[Northern Light]

Peak of the market retail. Love being tall.

View attachment 468972
View attachment 468973

Saugeen, not once did you tell us you're NBA material.....

 

[Deadpool X]

There is a world of difference between neglecting aesthetics and updating one's "brand" to keep up with the joneses.

What people care about is that their vehicle looks clean and presentable, is not dilapidated or rusty, not whether the brand is sufficiently up to date. Have you registered a noticable uptick in GO ridership since their rebranding in 2013? Or the TTC as their fleet has moved away from the kinder egg colours of the 1990s?


And as I already said, the people who are choosing to use the car are doing so because they either perceive GO to be inconvenient, not financially competitive, not time competitive, or because they're asocial and don't want to share their space with the plebs. It has nothing to do with whether they find the logo or the livery up to date or not. NO rational, self sufficient adult is making decisions about which form of transport to use based on criteria like this.


It really doesn't. GO and the TTC serve completely different markets; there are very few routes within the city that could be done both by GO or TTC. And when it comes to deciding between those routes, any sane, rational adult will weigh their options not on how ancient they find GO's brand to be, but on real, tangible things that people actually care about: how much will it cost them, in terms of money and time? Is it tenable to spend more money on GO to save time, or to waste more time on the TTC to save money? Are they in danger of getting shanked or pushed into the tracks? Will they get bedbugs if they sit down?

Fare integration with GO will change the balance a little bit, but again, the livery and logo of the transit system will not figure into that at all. The only people who care about such things are foamers and Metrolinx consultants.


This is a really bizarre comparison to draw. All of the examples you cited are makeshift or incomplete states. GO's branding is neither makeshift nor incomplete. It is your opinion, nothing more, that it is outdated and in need of replacement. You would draw a more accurate comparison by saying that the colours of your local station are purple, but you don't like purple, you think it is outdated, so to move with the times we should adopt blue, or, red, or, in keeping with the general tone of 21st century industrial design, anthracite (see also: the colours chosen for the Eglinton Crosstown and Finch West LRTs). It is your opinion, nothing more.

But since you feel the need to make this comparison, no, I don't think GO's ridership would be materially impacted if they ran all their buses ghost white. New York's MTA basically did just that - their old livery was pitifully bland - for many years. Was there a big increase in ridership when they introduced the dark blue Cuomo buses? Do you see people avoiding the TTC or New York subways in favour of buses because they are not painted colours?


And yet, New York has a very high subway ridership, and even the rich and famous can be counted among its users, which many other cities can't claim.


That's a nice theory, but it again only goes so far. The people who pay extra for having a different colour are in no way a majority - if you care to look outside your window, you will see that an overwhelming majority of the cars on the road are white, gray, or black. At the same time, you will also note that most people's cars are in good shape - not rusty, dirty, scratched up etc. What this tells me is that people do not find the colour of their car, largely, to be so important as to justify shelling out extra for it, but they think it is important that their personal vehicle looks clean and well maintained.

I don't want to drag this and let's agree to disagree. But I'll make 3 points clear:

1. Out of the 3 examples I mentioned, only one is makeshift.

2. You can't measure the impact on the ridership without having a control experiment (where we have the other option run in parallel). We can't say if even more people would have used NYC subway if it were less bland. You and I both can't conclusively answer that.

3. People who pay extra for colour are in minority but people who have a preference for a colour would be close to 100%. We may have black, white and gray cars but people who want to buy in white would not want in black and vice versa. If that were the case, manufacturers would have introduced cars in just one colour.

Ultimately we get what we care for. If we are okay with bland, we get bland, whether it's transit or condos or something else.

 

[Coolibop]

Random tangential thought...I got lost today in Union, as a regular visitor of Union because of an injury forcing elevator use. Either my old age is getting to me, but today was really eye opening from an accessibility standpoint getting from Bay lower level (B2) to the Skywalk using elevators only. I knew where the elevator was at the Bay concourse level...once I got in, I wasn't sure if I was to go up 1 or 2 levels (of course B2, B1, and G somehow make it clear?). So I obviously did the wrong thing and went up 1 to B1...and walked all the way to the York concourse where I realized my mistake and needed to go up one more. So I found the York concourse elevator (which had buttons labeled with C letters...thank god, that makes it so much clearer) and went up 1 level...which hilariously brings you up ...what 2 feet? to the opposite side where there is already a ramp leading up to the York GO waiting area (I really wish I took a video of how ridiculous this is). Of course the correct course of action was to go all the way back to the first elevator at the Bay concourse level and go up to ground. Now do this with crutches or wheelchair and imagine the frustration. /rant

 

[Canadian Chocho]

You used the wrong elevator, he one in the York side you used (by Union Chicken) is to access the food court.

To go up to ground level you would have had to enter the York Concourse, hang a left and walk towards the staircase/escalators p(ast the doors to access platform 3) where the elevator is nearby. It takes you to the great hall.

 

[nfitz]

You used the wrong elevator, he one in the York side you used (by Union Chicken) is to access the food court.

To go up to ground level you would have had to enter the York Concourse, hang a left and walk towards the staircase/escalators p(ast the doors to access platform 3) where the elevator is nearby. It takes you to the great hall.

It's not simple though - and not well signposted. I accompanied a disabled person from the Bremmer (Raptors Way) entrance to Union, to the Union Pearson platform, though the York concourse, and on to the right elevator.

I knew the way already - but I can't imagine a disabled traveller trying to do it by themselves, with all the turns, and lack of signage for an accessible route. It might be even more of a challenge in the reverse direction - though the VIA ramp is at least downhill, so that might be an okay option.

 

[asey20]

The solution to union station wayfinding could be more simple if we were willing to go into the 21st century and start putting up proper wayfinding screens that show animations to direct you where to go. It's honestly ridiculous that the union station food court has restaurant stalls with large LED signs for their restaurant signs yet we can't have proper wayfinding screens.

Look at what Japan is doing with signs in their stations @ 3:32 in this video. This should really be in union station at least.

 

[daptive]

The solution to union station wayfinding could be more simple if we were willing to go into the 21st century and start putting up proper wayfinding screens that show animations to direct you where to go. It's honestly ridiculous that the union station food court has restaurant stalls with large LED signs for their restaurant signs yet we can't have proper wayfinding screens.

Look at what Japan is doing with signs in their stations @ 3:32 in this video. This should really be in union station at least.

Think you pasted the wrong linked. The video is bringing me to a Google street view

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

The solution to union station wayfinding could be more simple if we were willing to go into the 21st century and start putting up proper wayfinding screens that show animations to direct you where to go. It's honestly ridiculous that the union station food court has restaurant stalls with large LED signs for their restaurant signs yet we can't have proper wayfinding screens.

Look at what Japan is doing with signs in their stations @ 3:32 in this video. This should really be in union station at least.

Actually that sound like a great idea! It doesn't even have to be some fancy new technology. Every mall has an interactive screen with a map of the mall and directory of the stores. Pick the store you want and the screen shows you how to get there from here.

That sort of screen could be implemented very easily in a few key locations (entrances where the majority of people enter). That said the building is still under construction so the directions would need to be updated as each phase is completed.

 

[asey20]

Think you pasted the wrong linked. The video is bringing me to a Google street view

You're right. Not sure how that happened. I was referring to this video here.

Edit: These signs would be particularly good for GO platforms.

Also, at 1:46 the video shows off Japan's 3D hologram information booth, which shows wayfinding info on how to get to different parts of the the station. We don't need to have something that advanced but something like the screens at malls, mentioned by @Woodbridge_Heights above, would be sufficient at providing information for wayfinding in the station.

The benefit of utilizing these screens would be that if there are delays or construction going on that closes off a portion of union station, then these displays could display alternate wayfinding paths or alternate platforms for trains that are being diverted for track maintenance, construction, etc. It just doesn't make sense that this isn't present in one of the largest stations/transit hubs in Canada.

 

[dkt]

If we are talking bus signs let me post this recent Uytae Lee joint:

Many TTC bus stop signs do have route maps, as well as schedules. I'd hope a unified wayfinding standard would be compatible with this extra info, otherwise we'd just be losing information.

 

[Reecemartin]

First of all I'm not at all certain that New York is actually bad. Are there people who get confused by the King and Queen streetcars, for example, both stopping at the same cross streets? What about every other route that does the same? At a quick glance of the 97 Yonge bus map, there are no less than 16 intersections along Yonge with bus routes. If the parameters of your argument were to be followed, we would have to rename each of those stops to avoid confusion.


But my point was, New York could theoretically be confusing, and yet people get by just fine there. The city was brought up in counter response to the statement that we need Metrolinx's hackneyed, ugly T logo because otherwise, you won't be able to identify the transit stop you're looking at is the type you need. There is no global wayfinding problem in Toronto that warrants modification, except for, funnily enough, the poor signage within Union station (where did the comrades from Metrolinx screw up?). The T logo is a solution in search of a problem.


Sorry, but I find this to be a horrifying solution in proportion to the scale of the problem.

These routes from different agencies will overlap at how many stops at best? Half a dozen? It is a minor inconvenience that doesn't actually cause problems to anyone capable of critical thinking, and "solving" it will generate new costs in reprogramming signage, redoing bus stops, and reprinting maps. All because... what? We can't expect users of public services to do the bare minimum amount of thinking about what it is that they're doing?

Again, see above. I am not at all a fan of frivolous renumberings.

New York is bad in a ton of places! Even natives will tell you this.

Just because some level of ambiguity is going to exist in any system, doesn’t mean we should try to make it better. . . It’s like suggesting that we shouldn’t invest in public transit because some people are always going to drive anyways . . .

Wayfinding in Toronto even confuses me at times, am I not doing the minimum level of thinking you suggest? Or might be Balkanized way we approach transit with different signs in every municipality, numerous overlapping, route names, and stop names, and just general inconsistency just be a little confusing?

Lots of routes have significant overlap, and optimally in the future, they will have even more because we won’t simply stop routes from one municipality at the border of the next so often…..

I just don’t understand defending the status quo. It’s pretty obviously bad even for someone who’s lived here for over 10 years (and spends a bit of time thinking about transit!) , signs get replaced all the time, that’s a cost that already exists. The idea that people just need to think and it will be obvious isn’t even true, try taking someone to finch station and getting them to find a particular bus route that they might’ve found on say Google maps - you’ll realize pretty quickly that it’s not as simple as everyone seems to think it is. Of course if you regularly ride certain roots, it’s going to be obvious, but the second you start going and trying to take unusual trips, you realize how broken or wayfinding is.

Edit to add: What’s worse is acknowledging things are bad (such as you sort of did with NY?) but saying people figure it out. I don’t really want my mother with a spinal injury having to pace around a Station so she can “figure it out”.

Personally, I am of the belief that if something is bad and we all acknowledge it’s bad then we should just fix it instead of pretending it’s somehow OK. Especially because the mild annoyance for someone who’s able-bodied or familiar with a place can actually be a huge problem for people who aren’t so lucky.

 

[Northern Light]

New York is bad in a ton of places! Even natives will tell you this.

Just because some level of ambiguity is going to exist in any system, doesn’t mean we should try to make it better. . . It’s like suggesting that we shouldn’t invest in public transit because some people are always going to drive anyways . . .

Wayfinding in Toronto even confuses me at times, am I not doing the minimum level of thinking you suggest? Or might be Balkanized way we approach transit with different signs in every municipality, numerous overlapping, route names, and stop names, and just general inconsistency just be a little confusing?

Lots of routes have significant overlap, and optimally in the future, they will have even more because we won’t simply stop routes from one municipality at the border of the next so often…..

I just don’t understand defending the status quo. It’s pretty obviously bad even for someone who’s lived here for over 10 years (and spends a bit of time thinking about transit!) , signs get replaced all the time, that’s a cost that already exists. The idea that people just need to think and it will be obvious isn’t even true, try taking someone to finch station and getting them to find a particular bus route that they might’ve found on say Google maps - you’ll realize pretty quickly that it’s not as simple as everyone seems to think it is. Of course if you regularly ride certain roots, it’s going to be obvious, but the second you start going and trying to take unusual trips, you realize how broken or wayfinding is.

Edit to add: What’s worse is acknowledging things are bad (such as you sort of did with NY?) but saying people figure it out. I don’t really want my mother with a spinal injury having to pace around a Station so she can “figure it out”.

Personally, I am of the belief that if something is bad and we all acknowledge it’s bad then we should just fix it instead of pretending it’s somehow OK. Especially because the mild annoyance for someone who’s able-bodied or familiar with a place can actually be a huge problem for people who aren’t so lucky.

There is certainly room for improved wayfinding; but I don't think it lies in eliminating every duplicated station or route name or stamping a T in a circle all over the place.

None of that would change the problem you describe at Finch Station.

The idea described above of an interactive map that shows you how to find your desired spot is one of the better ideas I've heard.

Likewise TTC bus terminals (and perhaps those of other agencies as well) often have poor identification of which routes stop where and don't use bus bay numbers, which can introduce a bit of guess work in larger facilities.

I'm all for giving bus bays numbers or letters and then following intuitive logic (ie. bus bay 1 is followed by 2, then 3 etc.) and route names are clearly displayed.

I think like many here, though, I have a desire not to infantilize the rider, and not to invest in elaborate new systems which will serve to confuse existing riders more than assist.

I don't really any difficulty navigating local transit under 'normal' conditions.

Now, if we talk about how the TTC conveys information about diversions, suspended services, or shuttle buses.......that is disastrously awful; but again, not really addressed by much of what's been discussed.

 

[MisterF]

New York is bad in a ton of places! Even natives will tell you this.

Just because some level of ambiguity is going to exist in any system, doesn’t mean we should try to make it better. . . It’s like suggesting that we shouldn’t invest in public transit because some people are always going to drive anyways . . .

Wayfinding in Toronto even confuses me at times, am I not doing the minimum level of thinking you suggest? Or might be Balkanized way we approach transit with different signs in every municipality, numerous overlapping, route names, and stop names, and just general inconsistency just be a little confusing?

Lots of routes have significant overlap, and optimally in the future, they will have even more because we won’t simply stop routes from one municipality at the border of the next so often…..

I just don’t understand defending the status quo. It’s pretty obviously bad even for someone who’s lived here for over 10 years (and spends a bit of time thinking about transit!) , signs get replaced all the time, that’s a cost that already exists. The idea that people just need to think and it will be obvious isn’t even true, try taking someone to finch station and getting them to find a particular bus route that they might’ve found on say Google maps - you’ll realize pretty quickly that it’s not as simple as everyone seems to think it is. Of course if you regularly ride certain roots, it’s going to be obvious, but the second you start going and trying to take unusual trips, you realize how broken or wayfinding is.

Edit to add: What’s worse is acknowledging things are bad (such as you sort of did with NY?) but saying people figure it out. I don’t really want my mother with a spinal injury having to pace around a Station so she can “figure it out”.

Personally, I am of the belief that if something is bad and we all acknowledge it’s bad then we should just fix it instead of pretending it’s somehow OK. Especially because the mild annoyance for someone who’s able-bodied or familiar with a place can actually be a huge problem for people who aren’t so lucky.

You're bang on about Finch Station. If you want to get on a YRT or GO bus the logical thing to do is follow the signs that say "Buses". But of course that's not how it works. You have to follow the GO and YRT signs. Our wayfinding system requires users to not only memorize a complex web of agencies but also know not to follow the "buses" signs to find their bus. It's madness.

Union Station is better but still flawed. In some places the signs say "national trains" or "regional trains", which everyone can figure out. But in other parts of the station the signs refer to Via Rail and UP Express, which again requires users to memorize multiple agencies and brands. It's inconsistent and confusing.

 

[T3G]

New York is bad in a ton of places! Even natives will tell you this.

Just because some level of ambiguity is going to exist in any system, doesn’t mean we should try to make it better. . . It’s like suggesting that we shouldn’t invest in public transit because some people are always going to drive anyways . . .

Wayfinding in Toronto even confuses me at times, am I not doing the minimum level of thinking you suggest? Or might be Balkanized way we approach transit with different signs in every municipality, numerous overlapping, route names, and stop names, and just general inconsistency just be a little confusing?

Lots of routes have significant overlap, and optimally in the future, they will have even more because we won’t simply stop routes from one municipality at the border of the next so often…..

I just don’t understand defending the status quo. It’s pretty obviously bad even for someone who’s lived here for over 10 years (and spends a bit of time thinking about transit!) , signs get replaced all the time, that’s a cost that already exists. The idea that people just need to think and it will be obvious isn’t even true, try taking someone to finch station and getting them to find a particular bus route that they might’ve found on say Google maps - you’ll realize pretty quickly that it’s not as simple as everyone seems to think it is. Of course if you regularly ride certain roots, it’s going to be obvious, but the second you start going and trying to take unusual trips, you realize how broken or wayfinding is.

Edit to add: What’s worse is acknowledging things are bad (such as you sort of did with NY?) but saying people figure it out. I don’t really want my mother with a spinal injury having to pace around a Station so she can “figure it out”.

Personally, I am of the belief that if something is bad and we all acknowledge it’s bad then we should just fix it instead of pretending it’s somehow OK. Especially because the mild annoyance for someone who’s able-bodied or familiar with a place can actually be a huge problem for people who aren’t so lucky.

Is there a specific problem you know of that you wish to see corrected?

I don't know of any wayfinding situation anywhere in the world that would be improved by having a generic T logo in place of the incumbent transit agency. Much like the transit agency logo, it doesn't tell you what type of transit, or what routes actually stop there.

And if you want to go on about the duplicate numbered routes, you might also acknowledge the confusion that would arise from renumbering routes that have had the same number for decades. This would affect much more people than the handful of shared stops within the city.

 

[Northern Light]

You're bang on about Finch Station. If you want to get on a YRT or GO bus the logical thing to do is follow the signs that say "Buses". But of course that's not how it works. You have to follow the GO and YRT signs. Our wayfinding system requires users to not only memorize a complex web of agencies but also know not to follow the "buses" signs to find their bus. It's madness.

While I concur that wayfinding at Finch could be better, I had no trouble navigating it on my own at the age of 10, visiting a friend in Richmond Hill, when I lived in East York.

'Madness' just seems very overblown to me.

I knew that at the time I needed a GO Bus to head up Yonge, I think it was Route C if I recall.

I followed the GO sign to the GO Bus, and to my route. Easy Peasy.

The idea that people need to memorize 15 agency logos is incorrect. Finch might be the worst spot of that with YRT, BT, GO, and TTC all in one spot, but it's still only 4.

And anyone arriving at Finch only needs to know the logo of the system they wish to board, which presumably they figured out on a transit app before arriving at the station.

****

At any rate, even if there were better language around 'Regional buses this way" or such, when you get to the terminal you still have agencies and their logos.

Union Station is better but still flawed. In some places the signs say "national trains" or "regional trains", which everyone can figure out. But in other parts of the station the signs refer to Via Rail and UP Express, which again requires users to memorize multiple agencies and brands. It's inconsistent and confusing.

Again. I've spent time in Europe where a busy station may have a 1/2 dozen carriers arriving/departing a station.

In Toronto, we have 2 for all intents and purposes (UP Express would make it three, but the intent is to fold it into GO anyway)

How much terminology do we need for GO or VIA? I think the agency logos suffice quite well.