Electrify
Senior Member
I was reading a book called Toronto Sprawls, which details the history of the city's growth through the 20th century. Side note, despite the author being pro-oil and even being a climate change denier, even he is against urban sprawl as it is unsustainable economically and environmentally (actually I thought he was a progressive until just now when I Googled him).
Back on topic, early on he details how the private streetcar network in the city was one of the most profitable on the continent, despite having the poorest service. He points out that while other private operators were constructing new suburbs for their tracks to go through, the Toronto Railway Company focused on servicing the developed urban area exclusively, with the fewest lines possible. In fact the city had to start their own streetcar company to serve the growing suburbs.
When I read this, it got me thinking about how so little has changed, despite public ownership. 100 years later, Toronto's transit continues to focus more on revenue generation than efficiently moving people. One example which comes to mind is in a long lost thread here (though it may have been Skyscraper City) discussing opportunities to expand transit on Finch Ave. Running transit along the hydro corridor would create an excellent opportunity to provide rapid transit to the far reaches of the city at a low cost. However it was decried because a local service would have to operate along Finch itself, and running duplicate services would be wasteful - even if it did better meet individuals' transportation needs.
Another point is the implementation of timed transfers. The TTC has continued to relay mixed messages about their implementation, and continues to be concerned about their cost impact. However it chooses to ignore not only the greater good for the city if such a fare system was implemented, but also how it would make transit more attractive for shorter trips - which is what the TTC should excel best at with its frequent stop spacing (which I believe has more to do with creating more points for revenue than it is about meeting local needs).
Of course, the biggest elephant in the room are the Sheppard and Eglinton/Scarborough subway lines. Perhaps such a line may end up costing more to operate, but there certainly are mobility benefits in linking the Scarborough, Pickering, and Oshawa urban growth centres directly onto the subway system rather than requiring an extra transfer to bridge them to the rest of them to the rest of the public transit network. Hell, we aren't even giving our new LRT lines limited/express stop operation, simply because we are too cheap to consider running a local bus alongside!
I'm not saying that we should build Ford's transit plan, or that we should throw out all fiscal sense in favour of building subways everywhere. I'm saying that in providing a service there needs to be a balance between revenue and quality. One of the benefits of a public service is that it generally favours quality because it is subsidized by the public at large, and thus needs to be less concerned about profits to stay afloat compared to a private service. However the way that we obsess over costs regarding transit, one would think otherwise.
Back on topic, early on he details how the private streetcar network in the city was one of the most profitable on the continent, despite having the poorest service. He points out that while other private operators were constructing new suburbs for their tracks to go through, the Toronto Railway Company focused on servicing the developed urban area exclusively, with the fewest lines possible. In fact the city had to start their own streetcar company to serve the growing suburbs.
When I read this, it got me thinking about how so little has changed, despite public ownership. 100 years later, Toronto's transit continues to focus more on revenue generation than efficiently moving people. One example which comes to mind is in a long lost thread here (though it may have been Skyscraper City) discussing opportunities to expand transit on Finch Ave. Running transit along the hydro corridor would create an excellent opportunity to provide rapid transit to the far reaches of the city at a low cost. However it was decried because a local service would have to operate along Finch itself, and running duplicate services would be wasteful - even if it did better meet individuals' transportation needs.
Another point is the implementation of timed transfers. The TTC has continued to relay mixed messages about their implementation, and continues to be concerned about their cost impact. However it chooses to ignore not only the greater good for the city if such a fare system was implemented, but also how it would make transit more attractive for shorter trips - which is what the TTC should excel best at with its frequent stop spacing (which I believe has more to do with creating more points for revenue than it is about meeting local needs).
Of course, the biggest elephant in the room are the Sheppard and Eglinton/Scarborough subway lines. Perhaps such a line may end up costing more to operate, but there certainly are mobility benefits in linking the Scarborough, Pickering, and Oshawa urban growth centres directly onto the subway system rather than requiring an extra transfer to bridge them to the rest of them to the rest of the public transit network. Hell, we aren't even giving our new LRT lines limited/express stop operation, simply because we are too cheap to consider running a local bus alongside!
I'm not saying that we should build Ford's transit plan, or that we should throw out all fiscal sense in favour of building subways everywhere. I'm saying that in providing a service there needs to be a balance between revenue and quality. One of the benefits of a public service is that it generally favours quality because it is subsidized by the public at large, and thus needs to be less concerned about profits to stay afloat compared to a private service. However the way that we obsess over costs regarding transit, one would think otherwise.