GTHA Regional Transit Amalgamation Discussion: Superlinx/Subway Upload

[MisterF]

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.

Yeah that's what I was getting at. That and the fact that the first significant transit investment downtown in half a century is a provincial initiative that never would have happened without a regional transit body, limited as it is.

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.

The insistence on underground construction in distant suburban industrial areas is frustrating and is just holding us back. No idea what the solution is for that problem.

 

[rbt]

The insistence on underground construction in distant suburban industrial areas is frustrating and is just holding us back. No idea what the solution is for that problem.

Elect Doug Ford as Prime Minister; surely then Ontario can afford $100B in suburban subways.

 

[BurlOak]

Van really is an example to study in how they're managing to to co-ordinate regional transit on a multi-municipal basis. This of course hit the news very recently when (Surrey?) Mayor wanted to buck the agreed arrangements. I think that has since been resolved (phew!).

I heard the Mayor and majority of Councillor elected supported the SkyTrain over the LRT. Did those politicians double cross the electorate - I had not heard about it.?

Nope - it looks like they will keep their word and the peoples voices will have been heard.
LRT will be cancelled at new council’s 1st meeting Surrey mayor-elect Doug McCallum says

 

[steveintoronto]

Nope - it looks like they will keep their word and the peoples voices will have been heard.
LRT will be cancelled at new council’s 1st meeting Surrey mayor-elect Doug McCallum says

Not quite. For some odd reason, all the others have a quibble with it. Check the date of the article you linked, and now see what two more days renders:

Mayor of New Westminster says Surrey should pay back money spent on LRT
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/can...r-says-surrey-should-pay-back-money-spent-on/

We'll have to wait to see what the Council of Mayors has to say. It was *pooled* money. I suggest reading the latest news stories on it before posting, and/or waiting for what the mayors decide next week.

My view? If Surrey wants to pay the extra to upgrade, excellent. But don't expect others to foot the bill. How Conservative are you exactly? Or is welfare for the rich to your liking?

You might wish to read this:
Experts weigh in on the costs of SkyTrain vs. LRT in Surrey
Studies and past projects don't seem to support mayor-elect's SkyTrain cost estimates

MATT ROBINSON
Updated: October 29, 2018
https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/experts-weigh-in-on-the-costs-of-skytrain-vs-lrt-in-surrey

If there's a point to this incident in this string, it's that perhaps the unanimity of Vancouver's mayors to move to the future together is shattering. All it takes is one person drunk on power to ruin things...and unwilling to pay for what they break.

And for those wondering on the VanSun bias...it's to right of centre. It's a Post Media publication.

 

[44 North]

Yeah that's what I was getting at. That and the fact that the first significant transit investment downtown in half a century is a provincial initiative that never would have happened without a regional transit body, limited as it is.

The Relief Line you're talking? That's a City initiative. And until only a few years ago Mlinx was clearly cool to the idea of RL being in place (even though it was in their own 2031 Big Move stuff). This is on record, and their hiring of an expert who claimed any RL wasn't needed period speaks to this. They came around, but it was sluggish at best.

The RL situation is actually a good case study about why we shouldn't cede a local transit agency to the Prov or regional transit body. That they lack the foresight to look at hard numbers and see true capacity issues also doesn't exactly bode well for GO expansion approaching Union in the near future. Not to say regional bodies can't be decent in theory or don't work elsewhere. But here in the GTA and with QP there's clear biases and befoulment.

 

[MisterF]

The Relief Line you're talking? That's a City initiative. And until only a few years ago Mlinx was clearly cool to the idea of RL being in place (even though it was in their own 2031 Big Move stuff). This is on record, and their hiring of an expert who claimed any RL wasn't needed period speaks to this. They came around, but it was sluggish at best

I was talking about RER actually. You could argue that it's primarily for the suburbs but it will also be a major expansion for the downtown area, the first since the 1960s. The Spadina and Queens Quay streetcars don’t count.

The RL situation is actually a good case study about why we shouldn't cede a local transit agency to the Prov or regional transit body. That they lack the foresight to look at hard numbers and see true capacity issues also doesn't exactly bode well for GO expansion approaching Union in the near future. Not to say regional bodies can't be decent in theory or don't work elsewhere. But here in the GTA and with QP there's clear biases and befoulment.

This seems to be a very Toronto trait - the idea that something that's routine in other cities would never work here. I don't know where that logic comes from. Regional transportation bodies don't just work in theory, they work in practice. There's nothing unique about Toronto that would prevent it from working here too.

The idea that establishing a regional body would amount to "ceding" local transit to some outside force is, frankly, baffling. This isn't a turf war. Transit in Mississauga and Markham is local transit. It's all, for all intents and purposes, one city. The sooner we stop reinforcing arbitrary boundaries for transit the better off we'll all be. Maybe a better way of looking at it is to recognize that the TTC is bigger than all the other transit agencies combined, which means that most of the staff of a new agency would be current TTC employees. Any merger would be more of a TTC takeover of the suburbs than the other way around.

Any argument against a potential Superlinx could also be made about the current system. It’s rife with biases and befoulment, as you put it. It’s subject to provincial and political meddling. There’s too much focus on the suburbs. And best practices from other cities are regarded with suspicion or hostility. If those are the biggest criticisms of a region-wide transit agency, then the worst case scenario is no worse than what we already have.

 

[steveintoronto]

Cross-posted from the http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2018/11/board-trade-poll-supports-cross-regional-agency-transit article comments:

You've assumed that all local transit systems will be absorbed. That appears to be the Superlinx position, albeit I haven't read the report yet, just downloaded it. This article is very helpful in linking and referencing info that hasn't come up in the forum yet, but I agree, 'Superlinx' per-se is far too much to upload, and frankly prone to failure from indigestion, if nothing else.

The *spine* of local transit systems (the major artery routes, the skeleton if you wish) should be all that's considered for region-wide integration, just as highways were in the day from local main roads before 'super-highways'. Highway 2 from 'Danforth Road' and more is an excellent example.
Local transit should stay local for funding and administration, and political will on frequency and the means of delivery.
We'd be making a massive mistake to consider upload 'All or Nothing'.

GO Transit has been purposely absent until recently on *intra-muni transit*. That has to change, and the beachhead for that is Toronto LRT. It should not only remain part of the GO network, (albeit as to who operates it is a good question, it could even be a separate org, as is done in some US and European cities, San Diego Trolley, for instance) but that is irrelevant as to how it melds the regions into one seamless ride.

Here's the San Diego Metropolitan Transit System website:
https://www.sdmts.com/about...
[...]
Subsidiary Corporations
MTS owns assets of: San Diego Trolley, Inc. (SDTI); San Diego Transit Corporation (SDTC); and the San Diego & Arizona Eastern (SD&AE) Railway Company, which owns 108 miles of track and right-of-way.
Areas of Jurisdiction
About 570 square miles of the urbanized areas of San Diego County as well as the rural parts of East County, 3240 total square miles, serving approximately 3 million people in San Diego County.
Operations Provision of Services
MTS provides bus and rail services directly or by contract with private operators. MTS coordinates all its services and determines the routing, stops, frequencies and hours of operation.
Light Rail
Light rail service is operated by SDTI on four lines (the UC San Diego Blue, Orange, Sycuan Green and SDG&E Silver Lines) with a total of 53 stations and 54.3 miles of rail.
Bus
Almost 100 fixed bus routes and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) complementary paratransit service (MTS Access). Fixed route bus service include local, urban, express, premium express and rural routes.
Freight
MTS contracts with the San Diego & Imperial Valley (SD&IV) Railroad and the Baja California Rail Road, Inc. (BJRR) to provide freight service to San Diego shippers over SD&AE right-of-way. SD&IV shares certain tracks with SDTI, operating during non-service Trolley hours.
[...]
(link posted above)

Does this equate directly to the GTHA? No, but anyone claiming that a 'region wide' system can't work must blame the politics, administration and *societal limitations* of that region, not the model.

[...] One huge warning, and given the alternative, I favour this: Private enterprise will be involved in making this work due to the past follies of successive governments in Ontario.

It's not a case of liking it or not, it's a case of 'how can this be done'?

 

[ssiguy2]

As a citizen of Surrey I can attest that the people of Surrey were never asked if they wanted LRT but rather told they were getting it and then the politicians and government mandarins went into overdrive telling everyone how wonderful it would be and how those that didn`t support it were `anti-transit`...……….see TransitCity for further reference.

A Superlinx is exactly what the region needs as it is very clear that the TTC, GO, all the other transit systems, and Metrolinx have absolutely no intention of working together. Fare and service integration will NEVER happen under the fiefdom mentality that pervades every different city and transit agency in the region. I would refrain from adding KWC, Guelph, Niagara, Brantford, Barrie, or Peterborough to begin with as it will be a big enough challenge within the GTAH but certainly basic GO integration for those areas. Metrolinx was an attempt to bring some form of integration into transit across the GTAH but the push back from the other agencies made it`s job impossible made worse by administrative incompetence. If a more confident and empowered Metrolinx were to be formed it still would face this wall of civic political opposition...……...how do work with people that don`t want to work with you? You can`t and this is why the entire system should go under one Superlinx umbrella so the system can be run with the best needs of users as it`s first priority and not the best interest of parochial transit agencies.

 

[JSF-1]

While I am not against the idea of a Metrolinx merger I do find it bizzare we would consider the creation of a super-regional organization without a super-regional body to answer to. Ideally any sort of "superlinx" would be part of a "Super Metro Government" similar to the Greater London Authority in London or the Tokyo Metropolitan Government in Tokyo. Obviously this would then beg the question what else gets uploaded to the Metro level. I mean it makes no sense to upload transit planning to Metrolinx if the regional planning to go along with it remains with the fiefdoms. I don't really trust the current conservative government to do this as knowing them they would either botch it completely or leave things out making it useless in the grand scheme of things. If this was the same type Con government that created the original Metro/Regionals during the Frost, Robarts, Davis eras I would be a bit more optimistic.

 

[steveintoronto]

I do find it bizzare we would consider the creation of a super-regional organization without a super-regional body to answer to.

This is the massive conundrum. Vancouver has the same challenge though, and apparently does very well. They also don't have blundering idiots running their province as we do at the moment. And to those of the 'right of centre' bent (And I am a Conservative Centrist) Van's regional transit org did very well during a number of Liberal (Conservative in all but name) provincial regimes.

Ideally any sort of "superlinx" would be part of a "Super Metro Government" similar to the Greater London Authority in London or the Tokyo Metropolitan Government in Tokyo.

I started reading the report last night to see what insight they might proffer on this. I was disappointed. From what little I've read so far, they got the GLA wrong in legal basis, they got it wrong in funding and responsibility, and they keep mentioning Crossrail in a context that Crossrail isn't. It's a creation of two levels of government (in simple terms): Municipal (in an aggregate of the GLA) and the National Government. Crossrail is a unique creation that *by and large* Ontario would consider un-Constitutional. I bite my lip....

Best I quote the Report directly:

[...]
MISSED OPPORTUNITIES: LESSONS FROM OTHER CITIES

Real Estate Development Opportunities
Where: London, UK; Hong Kong; Montreal
What is being achieved: London’s Crossrail project budgeted for £500 million ($840 million) in
development income toward its overall project cost—and Parliament gave it planning authority at its
own stations to deliver on that goal. Hong Kong’s MTR transit corporation goes even further, with a
majority of its annual operating and capital revenues coming from property rentals, property
development and ancillary income. Closer to home, Quebec’s provincial pension fund expects to recoup
at least some of its investment in a new Montreal LRT through real estate development.
What is possible here: There are numerous opportunities for real estate development within the
Corridor’s transportation network. Almost all of Metrolinx’s Eglinton Crosstown stations will be stand‐
alone, single‐story sites with no development, despite initial projections that development at just four
stations could raise $75 million for construction. In one widely‐reported case, a developer bid for
Metrolinx’s air rights over the Eglinton and Avenue Road station to build a fifteen‐story residential
tower with ground floor commercial space. Metrolinx rejected the proposal, partly due to a lack of city
approvals. This project would have secured $5 million in one‐time revenue to defray station costs, while
the City would have earned an estimated $325,000 in annual tax revenue over and above development
charges for the project. Superlinx will have the expertise and unified authority to capitalize on these
opportunities, reducing the financial burden on riders and taxpayers.

It's very tempting to examine how London does this, I've used it myself as an example of how a multi-muni co-operation can render an impressive result, but to use "Crossrail" as this Report has indicates an incredibly naive and gullible understanding of how the UK's governance works vs our own.

Except...! Under the Canada Transportation Act...maybe, just maybe, the Feds have powers *beyond* rails. Bus regulation, if I recall correctly, is shared Fed/Prov. This Report mangles the comparisons. Technically, Crossrail is a private company wholly owned by TfL and Westminster:

Crossrail Limited, established in 2001, is the company that has been set up to build the new railway that will become known as the Elizabeth line when it opens through central London.
It is a wholly owned subsidiary of Transport for London (TfL) and is jointly sponsored by TfL and the Department for Transport. Once the railway is complete it will be run by TfL as part of London’s integrated transport network.

About Crossrail Ltd - Crossrail
www.crossrail.co.uk/about-us/

I don't know how the authors of the BofT Report got this so incredibly wrong. It doesn't instill confidence. They conflate "Crossrail" as being the same as "Transport for London" (TfL). And in doing so, they lose the ability to use Crossrail as a potential example for Private Initiative (PFI) working in partnership with the City, cities, or Province.

[...more comparisons to other cities' examples given...]
[...]
Unified Authority
Current responsibility for planning, operating and funding transit in the Corridor lies with more than a dozen
governments at the federal, provincial and municipal levels. To address the complexity, competing priorities
and politicization, the Board proposes that all responsibility for transit is uploaded into a single, new provincial
agency. The Superlinx agency will have authority over transit planning, operations, expansion and asset
management. Consolidation will allow the agency to improve services, find efficiencies and maximize the value
of its assets. This proposal also has the virtue of simplicity, avoiding the coordination problems created by
partial uploads of only planning authority or rapid transit lines.
Moreover, consolidation also makes the lines of accountability clearer. Under the status quo, transit operations
and expansion are political footballs that are constantly tossed between governments. New projects are
delayed as municipal governments search for scare capital funds or feud with the province over operational
authority (such as with the Hamilton LRT). Putting the authority exclusively with a single provincial agency will
remove jurisdictional disputes as a reason for delay and operational inefficiencies.
Finally, a single transit authority will be better able to manage the procurement, logistics and talent pipelines
necessary to build and operate an expanded regional transportation network. The Superlinx agency will be able
to procure a single, integrated technology solution for the entire region, providing a better user experience at
a lower cost. In addition, centralizing the management of transit expansion will allow Superlinx to work with
the education sector to ensure that we are producing the significant number of skilled tradespeople necessary
for these projects, a need identified in the Board’s 2016 report, Building Infrastructure, Building Talent.
Regional Perspective
Beyond the efficiency and unified vision that comes with centralizing transit authority is the ability of the new
agency to act regionally. Decisions, such as fare structures and bus routes, are often made locally with little
regard for region‐wide transit needs. Although local transportation authorities, notably the TTC, have
significant experience in delivering transit, they are limited by geographic, organizational and financial
constraints that the province does not face. Regional coordination is needed, and this can only be achieved
through consolidation by the province.
Vesting full transit authority with the province also places this expensive, capital‐intensive sector with the order
of government best able to finance it. Relying primarily upon property taxes, user fees and transfers from other
governments, cities often struggle to find the funds necessary to meet the capital contributions necessitated
by the current “one‐third” model (where federal, provincial and municipal governments each contribute a third
of the total cost of new projects).
[...]

I'll continue reading this later, but I find the Report incredibly flaccid and devoid of any real answers.

Ironically, I think a network of cross-regional buses/light rail (beyond the present GO system) is not only needed, but essential. The Metrolinx Act (IIRC, it's been over a year since I read it last) has the power to create what's needed. It has the power to absorb (gist) "Any or all municipal systems in whole or part".

Without having direct reference to quote at this moment, my impression is that the Metrolinx Act is the answer, not the BofT Superlinx dream.

 

[steveintoronto]

From the Metrolinx Act (2006)

[...]
Powers
Powers
16 (1) Except as limited by this Act, the Corporation has the capacity, rights, powers and privileges of a natural person for carrying out its objects. 2006, c. 16, s. 16 (1).
Same
(2) Without limiting the generality of subsection (1), the Corporation has the power,
(a) to acquire, hold, lease or dispose of an interest in real or personal property for a purpose consistent with the Corporation’s objects, including for the construction, alteration, extension or expansion of a transportation infrastructure project;
(b) to hold, manage, operate, fund and deliver,
(i) the GO Transit system within the GO Transit service area,
(ii) the prescribed passenger transportation systems within the regional transportation area, and
(iii) any local transit system or other transportation service within or outside the regional transportation area or the GO Transit service area by agreement with the municipalities to be served by the system or service;
(c) to develop and implement management strategies and programs relating to transit and transportation demand; and
(d) to enter into commercial arrangements with municipalities in the regional transportation area or other persons or entities for a purpose consistent with the Corporation’s objects, including for designing, developing, constructing, maintaining or operating a prescribed passenger transportation system. 2009, c. 14, s. 14 (1).
Delegation to subsidiaries
(3) The Corporation may, subject to the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council, delegate any of its powers under subsection (2) to a subsidiary corporation established under section 17. 2009, c. 14, s. 14 (2).
Section Amendments with date in force (d/m/y)
Limitation re subsidiaries
17 (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), the Corporation may establish and dissolve subsidiary corporations within or outside Ontario. 2009, c. 14, s. 15.
Same
(2) The establishment of a subsidiary corporation under subsection (1), the structure, powers, duties, governance, constitution and management of such subsidiary corporation, the dissolution of such subsidiary corporation and the terms of its dissolution shall be subject to the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council. 2009, c. 14, s. 15.
Same
(3) A subsidiary corporation may be established for the purpose of designing, developing, constructing, holding, managing, funding, maintaining, operating or delivering a prescribed passenger transportation system only if the Corporation controls the subsidiary corporation at the time it is established and afterwards. 2009, c. 14, s. 15.
Section Amendments with date in force (d/m/y)
Grants, loans and other financial assistance
18 (1) The Corporation may pass by-laws, in the prescribed circumstances and manner, authorizing payments of grants, loans and other financial assistance to any person, including the council of a band within the meaning of the Indian Act (Canada), a municipality or a public body, for a purpose consistent with the Corporation’s objects. 2006, c. 16, s. 18.
Definition, “public body”
(2) In this section,
“public body” means a corporation established by a municipality, a local board, a ministry, department, board, commission, agency or official of the provincial or federal government. 2009, c. 14, s. 16.
Section Amendments with date in force (d/m/y)
Agreements
19 (1) The Corporation or any of its subsidiary corporations may enter into agreements with other persons, including municipalities in Ontario, the Crown in right of Ontario and the Crown in right of Canada, for a purpose consistent with the Corporation’s objects. 2006, c. 16, s. 19 (1).
Same
(2) Where the Corporation enters into an agreement with a person in a jurisdiction outside of Ontario, it may, in respect of such agreement and with the approval of the Minister of Finance, waive any immunity outside of Ontario to which it may be entitled as a Crown agency and submit to the jurisdiction of a court outside of Ontario. 2006, c. 16, s. 19 (2).
Municipal obligations re agreements
(3) Despite any other Act, a municipality may enter into an agreement with the Corporation or a subsidiary of the Corporation and, if it does so, it shall agree to pay to the Corporation or the subsidiary corporation all or any portion of the operating or capital expenditures required to meet the terms of the agreement, including any lease arrangements. 2006, c. 16, s. 19 (3).
Expropriation
20 The Corporation may expropriate land for the purpose of carrying out its objects. 2006, c. 16, s. 20.
By-laws regulating use of regional transit system, local transit systems
21 (1) The Corporation’s board of directors may pass by-laws with respect to the regional transit system or any local transit system or other transportation service provided by agreement with a municipality under subclause 16 (2) (b) (iii),
(a) prohibiting or regulating the use of any land owned, leased, used or occupied by the Corporation and prohibiting or regulating vehicular and pedestrian traffic on any such land;
(b) prescribing the fees or rentals payable for a permit, licence or right issued or granted with respect to any of the land owned, leased, used or occupied by the Corporation;
(c) governing the terms and conditions upon which tickets may be sold;
(d) governing the conduct of passengers and governing the refusal of passage to persons who do not comply with the by-laws or the terms and conditions upon which tickets are sold;
(e) requiring and providing for the issuance of permits and licences and providing for the granting of rights with respect to the use of any of its land and providing for the revocation of such a permit, licence or right. 2006, c. 16, s. 21 (1); 2009, c. 14, s. 17 (1, 2).
[...]

https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/06g16#BK18

On one hand, this offers great opportunity to impose solutions. On the other hand, and that hand being this present regime in QP....be scared. Be very scared...

Now compare the powers in the above to the claim in the BofTrade Report:

GOVERNANCE & STRUCTURE FOR SUPERLINX
Superlinx will require a new governance structure to meet its new mandate as the sole transit agency for the
region. Additionally, the new governance model should address the current challenge, faced by all large public
agencies, of providing services and accountability without the politicization of key projects. Finally, the new
organization should be positioned to improve services and take advantage of commercial opportunities and its
real estate assets.
The models provided by successful regional transportation agencies, such as Paris’ RAPT, London’s Crossrail
and Hong Kong’s MTR, demonstrate that effective governance relies on expertise, independence and clear
lines of accountability. Based on these examples, the Board proposes the following governance model for the
new agency. [...]

Google search for the three authors of the above report shows a parallel, much newer report:

"Agenda" is the key word. And this isn't being viewed as what's best for you and me. It's what's best for the Board of Trade. Best I quote the opening paragraph:

NEW REVENUE FROM REAL ESTATE COMMERCIALIZATION AND PENSION FUND PARTNERS “We’re seeing Canadian pension funds investing in transportation projects everywhere but here.” Clark Savolaine, Senior Manager, Deal Advisory, Infrastructure, KPMG Depoliticizing transit decisions, among other things, would attract pension funds and other institutional investors to the table. As a result of its oversight and capabilities, Superlinx would be advantageously positioned to work with Infrastructure Ontario and the Canada Infrastructure Bank. It could engage globally renowned pension funds–many of them Canadian–and institutional investors to partner on future transit projects by delivering the certainty, scale and business case analysis these pooled funds demand. Engaging pension funds and other institutional investors in future projects means our region can build better projects with lower risk and costs. Our region’s transit related real estate assets are an untapped source of commercial revenues. The substantial revenues that could be generated by air rights, lease agreements, property development and asset sales could contribute to the cost of new transit lines and superior service enhancements. For instance, London’s Crossrail project is expected to generate £500 million from the development of 12 properties. There is no reason this sort of smart development cannot happen here. [...]

http://ceo.on.ca/images/Agenda_For_Growth_Transit_Policy_Playbook_FINAL.pdf

 

[Kyle Campbell]

As a citizen of Surrey I can attest that the people of Surrey were never asked if they wanted LRT but rather told they were getting it and then the politicians and government mandarins went into overdrive telling everyone how wonderful it would be and how those that didn`t support it were `anti-transit`...……….see TransitCity for further reference.

A Superlinx is exactly what the region needs as it is very clear that the TTC, GO, all the other transit systems, and Metrolinx have absolutely no intention of working together. Fare and service integration will NEVER happen under the fiefdom mentality that pervades every different city and transit agency in the region. I would refrain from adding KWC, Guelph, Niagara, Brantford, Barrie, or Peterborough to begin with as it will be a big enough challenge within the GTAH but certainly basic GO integration for those areas. Metrolinx was an attempt to bring some form of integration into transit across the GTAH but the push back from the other agencies made it`s job impossible made worse by administrative incompetence. If a more confident and empowered Metrolinx were to be formed it still would face this wall of civic political opposition...……...how do work with people that don`t want to work with you? You can`t and this is why the entire system should go under one Superlinx umbrella so the system can be run with the best needs of users as it`s first priority and not the best interest of parochial transit agencies.

But isn't TransLink exactly what SuperLinx would be, and didn't you just complain about the surrey lrt

 

[kEiThZ]

It's strange to discuss the best strategy when nobody knows what the goals of the change are.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

The Relief Line you're talking? That's a City initiative. And until only a few years ago Mlinx was clearly cool to the idea of RL being in place (even though it was in their own 2031 Big Move stuff). This is on record, and their hiring of an expert who claimed any RL wasn't needed period speaks to this. They came around, but it was sluggish at best.

More accurately, Metrolinx responded to Toronto's prioritization of projects and when Toronto had it in their long-term file, with Transit City up front, that's what was in the Big Move. To reiterate the previous sentence for you: Metrolinx's "coolness" to the RL was entirely an integration of Toronto's own priorities into the regional plan.

When Toronto - 100% in response to the province's encouragement of the Yonge extension - asked the DRL be moved up, they moved it up. When the next reiteration of the Big Move was issued, it was where Toronto had asked it to be. Their (fictional) "coolness" didn't slow down the DRL for a single day Toronto would otherwise have been advancing it. "Sluggish, at best," based on what internal discussions to which you are privy? #FakeNews

And while Toronto moved the DRL up on paper, they continued to dither under Ford, blowing up Transit City, bringing it back and going through umpteen variations of the Scarborough subway. The idea of this thread - a Relief Line that went north of Bloor - was somewhere in unicorn fantasyland, as far as Toronto was concerned, until Metrolinx proposed it in this study. Whereas Toronto was doing its usual, half-assed, one-line-at-a-time planning, Metrolinx reviewed the entire network in relation to the Yonge line and proposed various scenarios for relieving capacity constraints; the sort of study that it's almost laughable to consider the TTC undertaking. One of those ideas was that taking the RL up to Sheppard would generate the most benefits. And here we are.
Thanks to Metrolinx, on both counts.

If they are to "blame" for anything in this arena, it's not taking a network approach from the start, instead just patching together an RTP based on projects already dictated/prioritized by the local municipalities.

But what's a few more factual errors from y'all, eh?

 

[gweed123]

While I am not against the idea of a Metrolinx merger I do find it bizzare we would consider the creation of a super-regional organization without a super-regional body to answer to. Ideally any sort of "superlinx" would be part of a "Super Metro Government" similar to the Greater London Authority in London or the Tokyo Metropolitan Government in Tokyo. Obviously this would then beg the question what else gets uploaded to the Metro level. I mean it makes no sense to upload transit planning to Metrolinx if the regional planning to go along with it remains with the fiefdoms. I don't really trust the current conservative government to do this as knowing them they would either botch it completely or leave things out making it useless in the grand scheme of things. If this was the same type Con government that created the original Metro/Regionals during the Frost, Robarts, Davis eras I would be a bit more optimistic.

This. While it is possible to create a Superlinx within the existing political structure of the GTHA, it would be much easier to create it if it was governed by a Metro type of government. That way, Superlinx would have direct accountability to the voters at the Metro level, instead of a finger-pointing game between Municipal and Provincial politicians if something to do with Superlinx went south.