News   Nov 28, 2024
News Roundup for November 28, 2024
 207     0 
News   Nov 28, 2024
Sunlight Shining Towards Us
 368     1 
News   Nov 27, 2024
Towers to be Introduced to Longo's Site at 7 and Woodbine in Markham
 1.2K     4 

Chicago Tribune compliments Toronto's transit system -- thoughts?

W. K. Lis said:
Meanwhile...

...so many problems, more than Toronto, with Washington's Metro.

See article on
A complete guide to the major problems facing Metrorail
at this link.

As well, see article on
The only fix for Washington Metro’s funding problems: regional cooperation
at this link.
Click to expand...
That 2nd article you posted doesnt make us look good in comparaison! It talks about challenge of getting funding due to the fact (as i mentioned earlier) its the only transit system that crosses different states. But they have and have been able to build a system that is able to to cross state boundaries whereas our subway system (as of this moment) doesnt even go outside Toronto. So what does that say about us when we dont even have a subway access into the highly populous regions of Peel, york and durham ! ?

Then it goes into the fare prices. We are way higher than all those fares lists for all those cities. And yet we hear that our system is always underfunded. So then whats our excuse given that we pay more per ride on system that only covers a toronto, and has many fewer lines and stations than Washington(ie.: a smaller urban area than the GTA)?
 
Last edited:
Burnt creek said:
Then it goes into the fare prices. We are way higher than all those fares lists for all those cities. And yet we hear that our system is always underfunded. So then whats our excuse given that we pay more per ride on system that only covers a toronto, and has many fewer lines and stations than Washington?
Click to expand...
"but Metro charges between $1.75 and $5.90 per trip (depending on length and time of day)"

How is that lower than the TTC?
 
LNahid2000 said:
"but Metro charges between $1.75 and $5.90 per trip (depending on length and time of day)"

How is that lower than the TTC?
Click to expand...
Really grasping at straws arent we :). Yes thats correct and we are roughly at the mid point (a little lower) of that range with our flat fare of $3.25. And all the other cities listed? What does it say?

It says that fares in other cities are cheaper than washington. But, as we can tell, those other cities are all much cheaper than Toronto. And its been insinuated that states like virginia and maryland escape their funding responsibilities. But then what our excuse for charging more than what those other cities charge? And whats our excuse for our transit funding issues, the declining ridership and the fact that we some 34 service disruption last year (see newspaper article today in the Star).

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/07/06/lower-ttc-ridership-leaves-25-million-budget-gap.html
 
Last edited:
Burnt creek said:
Really grasping at straws arent we :). Yes thats correct and we are roughly at the mid point (a little lower) of that range with our flat fare of $3.25. And all the other cities listed? What does it say?

It says that fares in other cities are cheaper. Even much cheaper than Toronto. And its been insinuated that states like virginia and maryland escape their funding responsibilities. But then what our excuse for charging more than what those other cities charge?
Click to expand...
No, you were comparing Toronto to Washington so I posted Washington's fares whose midpoint is about 30% higher than the TTCs.
 
LNahid2000 said:
No, you were comparing Toronto to Washington so I posted Washington's fares whose midpoint is about 30% higher than the TTCs.
Click to expand...
I know what i was comparing to. You didnt read. Or better yet, you chose to cleaverly cherry pick an a very small and insignifant aspect of my comparative data in attempt to support the contarian argument. In doing so, you are shifting the focus away of the central point that i was making. Namely, that other peoples problem pale in comparaison to ours.
 
Last edited:
Burnt creek said:
I know what i was comparing to. You didnt read. Or better yet, you chose to cherry pick an a very small and insignifant aspect of my comparative data in attempt to support the contarian argument. In doing so, you are shifting the focus away of the central point that i was making. Namely, that other peoples problem pale in comparaison to ours.
Click to expand...
Instead of just accusing me of things, maybe you could make your point more clear. I guess you just want people to agree with you here rather than having opposing viewpoints.
 
LNahid2000 said:
Instead of just accusing me of things, maybe you could make your point more clear. I guess you just want people to agree with you here rather than having opposing viewpoints.
Click to expand...
Its not about opposite views. I am all open to change my mind on things if convinced. I dont come here to propagate. I come here to share thoughts and learn.
 
A little late to the party...but HOW CAN THIS BE?

I keep hearing from those who have either never been to Chicago or who barely ventured outside the Loop that Chicago's transit system is far superior to ours, which has eight subway lines and you can just whisk to any part of the city in 15 minutes.
 
Burnt creek said:
Really grasping at straws arent we :). Yes thats correct and we are roughly at the mid point (a little lower) of that range with our flat fare of $3.25. And all the other cities listed? What does it say?

It says that fares in other cities are cheaper than washington. But, as we can tell, those other cities are all much cheaper than Toronto. And its been insinuated that states like virginia and maryland escape their funding responsibilities. But then what our excuse for charging more than what those other cities charge? And whats our excuse for our transit funding issues, the declining ridership and the fact that we some 34 service disruption last year (see newspaper article today in the Star).

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/07/06/lower-ttc-ridership-leaves-25-million-budget-gap.html
Click to expand...

You seem unfamiliar with exchange rates.
 
King of Kensington said:
A little late to the party...but HOW CAN THIS BE?

I keep hearing from those who have either never been to Chicago or who barely ventured outside the Loop that Chicago's transit system is far superior to ours, which has eight subway lines and you can just whisk to any part of the city in 15 minutes.
Click to expand...

Not from my experience for their L trains. Their trains may have a much larger coverage but getting anywhere in the city within 15 minutes is a ridiculous claim. Even getting anywhere in the loop within 15 minutes using the L is a challenge. Service in the loop can be painfully slow because of all the 90 degree turns. It felt like their trains crawled around the loop portion. Also, the actual service you're waiting for won't come as frequently as our subways because they have several lines sharing the same tracks.

I found their blue and red line trains to be much quicker/have more frequent service due to the fact they are independent underground lines that don't have incredibly sharp turns.
 
King of Kensington said:
TTC frequencies:

https://www.ttc.ca/PDF/Transit_Planning/Service_Summary_2016-02-14.pdf

Boston:

https://www.mbta.com/uploadedFiles/Documents/Schedules_and_Maps/Subway/frequency-schedule.pdf

Washington:

http://www.wmata.com/rail/frequency.cfm

Chicago's Blue and Red lines:

http://www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/rail_route_schedules/blue.pdf

http://www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/rail_route_schedules/red.pdf
Click to expand...

Are there many other North American subways with under ten minute waits for all lines at all times? I perceive Toronto as doing extremely well here; it seems to be a winner in this regard while the other cities win in other aspects (cover more area, cheaper fares, 24 hour lines etc).

I notice that most subways stateside have periods of greater than 10 minute waits at least some of the time (although in many cases, those are times that they run later than ours or lines that are much less used than ours).
 
Toronto has very high ridership by North American standards, as well as high frequencies. Do we know if the frequencies were extended because of high usage, or is usage high because of high frequencies?
 
King of Kensington said:
Toronto has very high ridership by North American standards, as well as high frequencies. Do we know if the frequencies were extended because of high usage, or is usage high because of high frequencies?
Click to expand...

I suppose if there is historical ridership data out there that's available this could be answerable. It would be interesting to know when Toronto's transit use rose to a point when it started to "punch above its weight" or so to speak, and started to outweigh cities much more populous than itself.

Alternatively, I wonder if any of the cities whose public transit systems are older and more established than ours ever had higher frequencies in the past and cut back?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top