TTC: Redesigning TTC Signage

[gweed123]

A minor quibble, but I've always thought the Yonge/University line was gold coloured, not yellow.
You do raise a good point about the background, here is white text on a black background:

I like that much better, easier on the eyes. Well done!

Although I would use the word "Subway" instead of "line". Especially once the Transit City LRTs come online, that distinction is going to matter.

I would also include the "Next Station:" on the signage. I think that makes a lot of sense.

 

[EnviroTO]

Although I would use the word "Subway" instead of "line". Especially once the Transit City LRTs come online, that distinction is going to matter.

I would leave it as Yonge line. I don't think there will be any confusion with that. I think that using "Yonge line" matches the way people communicate today. "Take the Yonge line to King" for example sounds more natural than "take the Yonge subway to King" or the old signage "take the Yonge train to King". I don't thing there is any confusion. No LRT line is going to have the same name as a subway line.

I agree with putting Union Station and Richmond Hill Centre on the signage, but not intermediate points.

 

[11th]

Does TTC ever think of adding platform numbers? GO trains seem to have them, as do a number of other metro systems around the world.

 

[Nobina]

Does TTC ever think of adding platform numbers? GO trains seem to have them, as do a number of other metro systems around the world.

This would make sense, even though the TTC subway is such a simple system. Always designate the "Union Station bound" platform (YUS line), and "Yonge Street bound" platform (BD and Sheppard lines) as "Platform 1" to maintain consistency. This idea should also be extended to bus/streetcar platforms where terminals exist (as YRT does at their terminals), but should be done so that platform numbers don't overlap between different modes of transport.

I would like to see this type of line map implemented on TTC subway platforms, where the part of the route the won't be served is shown in grey.

Stockholm subway signage. (Images courtesy of Google)

 

[DavidH]

Although I would use the word "Subway" instead of "line". Especially once the Transit City LRTs come online, that distinction is going to matter.

Why does the distinction matter? From the perspective of riders, aren't both "TTC trains I can board at a platform"?

Perhaps the word should simply be "trains" regardless of the technology in use.

 

[gweed123]

Why does the distinction matter? From the perspective of riders, aren't both "TTC trains I can board at a platform"?

Perhaps the word should simply be "trains" regardless of the technology in use.

I figured just for consistency with the system maps. There are many directional signs throughout the system (or more specifically outside the stations themselves) that say "To Subway".

The TTC already makes a distinction between the Bloor-Danforth Subway and the Scarborough RT. They mention both name and technology.

It could also get confusing if there are multiple types of lines on a single corridor, like Sheppard. Having "Sheppard Line" and "Sheppard East Line" would get very very confusing, but having "Sheppard Subway" and "Sheppard East LRT" immediately makes the distinction clearer.

Also, thinking ahead to when the DRL is built, it will probably have "Don Mills" somewhere in the name. Having "Spadina-Don Mills Subway" and "Don Mills LRT" could again save a lot of confusion.

 

[MafaldaBoy]

I think the directional signs should reflect the transit mode (bus, streetcar, subway, LRT, etc.) but route name on maps should be categorized; subway lines could be called S-Yonge, S-Bloor, S-Downtown, etc. and LRT lines could be referred to as L-Eglinton, L-Sheppard, L-Finch. This way the line's route is still in the name but with the mode's prefix to differentiate between subway or LRT for instance.

 

[nfitz]

The TTC already makes a distinction between the Bloor-Danforth Subway and the Scarborough RT. They mention both name and technology.

And yet there are currently TTC signs at RT stations refering to the Scarborough RT as a subway.

 

[11th]

Change it to Line 1, 2, 3..and/or Line A, B, C; combine each with a colour - should solve everything.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Change it to Line 1, 2, 3..and/or Line A, B, C; combine each with a colour - should solve everything.

These was posted earlier in the thread.

 

[gweed123]

I think the directional signs should reflect the transit mode (bus, streetcar, subway, LRT, etc.) but route name on maps should be categorized; subway lines could be called S-Yonge, S-Bloor, S-Downtown, etc. and LRT lines could be referred to as L-Eglinton, L-Sheppard, L-Finch. This way the line's route is still in the name but with the mode's prefix to differentiate between subway or LRT for instance.

I would prefer something like this too, although a combination of letters and numbers.

The single letter prefix would denote the route type (S = Subway, L = LRT, E = Express Rail (GO REX), R = Regional Rail (current GO), B = BRT). So YUS would be S1, Eglinton-Scarborough would be L1, etc. They can use the NYC-style bubbles on the route maps and on station signage.

Local bus routes would have a 2 letter prefix (HM, HR, PR, YR, DR, TO) from the region they're in.

And yet there are currently TTC signs at RT stations refering to the Scarborough RT as a subway.

Really? Because the maps posted on all subway trains are called the "Subway/RT Map". Strange.

 

[MafaldaBoy]

The single letter prefix would denote the route type (S = Subway, L = LRT, E = Express Rail (GO REX), R = Regional Rail (current GO), B = BRT). So YUS would be S1, Eglinton-Scarborough would be L1, etc. They can use the NYC-style bubbles on the route maps and on station signage.

Would this be across all mediums? I think including the name of the route (Yonge, Eglinton, etc.) should at least be on maps; directional signage could use the letter/number hybrid and maybe be accompanied by pictograms?

EDIT-
Like this perhaps:

 

[gweed123]

Would this be across all mediums? I think including the name of the route (Yonge, Eglinton, etc.) should at least be on maps; directional signage could use the letter/number hybrid and maybe be accompanied by pictograms?

The full name would be in the legend. The map itself would show the bubbles at interchange and terminus stations. The less clutter on the map itself, the better.

For signage, I would think having both would be appropriate. For example, any signage for YUS would read "S1 (in a gold bubble) Yonge-University-Spadina Subway". The hope is that eventually people begin to think of it as the S1, and not YUS.

 

[MafaldaBoy]

I agree with points about the map.
The problem with putting "Yonge-University-Spadina Subway or Eglinton-Crosstown LRT" on signage takes up valuable space and it's quite a mouthful. I think pictograms for each mode following the coloured bubble would be sufficient.

 

[gweed123]

EDIT-
Like this perhaps:

I like that a lot. Gives direction, has the line bubble, has the subway pictogram, and shows key stations.

Theoretically once you're inside the station the S1 is all you need. Presumably at the entrance to every station you would have "(S1) Yonge-University-Spadina Subway".

Only thing I would change is next to Bloor-Yonge I would put a small (S2) bubble (Bloor-Danforth Subway), and next to Union I would put the symbols for GO and VIA. That way passengers heading to those stations would know exactly what transfer options are available. People will remember they're transferring to GO before they remember exactly what station they need to get off at.

Another example: Signage at Dundas West would show the transfer options to (E2) and (E3) (Milton & Brampton-Markham GO REX lines).