Lessons from other Cities

[Reecemartin]

Upon looking around it seems that many cities especially those in North America are undergoing a transit renaissance.

I think it could be interesting to discuss what we can learn about what works and what other cities are doing in a dedicated space. In particular I find the expansion of LA Metro very interesting as LA resembles Toronto in multiple ways and there system is currently undergoing major expansion.

 

[Tuck]

Oh you posted this at the perfect time. I have no idea why we are both up at 4 am, but here goes:

I was recently in Bangkok, which has a very interesting transportation network.

Bangkok has multiple transit systems - the city has so many bad transfers, its unbelievable. Terrible planning. You have the subway (2 lines, below ground), the skytrain (2 lines, elevated), then the airport connection (1 line, elevated, but counted separately from the skytrain). You can't easily transfer from one system to the other - you must fully exit the subway system to get onto the skytrain. Plus, skytrain and subway interchanges are not built on top of each other - they are built kind of near each other. So often you don't just have to walk up or down a ton of stairs, you may need to walk 100 meters too. The transfers are so, so bad. I find it funny that a justification for the SSE was the bad transfer - hope those people never move to Bangkok!

That said, the sky train is slick as hell. Such an awesome pair of train lines. I wish Toronto would be more willing to give elevated rail a try. It would not work in the downtown core - Bangkok has much wider streets in certain places to work with, Toronto does not. But in the suburbs? It'd be great. Riding the train with a full view of the city (and cell reception) is a wonderful thing.

As for the subway - I actually just posted this in another thread, but the stations are a big lesson for Toronto. They're simple. They aren't architectural master pieces. They all have a standardized, professional tiling scheme. In terms of architecture, think Finch station. Rapid transit is not meant to be a fashion statement.

All stations (except some on the airport line) have platform doors, which i'm mixed on. I like looking down onto the tracks, but I must admit this is much safer.

Finally, the fare system. God I love this so much: its pay by distance. Before you get on, you select the station you are travelling to, and pay the associated fare. This is so smart. It does not make sense to charge someone going 500 meters the same as someone going 5 km. For the skytrain, you get a card that you insert into the fare gate when you get on, and then again when you leave the station. For the subway, same idea but its a small electric disk.

I do like that Toronto has a "once you're in the system, you're in" system - so you don't have to leave one system to enter the other like in Bangkok. But I think as a whole, the fare system should be by distance. Tap when you get on a vehicle, tap when you get off. Simple.

Oh and also, no eating or drinking on the trains or in the stations, which is weird because some skytrain stations sell food...

 

[Leo_Chan]

I feel like Toronto's subway lines (LRT included, transit in general) are destinguishly different from all the other metros in the world where it is strongly focused on a non-central point.

You can probably guess that this point is Union Station. Most other city centres are relatively central to their transit system's centre. We all have Lake Ontario to thank for our flawed city placement (even though a water connection was important for cities in the past).

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I feel like Toronto's subway lines (LRT included, transit in general) are destinguishly different from all the other metros in the world where it is strongly focused on a non-central point.

You can probably guess that this point is Union Station. Most other city centres are relatively central to their transit system's centre. We all have Lake Ontario to thank for our flawed city placement (even though a water connection was important for cities in the past).

Metro systems are typically set up in a radial or a grid system.

Radial:

Grid:

Toronto's system, as it is planned, is a radial/grid hybrid. The Yonge-University, Bloor-Danforth and Queen Subway lines (including extensions north to Sheppard and west to Dundas/Bloor), all of which spread out to the suburbs from the downtown core, is a quintessentially radial system. This radial system, including the Relief Line extensions West to Bloor/Dundas and north along Don Mills have been envisioned for at least 50 years. It's just now starting to come together.

Toronto's grid system is made up by the east-west rapid transit lines (Queen Street, Bloor Street, Eglinton Avenue ,Finch Avenue) and the north-south lines (Don Mills Road, Yonge Street, Allen Road).

Radial systems are great for getting into and out of the core of the city. Grid systems are great for travelling between points outside the core of the system. Toronto's system will combine the both of these systems once the Relief Line and Eglinton Line are complete

 

[Dan416]

GO Transit is pretty radial

 

[TheTigerMaster]

You're essentially describing the Etobicoke RT proposal from the 1970s. It would've been the counterpart to the Scarborough RT, connecting Kennedy Station to Pearson. Although an Etobockoe RT platform was roughed in at Kipling Station for a future connection, the Etobicoke RT proposal was never seriously persued by the TTC

http://www.blogto.com/city/2012/06/whatever_happened_to_the_etobicoke_rt/