[nfitz]

I was referring to the urban area (population centre in StatsCan terminology) rather than the city.

It looks like you've done the same for these smaller European cities as well. Which is apples and oranges.

As soon as you get away from the downtown area of most European cities, you have huge swaths of greenspace, that skews the population densities. And that's even more true if you use "urban areas" rather than the main city. You only have to look at these cities, to see that there is a higher density.

Berlin's a good example of a larger city though. I'm not very familiar with it - I have no idea how they only get 3.8 million people (35% higher than Toronto) into an area over 40% bigger than Toronto! Though a quick glance suggests that there's a lot of greenspace and waterbodies on the periphery. Though not necessarily more greenspace. More water though, as I don't think Toronto's number even the ship channel, let alone the inner harbour.

But there must be more going on than that.

Though is Berlin the shining beacon of frequent service? I'm seeing off-peak U-bahn service reported as only once every 10 minutes off-peak - and even less at night (though it is 24-hours on weekdays). The S-Bahn is even less frequent!

 

[Northern Light]

Berlin's a good example of a larger city though. I'm not very familiar with it - I have no idea how they only get 3.8 million people (35% higher than Toronto) into an area over 40% bigger than Toronto!

I think you'll find height has a lot to do with that............there are many fewer hirises in Berlin relative to Toronto.

In fact, excluding the communications towers, there is nothing over ~125M in all of Berlin!

In total there are 12 buildings over 100M for comparison, Toronto has 413 buildings 100M or greater built or under construction.

Source:

List of tallest buildings in Berlin - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And UT's own 100M list.

 

[crs1026]

^Merging transit agencies across the GTA would be a huge transitional exercise, probably a two year hiatus during which not much would get done while departments were amalgamated, middle managers selected, systems and databases amalgamated, etc. A huge learning curve just to land on common methods and policies and achieve alignment and consistency. And in a unionised environment, amalgamation of many diverse bargaining units and collective agreements.

Even smaller scale amalgamations would have these learning curves…. and many operators are dependent on services provided municipally - eg Brampton Transit uses City of Brampton systems and databases, procurement legal and HR functions etc, Miway uses Mississauga‘s departments. and so forth. These functions would have to move to the regional government equivalents, or new internal central functions would have to be created and staffed and systems built.

There might be eventual improvements and efficiencies…… at the risk of creating a monolith.

My sense is that there is so much expansion going on that this is not the right time to make those changes. There may never be a “quieter” time, but the impacts and distractions of that change is to be feared. Plus, I would be suspicious of any move towards ML. Whatever local inefficiencies exist, they will not be reduced by bringing ML into the picture.

- Paul

 

[rbt]

^Merging transit agencies across the GTA would be a huge transitional exercise, probably a two year hiatus during which not much would get done while departments were amalgamated, middle managers selected, systems and databases amalgamated, etc. A huge learning curve just to land on common methods and policies and achieve alignment and consistency. And in a unionised environment, amalgamation of many diverse bargaining units and collective agreements.

A substantial budget increase too. Amalgamation showed us that the pay-scale for every employee in a role will be increased to match the highest paid people who have that role.

 

[nfitz]

I think you'll find height has a lot to do with that............there are many fewer hirises in Berlin relative to Toronto.

In fact, excluding the communications towers, there is nothing over ~125M in all of Berlin!

In total there are 12 buildings over 100M for comparison, Toronto has 413 buildings 100M or greater built or under construction.

Source:

List of tallest buildings in Berlin - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And UT's own 100M list.

True. And towers tended to be clustered, rather than more uniformly distributed.

Perhaps we need the 25% and 75% percentile neighbourhood densities. Or a good density map to look at.

 

[Northern Light]

True. And towers tended to be clustered, rather than more uniformly distributed.

Perhaps we need the 25% and 75% percentile neighbourhood densities. Or a good density map to look at.

Berlin Density Map for you:

From: https://i.redd.it/j0s14zhivo931.jpg

Toronto:

From: https://www.researchgate.net/figure...our-monitors-used-in-the-study_fig1_304186957

* note, the 60,000 numbers are NOT a population reference, they are an overlay for other data.

 

[JasonParis]

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'm not saying I totally disagree, but Metrolinx generally offers less service (or wants to) as the turf-war on Line 5 is pointing out. Moreover, serving far less density could also force them to balance out the 416 services to match 905 levels. Therefore, you get way less service where way more people ride. I'm not saying this would happen, but it is a huge risk. Also, I'm not sure the majority of world cities have their regional and city transportation agencies under the same umbrella. I can name about 20 successful ones that don't, albeit some do. Even some that look like they do (like Tfl) don't actually in some cases. It may be branded Tfl, but operated by a separate, often private, entity. Having said all that, there may have been an O.K. case for Metrolinx to have fully uploaded the TTC subway system, rather than the weird hybrid era we are entering into. Not that I believe they'd be any better at operating though.

 

[Allandale25]

Some confusing reporting by Global News' Isaac Callaan:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1552108771861827584

 

[The REAL]

Accurate. Though entirely wrong-headed on the part of the City.

It's ridiculous that they build the surface part with absolute zero transit priority and still make it catered to cars. It's like saying "You can build on this property, but you have to follow the rules".

 

[The REAL]

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.

Apparently it's to match the current rapid transit train colors (subway), instead of it being red and white. It's also to distinguish that it'll be more "rapid" and not local like the streetcars downtown.

 

[drum118]

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

I will say no as there are far better systems out there. Never supported Presto from day one and never will.

Having used a number of transits smart card system while in Europe now, found a number a lot easy to use and buy.

No system should be tie to Presto for funding as it cost more than the old fare collection system on all levels,

 

[T3G]

There may be better systems in existence than Presto, but the fact of the matter is that is what we have, and we should aim to maximize our usage of it as best possible. This is a conversation we should've had when Presto was first being proposed, not now.

Introducing another fare card system would surely cost more than implementing an existing system onto smaller transit systems, and would make the passenger experience more inconvenient, not less. If we want to introduce something new, let's drag this region kicking and screaming into the 2010s and allow payment of fares via credit or debit cards and eliminate the need to carry a presto card at all, otherwise don't bother.

Making funding contingent on implementing Presto is extremely reasonable if our aim is to make travel by transit as convenient as possible for as many groups of people as possible, instead of sticking it to the Presto man.

 

[drum118]

There may be better systems in existence than Presto, but the fact of the matter is that is what we have, and we should aim to maximize our usage of it as best possible. This is a conversation we should've had when Presto was first being proposed, not now.

Introducing another fare card system would surely cost more than implementing an existing system onto smaller transit systems, and would make the passenger experience more inconvenient, not less. If we want to introduce something new, let's drag this region kicking and screaming into the 2010s and allow payment of fares via credit or debit cards and eliminate the need to carry a presto card at all, otherwise don't bother.

Making funding contingent on implementing Presto is extremely reasonable if our aim is to make travel by transit as convenient as possible for as many groups of people as possible, instead of sticking it to the Presto man.

Amsterdam has one system while Rotterdam has another, yet only 30 minutes apart in the same country. The same goes for Germany where Hamburger is one while Frankfurt is another. Germany currently has the 9 euro monthly pass that can be use on any system in it. Even Italy Rome and Milano systems are different.

Funding "SHOULD Not Be Tie" to the Presto system "PERIOD".

What does a system do when ML charges X 5% fare collection fee in the beginning only to see it balloon to 9% years later and 4% more over straight fare collection??

Why is TTC looking at another system now when their contract comes up for renewal in 4 years??

It maybe great to have one card for X area, but at what cost???

 

[ARG1]

Amsterdam has one system while Rotterdam has another, yet only 30 minutes apart in the same country. The same goes for Germany where Hamburger is one while Frankfurt is another. Germany currently has the 9 euro monthly pass that can be use on any system in it. Even Italy Rome and Milano systems are different.

You know, just because Europe does something doesn't automatically mean it's the right thing to do. I spent a week in NYC and a bit of philly where you have Metrocard/OMNY for the NYC Subway, Liberty Card for PATH, Septa Key for Phily except Patco, Another fare card exclusive to Patco, and NJT and all of the NYC Regional Raillines that each have their own fare system. You know what? I like having 1 fare card even if it isn't ideal. That's still only 1 card to keep track of, refill, and only 1 card that takes up space in your wallet exclusive for transit. One of the best perks of Presto is not only the fact that it's accepted in the entire GTHA, but also the fact that it's accepted in Ottawa. The fact that I can go to Ottawa as well as bring my friends to Ottawa and they can all use the same card they already use on a regular basis is amazing.

That being said I will agree with you that Metrolinx doing things like tying funding with Presto adoption as a way to compensate for how bad Presto is isn't a good thing - however I also don't think that this should be a green light to already work on replacing Presto entirely. The transition to Presto wasn't exactly the smoothest especially with the TTC lagging behind, and I fear that making a completely brand new "Presto 2" (or would it be Presto 3?) is basically asking to introduce the same issues that are currently being faced in NYC with OMNY, where we're going to have some agencies don't feel like upgrading, or use the opportunity to just do their own thing (I'm looking at you Ottawa) - resulting in an even more confused mess of a payment system.

 

[johntauren]

New systems funding shouldn't be tied to having to adopt to Presto, but it should at least be accepted if your system intersects with an existing system that accepts Presto.


Presto is far from perfect, but as someone that used multiple systems on most days, it's way better than having to worry about tickets and tokens for separate systems and having to go out of my way to stock up again.