Reducing routes to 60 minutes, and cutting service after 10p.m. is anti-transit. It's an attack on the elderly, and infirm, the people you supposedly champion. Pathetic.
Yes I do champion them, Justin; for whom or what do you stand for? Maybe it is easier for you to label me as an anti-transit philistine because then you don’t have to deal with the realization that there might actually be a valid altruistic, pro-transit reasoning behind the proposals that I’m making. That I may actually have a functioning brain, have lots of good ideas to share that the status quo is not effectively addressing, and should be given an opportunity to expand on my thought process without a condescending or angry lynch mob-style reaction to every single thing that I post!
With demand responsive transport, the aim is to extend public transport services to the front door of all residences, or from any place to any place. Similar to the Wheel-Trans system but available for
all transit users, Dial-a-bus could be a cost-effective way to provide "as needed" transit service in the inner-suburbs when ridership is low (i.e. late night service hours). Dial-a-bus is available upon request to travel to bus stop locations where riders wish to board or be dropped off. They can provide local service and will always connect to the commuter buses going into subway terminals. But it doesn’t necessarily have to be done by buses exclusively, it can also rely on contracted accessible and sedan taxis. After seeking a form of public transit that could serve effectively but within its financial constraints, the City of Rimouski created a successful operation using private taxis (e.g. Beck, Co-op). Taxibus has shown that public-private partnerships with the taxi industry can improve public mobility in an affordable manner. Since 1999, the concept has been applied in other cities in Quebec including Montreal, and variations have appeared in cities across Canada.
TTC riders, especially those in the suburbs, often face long wait times between buses. With TTC's budget crisis, it is extremely unlikely they can add more bus service. However, there are ways TTC could dramatically improve service at little to no cost. Rescheduling buses on trunk lines is one way to increase service, at least as far as the customer sees it, at very little cost to the agency. Technically, there's no increase in capacity through rescheduling - the same number of buses, the same number of seats - but a better distribution of those seats throughout the day. A bus that comes "once per hour" to you and I could be counted once in each direction, thus making the frequency "every 30 minutes". I do propose some potential route adjustments. Those would either shorten routes or be pretty close to no net gain on route length. So that would actually tend toward a decrease in the number of vehicles (and operators) required to run the route. Of course, savings would have to pass a certain threshold before a bus could actually be removed from the schedule.
In some instances, it might make sense to reroute neighbourhood buses to serve a particular trunk or to give more common segments. Simplification of route structure could increase productivity by shortening the length of routes and making it easier for riders to understand the bus line. In attempting to connect as many points as possible with as few exchanges as possible the TTC has created a system that sub-optimally serves most. The lack of predictability and reliability along core lines is one of the larger impediments to ridership growth.
It would not be easy to schedule every bus line that had common segments with other buses so that intervals were nice and even. Yes it is a complex problem, but not that complex for a good computer programmer. Plenty of algorithms and software exist to find near-optimal solutions. It just takes some skill in programming and operations research to use them. It's long been clear that TTC has near-zero OR expertise. The TTC could contract out the scheduling. TTC can also simplify its route structure to make scheduling easier.
But before the TTC even attempts this, it needs to collect good data on ridership system-wide. Segments with low ridership can be dropped or have service reduced. Identify important core routes, including looking at ways to reduce proximal, parallel routing. Assign a global percentage of vehicles to the core as a whole; reassign vehicles from that pool to maintain average headways across routes. The design goal here has to be headways, because the system is more valuable to riders the less they stand around waiting for the next bus. Optimize shorter feeder routes based on remaining equipment. Where possible reduce the effect of traffic on core routes, with stop light priority, dedicated lanes, smarter routing, and other low-overhead improvements as available. We don't need to wait on Transit City to improve the system.
So to wrap this up, I suggest that you see whether once an hour route frequency is not the norm along the majority of routes for much of the GTA during late evening service hours. Heck, look at GO Transit during off-peak hours. Night services can be less frequent and operated based on necessity. That 74% (could be higher) of the TTC's annual operating budget's going towards workers' salaries alone should inference to you that something is profoundly wrong in its management. The TTC comprises 14% of the City annual budget or $512.5 million. Operating costs increasing faster than revenues – 1% increase in City expenses = $80 million. Service cuts where appropriate translates into more frequent service levels when they’re most critically needed.
@everybody else:
Note that I didn't call the TTC's planners morons. They're hard working, intelligent people. But without adequate amount of feedback from the
community, they don't always know that improvements we value most.
