[Sunnyside]

This is 'to-may-to / to-mah-to' in my books. I think we're in agreement.

I would say so too, it’s moreso that we aren’t all calling the same phenomena the same thing…

I had a discussion with a local councillor a couple weeks ago and this is the sentiment they conveyed to me: providing a service that crosses municipal borders is outside of their jurisdiction, in principled and legal / administrative practice, and should be done by the province. In absence of that, if the Province is not making a local intercity service a priority, what are cities left with?

That's the barrier that a provincial agency should be breaking through, and I think we're all in agreement on that.

Good convo all.

Ignore the weird quote. I agree that we agree, lol. Glad to know it’s not just my neck of the woods feeling short-changed.

I think when you say Provincial, you may just mean any higher government, as the Province is supposed to deal with much-larger-scale matters; Metrolinx is merely a puppeteered ‘regional’ body, which is part of what screws it..

I’d prefer Mx develop internal sub-regional divisions, ideally after a total rebuild, which operates as one cohesive org responsible to either the cities or public. NOT a Minister. We are one region, after all; it’s just not remotely that singular.

Anyway, yes- great discussion. I always enjoy when ideas get fleshed out like this. It’s what helps make UT so great.

 

[Metroscapes]

I think when you say Provincial, you may just mean any higher government, as the Province is supposed to deal with much-larger-scale matters; Metrolinx is merely a puppeteered ‘regional’ body, which is part of what screws it..

I’d prefer Mx develop internal sub-regional divisions, ideally after a total rebuild, which operates as one cohesive org responsible to either the cities or public. NOT a Minister. We are one region, after all; it’s just not remotely that singular.

Anyway, yes- great discussion. I always enjoy when ideas get fleshed out like this. It’s what helps make UT so great.

I know why Metrolinx is what it is, though I've long held that a provincial agency should cover the Province. But yeah, there would need to be significant structural changes.

 

[lenaitch]

I’d prefer Mx develop internal sub-regional divisions, ideally after a total rebuild, which operates as one cohesive org responsible to either the cities or public. NOT a Minister. We are one region, after all; it’s just not remotely that singular.

How would you envision that working if not as an agency of the Crown? Nobody wants a for-profit corporation. Some kind of separate not-for-profit corporation owned by the member municipalities? They would have to fund it and, in reality, would lead to a very large board given the size of the area and likely end up with a lot of squabbling. Who secures the debt? An organization like that would tie up a lot of capital.

 

[urbancog]

responsible to either the cities or public. NOT a Minister.

In 2007, when Metrolinx’s geographic remit was just the GTA, its Board consisted of local elected officials. This changed in ~2009 to today’s ineffective bunch of Ministerial toadies. Here’s a snip from the 2007/8 Annual Report

 

[ShonTron]

It was something that Brampton had no representation on the old GO Transit/GTAA board back then. Bus service was awful on the Georgetown corridor, especially on weekends.

 

[crs1026]

The whole reason for creating ML was that the TATOA could never agree on anything because the local pols on the board took parochial win-lose views and mostly promoted transit for their own jurisdiction.

I'm not seeing any of the provincial governments who have overseen ML doing much to broker an evenhanded integration of transit. They have all simply created and pushed their own self-serving projects.

I'm not in favour of any provincial monolith (self disclosure - I worked at the old Ontario Hydro before it was broken up) but there has to be some sort of silo-busting so that individual transit properties work better with each other.

For regional and provincial needs, a single bus/regional rail plan similar to Let's Move is needed. But I'm not so sure that Metrolinx ought to run it all.

- Paul

 

[sixrings]

The whole reason for creating ML was that the TATOA could never agree on anything because the local pols on the board took parochial win-lose views and mostly promoted transit for their own jurisdiction.

I'm not seeing any of the provincial governments who have overseen ML doing much to broker an evenhanded integration of transit. They have all simply created and pushed their own self-serving projects.

I'm not in favour of any provincial monolith (self disclosure - I worked at the old Ontario Hydro before it was broken up) but there has to be some sort of silo-busting so that individual transit properties work better with each other.

For regional and provincial needs, a single bus/regional rail plan similar to Let's Move is needed. But I'm not so sure that Metrolinx ought to run it all.

- Paul

That’s not fully true Paul. The Milton line representatives have nicely let their project die because of its crazy cost that could be used on much more desirable and worthy projects such as the tunneled Brampton lrt. See how that’s not putting your people first for the greater good?!

 

[Sunnyside]

In 2007, when Metrolinx’s geographic remit was just the GTA, its Board consisted of local elected officials. This changed in ~2009 to today’s ineffective bunch of Ministerial toadies. Here’s a snip from the 2007/8 Annual Report

(Posting this without catching up yet…)

Wow, thanks for sharing. Some big names in this. I wonder how it played out with such colourful characters… Why did they switch to just the Minister?

How would you envision that working if not as an agency of the Crown? Nobody wants a for-profit corporation. Some kind of separate not-for-profit corporation owned by the member municipalities? They would have to fund it and, in reality, would lead to a very large board given the size of the area and likely end up with a lot of squabbling. Who secures the debt? An organization like that would tie up a lot of capital.

Ah, I think I didn’t say that right. Basically return to as-above (a board, in any case) for a restructured Metrolinx. That much is needed regardless. And Mx already acts like a Corporation- I’d rather it didn’t.

My main idea was a partial breakup into 3 or 4 “Planning Districts:” Areas defined by a sufficiently distinct economic centre and/or travel patterns. Something like TO+905/ CMA, Ham-Niagara, KWCG. Likely Barrie, Ptbo. I’d prefer ‘joint jurisdiction’ for the in-betweens like Brantford or Burlington. A London PD would be perfect, but best not under Mx…

I expect Mx properly distributes funding (pop., growth, SOGR, etc). They also still execute the projects- PDs only help figure what those are. GO should remain directly under Mx, only now with major PD input.

Ideally the PDs hold accountability through boards. ~1-2 from each rep’s the PD at a Mx board, which also now has the Minister. GTA ought get +1.

Devolving lets a PD work with local munis better, and maybe even leverage/balance out their resources to deliver more. But, how integrated things can/should get is in the air. This is just how I see a more accurately-represented and planned GGH under a remade Metrolinx.

 

[WB62]

Very interesting post over on the electrification thread:

legacy service plan
View attachment 657789
from 2022

 

[Metroscapes]

Very interesting post over on the electrification thread:

• "Woodbine GO", no Etobicoke North
• 2 service configs for UPX
• A service gap between Old Cummer and Langstaff?

 

[WB62]

• "Woodbine GO", no Etobicoke North
• 2 service configs for UPX
• A service gap between Old Cummer and Langstaff?

Etobicoke North is closing once Woodbine opens.

I’m actually a bit familiar with that RH plan, the proposal was originally 30 minute service along the whole line all day.
Because of the rail to rail crossing between Old Cummer and Langstaff, they split the service, terminating the 30 minute service at Old Cummer, and running a hourly Langstaff-Bloomington service.
The line obviously would have run in full during rush hour, which is what the broken lines on that diagram represent

 

[Krypto98]

Etobicoke North is closing once Woodbine opens.

I’m actually a bit familiar with that RH plan, the proposal was originally 30 minute service along the whole line all day.
Because of the rail to rail crossing between Old Cummer and Langstaff, they split the service, terminating the 30 minute service at Old Cummer, and running a hourly Langstaff-Bloomington service.
The line obviously would have run in full during rush hour, which is what the broken lines on that diagram represent

Makes sense, langstaff to Bloomington can fit 3-4 tracks (the ROW). The Doncaster Diamond and Don Valley are the big constraints. Judging by the terrain around the Diamond the best option would likely be Bala sub under/over York sub as if you trench the York sub the grades would be too extreme for freight trains to go through. It's already a 0.8-% grade coming into Doncaster from the north and west.

 

[Northern Light]

Makes sense, langstaff to Bloomington can fit 3-4 tracks (the ROW).

Are you accounting for the YNSE running in this corridor on 2 dedicated tracks.

 

[Krypto98]

Are you accounting for the YNSE running in this corridor on 2 dedicated tracks.

Likely just 3 tracks with the YNSE.

 

[Urban Sky]

Are you accounting for the YNSE running in this corridor on 2 dedicated tracks.

Even 3 tracks at the Train Storage Facility between Bantry Avenue and 16th Avenue…