes, while at the same time ensuring there’s a strong local network to feed the express buses.
[...]
https://tvo.org/article/current-affairs/the-secret-behind-bramptons-transit-success

Addendum: Rereading this, this is pretty much the model...the *achievable and affordable and easily instituted model* for a cross boundary GTHA 'superlinx' system. There are political and funding issues that would have to be addressed, but that's going to happen with a 'subway upload' anyway.
If other municipalities want to repeat Brampton Transit’s success and reproduce its record ridership increases, the path forward is clear: Commit to transit expansion in the municipal budget. Offer more frequent service, and guarantee a minimum level of service on major routes. Provide useful connections to major transit hubs and post-secondary institutions, even if that means extending service well beyond municipal boundaries. Adjust service regularly to meet demand. And develop a network of rapid, reliable express routes, while at the same time ensuring there’s a strong local network to feed the express buses.

A successful model is already up and running, a couple are, and if Ford et al had half a neuron between them...well...let me rephrase this...if they hire an independent outside adviser, some excellent ideas might be had as to how to string the GTHA wide express buses together into a cogent whole, and still leave the local buses intact as they now are. Other than the presently owned Metrolinx LRTs in Toronto, most of the system would be left as the TTC minus subways.
 
Last edited:
Yes, Vancouver's system is one of the ones I was talking about when I said that a single agency handling transit across the entire region is standard (whether truly unified like Translink or an umbrella like TFL), and being done in Canada. All the fears that Toronto residents have about a region-wide system haven't come true in Vancouver. There's no inappropriate focus on the suburbs and they've built the largest rapid transit system in the country since the 1980s, which is coincidentally when Toronto practically stopped building anything. Toronto will soon fall to third place when Montreal's REM opens.

Toronto already has the exact suburban focus that opponents of integration fear. No subways have been built downtown since the last time the Leafs won a Stanley Cup. Toronto has been failing at this for longer than most of our lifetimes. Systemic change is needed.

You could argue that RER is classified as rapid transit and if so is the largest rapid transit expansion in Toronto's history. But that project comes from the province and Metrolinx, not the city. It's the result of the small amount of regional integration that we now have and something that the TTC would never have come up with on its own. Imagine what we could accomplish if we had some unity across the GTA.
 
whether truly unified like Translink or an umbrella like TFL
Bingo.

Medellin, although nowhere as akin as Brampton, is an excellent model to learn from:
Medellin’s Amazing Metro System: Colombia Uses Public Transport To Drive Societal Change
THINKPROGRESSMAR 13, 2012, 2:35 PM

by Jorge Madrid

The public transportation system in Medellin, Colombia, is one of the most successful in the world. It is successful for promoting not just environmental sustainability, but social equity as well.

In 2012, it was named one of the top transport systems in the world by the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP), a global consortium of organizations founded in 1985 to promote sustainable transportation worldwide:
[...]
https://thinkprogress.org/medellins...nsport-to-drive-societal-change-1a4186f6c3c6/

Medellín: A Leader in Sustainable Transport
See vid at link below
April 3, 2012


Once mired with problems of citizen safety and public order, Medellín city is now becoming famous for its innovative sustainable transport. Plagued by urban warfare in the 1980s and 1990s, the city’s recent efforts to improve public transport, create better public spaces, and improve safety have transformed the city. To highlight these best practices, Streetfilms, in collaboration with the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy, is releasing a video documenting these changes.

These efforts include the development of a bus rapid transit system, MetroPlús, which is fully integrated with the existing underground metro and cable car systems, EnCicla bike share, and 1.6 million square meters of new public space, including 25 new parks and 11 new promenades.

Medellín is the second largest metropolitan area in the country. With more than 3.5 million people, the city is one of the strongest economic regions in the country. Medellín’s recuperation of its public spaces has brought direct benefits to 800,000 residents, mostly through increased and safer access to public transport. The city has also introduced an Intelligent Mobility System (SIMM), aimed at improving mobility and road safety for all users, which has reduced response time to road side accidents from 40 minutes (2008) to 18 minutes (2011). For these reasons, Medellin was awarded the 2012 Sustainable Transport Award.

The city has demonstrated the ability of a city to transcend its past and make sustainable roads to a better future for its residents. Watch this video and see the wonderful transformation of Medellin.
https://www.itdp.org/2012/04/03/medellin-a-leader-in-sustainable-transport/

Frankly though, we lack the societal impetus and leadership to do this. I give you Messrs Tory et Ford. Enough said on that. Damn, now my day has started off in cynicism...
 
Last edited:
Yes, Vancouver's system is one of the ones I was talking about when I said that a single agency handling transit across the entire region is standard (whether truly unified like Translink or an umbrella like TFL), and being done in Canada. All the fears that Toronto residents have about a region-wide system haven't come true in Vancouver. There's no inappropriate focus on the suburbs and they've built the largest rapid transit system in the country since the 1980s, which is coincidentally when Toronto practically stopped building anything. Toronto will soon fall to third place when Montreal's REM opens.

Toronto already has the exact suburban focus that opponents of integration fear. No subways have been built downtown since the last time the Leafs won a Stanley Cup. Toronto has been failing at this for longer than most of our lifetimes. Systemic change is needed.

You could argue that RER is classified as rapid transit and if so is the largest rapid transit expansion in Toronto's history. But that project comes from the province and Metrolinx, not the city. It's the result of the small amount of regional integration that we now have and something that the TTC would never have come up with on its own. Imagine what we could accomplish if we had some unity across the GTA.
While I agree with all your points, was the decision not to build subways Downtown really due to a lack of regional planning?
 
While I agree with all your points, was the decision not to build subways Downtown really due to a lack of regional planning?
I don't think that he meant that as the causation of the lack of subways, just an aspect of Toronto being 'frozen in the mud' for at least a generation. Subways were built, but ones that don't address the needs of the core, and only exacerbate the overcrowding.

Addendum:
  1. Ben Spurr‏Verified account@BenSpurr Oct 31
    I asked the transportation minister's office what the terms of reference for the upload study are, whether it's authorized to consider a broader upload than just taking ownership of the subway, and whether other members have been appointed to the panel. I got this non-response.

    Dq3ypU7XgAEgXoF.jpg

    2 replies1 retweet3 likes

    Show this thread

  2. Ben Spurr‏Verified account@BenSpurr Oct 31
    What the board is proposing is a much more sweeping upload than the province is officially considering. But the government hasn't released any terms of reference for its advisory panel on the TTC subway upload, so we don't know if it would consider a broad plan like this.

    1 reply1 retweet4 likes

    Show this thread

  3. Ben Spurr‏Verified account@BenSpurr Oct 31
    Toronto Region Board of Trade says it has strong support proposal to upload transit to regional super-agency



    https://twitter.com/BenSpurr
 
Last edited:
Yes, Vancouver's system is one of the ones I was talking about when I said that a single agency handling transit across the entire region is standard (whether truly unified like Translink or an umbrella like TFL), and being done in Canada. All the fears that Toronto residents have about a region-wide system haven't come true in Vancouver. There's no inappropriate focus on the suburbs and they've built the largest rapid transit system in the country since the 1980s, which is coincidentally when Toronto practically stopped building anything. Toronto will soon fall to third place when Montreal's REM opens.

The other piece in common between Vancouver and recent Montreal expansions (REM) is that they're mostly not underground. The pricetag of underground expansion is sufficient in itself to cause decades of delays (see numerous Montreal subway expansion plans for example).

If you only focus on doing only the most expensive type of expansions without setting aside a dedicated funding stream, then you don't get much done.
 

Back
Top