News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 6.6K     0 
Yeah, fair enough and I understand the difference in scale, but that's entirely besides the point. A single agency should handle all of transit (if not straight up all of transport) in a de facto city-state like Toronto.

The jurisdictional wrangling is counterproductive.
Yep. Even with fare integration, I would not be surprised if routes and operations were not well coordinated across municipal boundaries.
 
Yep. Even with fare integration, I would not be surprised if routes and operations were not well coordinated across municipal boundaries.

That's just local custom, don't you know!

Personally I find the various fanboy/local agency/jusrisdictional selfishness pathetic and very unbecoming of a purported world city.

It's inefficient and counterproductive to have however many different agencies working at cross-purposes half the time. It's a waste of time, money, resources, and is a good deal of the reason why our regional transit infrastructure is so piss poor relative to how good it should be.
 
That's just local custom, don't you know!

Personally I find the various fanboy/local agency/jusrisdictional selfishness pathetic and very unbecoming of a purported world city.

It's inefficient and counterproductive to have however many different agencies working at cross-purposes half the time. It's a waste of time, money, resources, and is a good deal of the reason why our regional transit infrastructure is so piss poor relative to how good it should be.
I find it amusing and frustrating by turns when I refer to the GTA as a city, and people I'm speaking to interject to say that no, Vaughan or Markham are their own cities. Yes, that is true in ways that don't really matter. Same with people who think Toronto the city is just the City of Toronto. City of Toronto is just a 'borough' of Toronto. The actual municipal organization is secondary to the economic and social reality that is the GTA. As proof, the province could with a stroke of the pen combine the entire GTA into one municipality. They could not with the same ease change the economic or transportation patterns.
 
I find it amusing and frustrating by turns when I refer to the GTA as a city, and people I'm speaking to interject to say that no, Vaughan or Markham are their own cities. Yes, that is true in ways that don't really matter. Same with people who think Toronto the city is just the City of Toronto. City of Toronto is just a 'borough' of Toronto. The actual municipal organization is secondary to the economic and social reality that is the GTA. As proof, the province could with a stroke of the pen combine the entire GTA into one municipality. They could not with the same ease change the economic or transportation patterns.

That's a very fair point, and I must confess to myself being guilty of "municipal nationalism" in some sense. But that's mostly to rib my mates who claim to be from Toronto but in reality live in Oshawa/Missisauga/etc. And this is always in the context of being well far away out of town and describing to locals where we're all from.
 
That's a very fair point, and I must confess to myself being guilty of "municipal nationalism" in some sense. But that's mostly to rib my mates who claim to be from Toronto but in reality live in Oshawa/Missisauga/etc. And this is always in the context of being well far away out of town and describing to locals where we're all from.
I remember as a kid when I lived in Niagara that, when we travelled in the US when we said we lived in Niagara we would get blank stared. Then you say, near Toronto. Some would get it, and some would amazingly still give you a blank stare. Usually saying across the border from Buffalo/NY state would get you there.
 
I remember as a kid when I lived in Niagara that, when we travelled in the US when we said we lived in Niagara we would get blank stared. Then you say, near Toronto. Some would get it, and some would amazingly still give you a blank stare. Usually saying across the border from Buffalo/NY state would get you there.
And the rest of world wonder why the Americans keep voting for the GOP-Q.
 
I remember as a kid when I lived in Niagara that, when we travelled in the US when we said we lived in Niagara we would get blank stared. Then you say, near Toronto. Some would get it, and some would amazingly still give you a blank stare. Usually saying across the border from Buffalo/NY state would get you there.

That's entirely my experience in the US. Including in Detroit. I kid you not.

Meanwhile in Europe, randos I meet at the pub get my joke about Toronto being "the biggest airport terminal in the world" as I describe it.
 
You can't honeslty believe the reason transit ridership falls off a cliff outside of Toronto is because of wayfinding? You know why transit ridership falls off a cliff outside of Toronto? BECAUSE THERE IS NO TRANSIT OUT THERE and its all subruban wasteland where your forced to drive. Fancy signage and way-finding isn't going to put butts in the seats. The low ridership outside of Toronto is not a way-finding problem, its an urban planning problem so I don't understand the point you are trying to make here.

"To be clear wayfinding integration is not the biggest problem, and it's not the only problem - but it is a real one." This was in the post so . . . . also there's no transit? What? Some of it isn't great but Brampton and Miss do put a LOT of service out.

sit to cross borders nor to downtown. That also means many 905 areas won't need to cross borders or head downtown. The equivalent would be hoping on the bus and riding it for 15-30 min to get to where they want to go. The problem? That get's them nowhere if they even get on

See this is the classic, "people don't do a so we shouldn't do b (when b causes a)" the issue is that of course not many people ride across the border - the numbers are highly suppressed by the lack of integration. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Back before the 905 suburbs expanded, the TTC was equivalent to Translink. Vancouver has no suburbs outside the GVRD.

Yeah that's not true, Abbotsford and out are suburbs without Translink service, people actually commute in from Squamish as well which also does not have Translink sservice.
 
Screenshot 2021-02-13 at 13.58.15.png

This is really pretty, imo - it's a shame that Metrolinx has got rid of their art program for future projects..
 
"
See this is the classic, "people don't do a so we shouldn't do b (when b causes a)" the issue is that of course not many people ride across the border - the numbers are highly suppressed by the lack of integration. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
There is a difference between city X and Y. If city X and Y were designed and built in the same way, people in X can stay in X and vice versa. The dependency would reduce hence lower congestion and lower chance of spreading COVID-19 these days too. Integrating both city won't solve the problem as X would stay in X while Y might want to go to X but X would never want to go to Y.

This kind of boarder is visible in Toronto itself. Look at Dundas and Runnymede, the boarder between Old Toronto and York. Immediately east, everything is well developed with an urban feel in The Junctions. West of it, you'll immediately feel different. Transit usage totally drops off with the 40B bus short turning leaving half as much service on the 40A. You'll see most of the bus would empty off passed this invisible boundary at Runnymede. Route 40 is now fully integrated but the integration itself didn't trigger the change.

The point is people don't do A, so doing B won't make people do A. Fully integrating the GTA won't bring a boom to 905 transit itself. The 905 needs to do more to attract people to transit than simple integration. Fare subsidy is another question. The TTC got rid of fare zones between the Old city and the rest of Metro Toronto. The result was downhill from running a profit to more and more subsidies every since 1973. It ain't going away.
 

Back
Top