i
‘ t
vi @
hs
Cars
ie
Pog
ee
an
a
48 {4 fi
eae 4
ee taste p
vite
ace
UPR el
Steen
" oe
a can
i
May
cf
s
Beasts
ay
Ht o.
: ie
vf
Af
ri
fe" é
. ¥
AN att gS:
iy
ay if
aye
oF
veh
a
mM,
he
a ae
4
i
wy
hn ‘
Relay a
wen
:
4 iy
° 1
: hy
ts
oy
i
rt
vhf
ae
vf
ae
1
“a
cS cag
fe 7
Can
BRON are
ue 4
fay '
ee
Py e
i ee
J
ee f
3
v
at te .
" oe
c:
i
"
tN, a.
‘
Hf :
‘
“t
ut
i
ri
: e
wd
t
a 4
rv
4
agg
2 x

-~2-

3. Fine Tune Present Structure

The Committee's recommendation includes this

|lternaTtive as 4 partial solution to the organizational

4

direction questions raised in Mayor Landskail's letter. +
fits in with alternative 5 and is a back-up position should
a

l+ernative 5 not proceed.

4. Expand Commission Membership

This alternative was falt to be too cumbersome.
ities and electoral areas represented

Having al! municipal i
force decision making to be carried

on the Transit would
out simiiar to the Regiona. District Board of Directors.

5. Combine Existing Agencies into a new Transit Authority

The Committee recommends +his approach. it builds
upon the capabilities of the existing agencies, providing

them with authority to carry out their mandate.

+ the Provincial Government is a key player in

instituting alternative 5 may not be feasible.
a greater degree of local autonomy for

Recognizing tha
public transit,

Alternative 5 provides

the proposed new Transit Authority than the Provincia!

Government may accept. in view of This possibility,
In

alternative 43 is suggested as 4a back~up position or
conjunction with alternative 5.

We Brown,
Director of Planning

FILE: 0003-05(3)
Am

mn Se Pen eae

ay