[Townie]

Apologies if this is a stupid question: Why aren't the Crosstown trains red & white, like other public transit vehicles in Toronto? And why are the Crosstown stations marked with a giant, black & white "T" sign, instead of the well-known identifier of the TTC logo? What does the "T" stand for, anyway? Transit? Toronto? Tommy the Tank Engine? Isn't this confusing for transit users? Is it because the trains are "owned" by Metrolinx? Most people don't know or care what Metrolinx is. They know and understand TTC (red & white) and GO (green & white) and their specific areas of operation.

 

[TRONto]

Apologies if this is a stupid question: Why aren't the Crosstown trains red & white, like other public transit vehicles in Toronto? And why are the Crosstown stations marked with a giant, black & white "T" sign, instead of the well-known identifier of the TTC logo? What does the "T" stand for, anyway? Transit? Toronto? Tommy the Tank Engine? Isn't this confusing for transit users? Is it because the trains are "owned" by Metrolinx? Most people don't know or care what Metrolinx is. They know and understand TTC (red & white) and GO (green & white) and their specific areas of operation.

You got it. These decisions are made at the whims of Metrolinx

 

[T3G]

I still find their choice of livery shocking. If memory serves, the original ideas thrown around called for green and white (?) trains, which would've been far more visually appealing than this grey on grey on grey dreck, even if it would cause the intellectually challenged to confuse it with a big honking GO Train.

I do not understand this modern era at all. It seems that the only objective is to make everything around you look as dull and dreary and depressing as possible. To match the times, perhaps? Not that I particularly enjoy 70s era kitsch but I would welcome that a million times over instead of grey/white & black/anthracite everything.

 

[nfitz]

Not that I particularly enjoy 70s era kitsch but I would welcome that a million times over instead of grey/white & black/anthracite everything.

I've commented about that about the ugly white to grey to black "colour" schemes in the office - particularly all the white counters and stuff that won't wear well - and they all look at me like I'm from a previous century ...

... no wonder no one wants to work in an office any more!

 

[MisterF]

The TTC, Metrolinx, and the suburban systems should all be merged into a single regional system. That's the way it works in most cities that operate mass transit properly. These stupid little turf wars and competing standards are a big part of what's wrong with transportation in Toronto.

Apologies if this is a stupid question: Why aren't the Crosstown trains red & white, like other public transit vehicles in Toronto? And why are the Crosstown stations marked with a giant, black & white "T" sign, instead of the well-known identifier of the TTC logo? What does the "T" stand for, anyway? Transit? Toronto? Tommy the Tank Engine? Isn't this confusing for transit users? Is it because the trains are "owned" by Metrolinx? Most people don't know or care what Metrolinx is. They know and understand TTC (red & white) and GO (green & white) and their specific areas of operation.

To be fair, using the TTC corporate logo to identify subway stations has always been a flawed idea. The TTC logo identifies everything from streetcars to buses to TTC offices. Most cities use a simple M or T or some other distinctive logo to identify rapid transit.

For example, there's nothing at this station entrance that says it's a subway station. Sure, it shows the line numbers but to someone unfamiliar with the system those are meaningless. All they would know from looking at the signs is that the TTC runs it and buses go there. In Montreal, OTOH, when you see a big down arrow you know exactly what you're getting.

 

[T3G]

The TTC, Metrolinx, and the suburban systems should all be merged into a single regional system. That's the way it works in most cities that operate mass transit properly. These stupid little turf wars and competing standards are a big part of what's wrong with transportation in Toronto.

I know this idea has been thrown around a fair bit, but I'm personally dubious as to the benefits a system of this scale would end up generating, with the sole exception of simplifying cross border boundaries, allowing for smooth travel across urban boundaries rather than the silly cat and mouse games the various towns and agencies engage in right now.

I get the appeal and it definitely makes sense in a place of a certain scale, but I think that the GTA is far too large and sprawling, and with far too many competing needs and interests, to make this a viable course of action or to even result in any real tangible change. The needs of transit in downtown Toronto, or even along a more frequent suburban line in the outer boroughs of Toronto, are very different than the needs of transit out in Milton (though I wouldn't protest to having transit that runs 7 days a week out here!) Outside of a few cross border routes, which could also be solved by improving the frequency of the GO bus and not letting CP Rail hold commuters in Milton and Mississauga hostage, I don't think there would be that many changes to the route network... not like you'd see the 32/34 Eglinton buses extended deep into Mississauga or Milton, the route would become far too long to be run reliably and would necessitate a transfer anyway.

Inter-agency cooperation, and nixing nonsense laws like the ones that only permit the TTC to carry passengers within Toronto, would go a long way towards improving cross border travel in the region without having to spend money on rebranding and what have you.

 

[nfitz]

The TTC, Metrolinx, and the suburban systems should all be merged into a single regional system. That's the way it works in most cities that operate mass transit properly.

Other than Translink, I'm struggling to find good North American examples of a big city that does that. Even New York City has a different agency for one of the subway lines in Manhattan - not to mention across the river. Seattle too operates their LRT through different governments - not to mention their commuter trains. Montreal has several agencies.

The problem many fear is the lack of decent service standards in a regional agency that isn't beholden to locally elected oversight. That off-peak some of their subway service only goes every 20 minutes is a disgrace. It will be interesting to see how the Hamilton and Hurontario LRT frequencies compare to Line 5 and Line 6. Though it's not clear just who is going to be operating those lines - are those cities even paying operating costs?

 

[MisterF]

I know this idea has been thrown around a fair bit, but I'm personally dubious as to the benefits a system of this scale would end up generating, with the sole exception of simplifying cross border boundaries, allowing for smooth travel across urban boundaries rather than the silly cat and mouse games the various towns and agencies engage in right now.

I get the appeal and it definitely makes sense in a place of a certain scale, but I think that the GTA is far too large and sprawling, and with far too many competing needs and interests, to make this a viable course of action or to even result in any real tangible change. The needs of transit in downtown Toronto, or even along a more frequent suburban line in the outer boroughs of Toronto, are very different than the needs of transit out in Milton (though I wouldn't protest to having transit that runs 7 days a week out here!) Outside of a few cross border routes, which could also be solved by improving the frequency of the GO bus and not letting CP Rail hold commuters in Milton and Mississauga hostage, I don't think there would be that many changes to the route network... not like you'd see the 32/34 Eglinton buses extended deep into Mississauga or Milton, the route would become far too long to be run reliably and would necessitate a transfer anyway.

Inter-agency cooperation, and nixing nonsense laws like the ones that only permit the TTC to carry passengers within Toronto, would go a long way towards improving cross border travel in the region without having to spend money on rebranding and what have you.

The transit needs of downtown Toronto have been neglected in favour of the suburbs since the 1960s, so it's not like the current system isn't already resulting in the problems you're talking about. You can't blame Metrolinx or other agencies for that. A transit agency can handle large areas with diverse needs and still be effective. As I said, it's how most cities operate.

Other than Translink, I'm struggling to find good North American examples of a big city that does that. Even New York City has a different agency for one of the subway lines in Manhattan - not to mention across the river. Seattle too operates their LRT through different governments - not to mention their commuter trains. Montreal has several agencies.

The problem many fear is the lack of decent service standards in a regional agency that isn't beholden to locally elected oversight. That off-peak some of their subway service only goes every 20 minutes is a disgrace. It will be interesting to see how the Hamilton and Hurontario LRT frequencies compare to Line 5 and Line 6. Though it's not clear just who is going to be operating those lines - are those cities even paying operating costs?

If we only look to North America for inspiration then we're dooming ourselves to mediocrity forever. North America is very small and insular in a lot of ways. We should be looking at the entire world, or at least other democracies. New York is great but it's not the pinnacle of everything and there are better ways of organizing mass transit than how they do it.

 

[nfitz]

The transit needs of downtown Toronto have been neglected in favour of the suburbs since the 1960s, so it's not like the current system isn't already resulting in the problems you're talking about. You can't blame Metrolinx or other agencies for that. A transit agency can handle large areas with diverse needs and still be effective. As I said, it's how most cities operate.

If we only look to North America for inspiration then we're dooming ourselves to mediocrity forever. North America is very small and insular in a lot of ways.

We need to look at places with similar populations densities and sprawl - it's hard to see too many examples of that. Even in parts of North America like Mexico!

The experiences in a much denser location like London aren't comparable; even there, by the time you hit the end of some of the TfL lines, you are dealing with different transit agencies running buses. And the commuter trains into central London STILL aren't under one organization - some are for-profit services!

 

[T3G]

The transit needs of downtown Toronto have been neglected in favour of the suburbs since the 1960s, so it's not like the current system isn't already resulting in the problems you're talking about. You can't blame Metrolinx or other agencies for that. A transit agency can handle large areas with diverse needs and still be effective. As I said, it's how most cities operate.

Looking at the service frequencies of the any individual branch of lines like the 37, 40, 45, 52, 95, or 96, I'm not really sure that anyone came out the winner.

I guess I just don't see what the point would be in rebranding, consolidating, and having to upgrade systems and update paperwork for a merger of various agencies, when improving service frequencies and cross-border travel would achieve much the same results and be less of a headache.

 

[MisterF]

We need to look at places with similar populations densities and sprawl - it's hard to see too many examples of that. Even in parts of North America like Mexico!

The experiences in a much denser location like London aren't comparable; even there, by the time you hit the end of some of the TfL lines, you are dealing with different transit agencies running buses. And the commuter trains into central London STILL aren't under one organization - some are for-profit services!

It's very easy to find other urban areas with similar population densities.
Toronto 3088 people/km2 (latest census)
Marseille 3100
Amsterdam 3200
Frankfurt 3000
Berlin 2900
Milan 2800
Ruhr area 2800
Copenhagen 2700
Rotterdam/The Hague 2700
(the rest from Wikipedia)

 

[Undead]

I believe Toronto's population density is in the 4,500-5,000 people per square kilometre range. Approx 3,050,000 current population divided by 630 km^2 gives us ~4,800.

 

[MisterF]

I believe Toronto's population density is in the 4,500-5,000 people per square kilometre range. Approx 3,050,000 current population divided by 630 km^2 gives us ~4,800.

I was referring to the urban area (population centre in StatsCan terminology) rather than the city. That's the best apples to apples comparison with cities in other countries because it doesn't rely on arbitrary political boundaries or include rural areas.

 

[Northern Light]

I'm not sure I see the virtue in putting every bus service in the Golden Horseshoe under one direct management umbrella. I tend to think one encounters dis-efficiency when bureaucracies (corporate as well as government) get too many layers
and too disconnected from their own frontline operations.

I do think there is room for some improvement/streamlining/coordination.

***

Before getting into that, I think the Crosstown should have TTC branding/livery; and I'm inclinded to think the TTC's own subways ought to as well as opposed to the stainless steel look. They really could and should have a sleeker appearance compatible w/TTC branding.

***

Back to the idea of broader streamlining..........I would be happy with......

- Some variation of common fare policy (if 12 and under is free, that should be the case for every GTA agency etc. Consistency of policies so one doesn't need to be familiar with 3-4 different agencies with different policies for a single commute/trip.

- An integrated fare structure for cross-GTA trips. I broadly liked the Board of Trade's proposal for a zone system in which all trips within 1 zone remain priced roughly as is; by local agencies, and follow the borders of regional municipalities.
Additionally allowing for added fares for crossing zones but adding a modest increment, not a double-fare; and waving fees for short crossings.

- GO should follow the same fare structure as the local agencies.

- I would merge Oakville/Milton/Burlington Transit into Halton Region Transit. That would be the singular added combo that adds the most value.

- I'd be tempted to Merge Brampton/Mississauga Transit into Peel Region Transit so we can uniformly follow the idea that local agencies operate at the regional level; though Brampton being the better
service I'd be concerned about it being watered down to Miway Standards instead of the latter being raised.

- If we keep Presto, every agency in the Golden Horsehoe should accept it.

 

[kalis0490]

I think funding for ion 2 should be contingent on waterloo adopting presto,. Same with guelph for all day go