Where should the TTC go from here?

[Antiloop33rpm]

While most people would agree that the TTC is acceptable by North American standards, there would also be a large majority (on this forum at least) that would also agree the system faces a lot of challenges.

So what do you think are the biggest challenges facing the TTC right now? Im not so much concerned about which route should be next on the list for subway expansion or whether Streetcar ROW's are a good or bad idea. The issues Im thinking about are ones such as rising fares, regional integration, expanding into the 905 area, managing transit growth with urban growth, funding from various levels of government, private partnerships, both in terms of construction and maybe even route operation.

My own two cents. Like it or not, Toronto and the 905 area are going to become more and more integrated as time progresses. This is really just one example of how the region has grown to the point where boundries that once existed via farmland and greenspace are now gone. The TTC may be the largest transit system in the GTA, but it is certainly not the only one. GO is also growing at a steady rate and is starting to take on a more critical role in regional travel, and will more so as oil prices continue to climb and alternatives are explored by commuters.

And this is probably my biggest concern about the TTC is that it is going to continue to function and operate as though nothing existed beyond the city limits which would be a horrible mistake. Cdl made the comment that other options beside subways need to be explored and I couldnt agree with that more. Alternatives such as a commuter rail system in between light rail and GO should really be explored given the nature of Toronto. But the specifics arent really too important.

What is important is that the TTC, as well as other systems in the GTA start to think in terms of the region as well as the municipality or city they serve. Right now I really dont see the TTC doing that. Now maybe the GTTA will help with this issue but I still believe that the TTC needs to take a lead in this given its size and status in the region.

I could go on with lots of other examples but no sense rambling on. The above point is the one that I think is really the most important for the TTC. In terms of local travel the TTC is fine. But it is the regional scale that it really fails to deliver and as mentioned above, with travel patterns starting to shift away from cars as gasoline prices rise, alternatives being explored, and denser development taking place across the GTA it really needs to get on the ball.

 

[Chuck100]

I agree. This is the year 2006, it's time to stop basing service boundaries on concession roads laid in the 1700s.

I think it's time to completely dissolve all of the transit systems in operation today, and create one massive transit system. The board of directors or commissioners, whatever you want to call them, would be made up of transportation and land use planning experts. Not x people from Toronto, y people from Mississauga, and z people from York Region.

Subways will be built wherever all day ridership permits, regardless of where that happens to be. Suburban arterials will have ROWs where demand exists, and the service which GO currently provides will be provided to all suburban areas, regardless of area code.

Each region's contribution will be on a per capita basis. If one place has twice the population, it will contribute twice as much funding. The funds are then pooled and distributed to the most critical projects, wherever they may be. Fares will be zonal. You cross two zones, you pay a specific fare, regardless of where those zones happen to be.

 

[TdotTrickyRicky]

Dissolve municipal transit bodies create a regional system under a crown corporation. Infrastructure expansion should be based on maximizing ridership growth and hence overall revenue. Fares should go up all round in my opinion including a zone system. I think the target should be that the transit authority should move to zero operational subsidy and that the government should only kick in money to fund capital expansion. Naturally there would need to be some kind of basic transit coverage requirement. Capital expansion plans should be planned out clearly for the next decade with firm targets. I'm afraid i also don't believe the system should be egalitarian, funding for capital improvements should be based on ridership not population. A message to property tax payers, inplement land use strategies that foster greater ridership or face the prospect of paying into a system that others will benefit from at your expense.

 

[GregWTravels]

The models above pretty much seem to echo the same thing - it's time to stop being municipal. I believe this is how Paris' system is organized.

The one thing I think is key is that whoever is determining projects for expansion needs to have some sort of say over the development of the areas around the transit nodes. We can't continue to build large capacity transit like subways, LRTs and commuter trains to areas that are just going to be low density, single family dwellings. If you are going to develop large capacity transit to an area, then the area has to have the work/residential density to support it.

 

[unimaginative2]

I think it's time to completely dissolve all of the transit systems in operation today, and create one massive transit system. The board of directors or commissioners, whatever you want to call them, would be made up of transportation and land use planning experts. Not x people from Toronto, y people from Mississauga, and z people from York Region.

While I think that kind of super-regional transit authority is a good idea, I don't like the idea of a board completely made up of "experts." I find that these sorts of individuals tend to have very set ideas, are resistant to change, and tend to put customer service rather low down on the list of priorities. That's not to say that a significant number of professionals shouldn't be on any transit authority board, but there's no substitute for elected officials who are actually directly responsible to the riders and taxpayers using and paying for the service.

 

[Chuck100]

Well, you can thank elected officials for the VCC extension, the Sheppard subway, and the SRT. Perfect examples of what happens when you let clueless people make important decisions. Obviously good decisions have been made, such as the Spadina ROW, however overall elected officials are out there first and foremost to keep their jobs, and they do that by catering to their own consituents rather than the greater good of everyone.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

"Well, you can thank elected officials for the VCC extension, the Sheppard subway, and the SRT. Perfect examples of what happens when you let clueless people make important decisions."

VCC and SRT are one thing, but the only thing wrong with the Sheppard subway is that it's not finished.

 

[unimaginative2]

I'm sure you would prefer to blame all the TTC's faults on elected officials and its successes on engineers, but clearly both share responsibility for everything. Thank elected officials for saving the streetcars, for example, over strenuous objection from TTC engineers.

The all-wise and perfectly enlightened engineer lacking any bias doesn't exist. That's no knock on engineers: no class of people has those characteristics. That's why it's important to have people with a blend of expertise governing anything as important as the TTC. It's also important to ensure that the governors of the TTC are directly responsible to the public in a way that an unelected panel of engineers could never be.

 

[roch5220]

I agree with the thought regarding a regional transit body. More specifically, I believe the TTC should be the body that takes control over other GTA transit authorities, including GO transit. Especially since the TTC has the greatest ridership. However, the chairperson would have to be agreed upon by general consensus, and I would prefer if they were not an elected municipal politician.

Given that, I would like to see the new authority have similar powers to the GTAA, being able to finance their own bonds, inorder to finance capital initiatives. These bonds can be backed by 'gov't guarantees' that are made by sr levels of gov't. Hence, when the feds in the last decade made multiple announcements of TTC funding, without paying even a fraction of it, it will become more of a spotlight issue.

 

[Chuck100]

I'm not referring to any one type of professional. I'm just saying that people who are in positions of power should have extensive training in the field, be it finance, business, health, education, or anything. If I got elected to city council and was a good pal of the mayor, who knows what position I could get. That's the problem.

Minimize the role of untrained people in the initial planning stage, but give them the final say of whether it goes through or not. What we've got now is a guy from Vaughan saying hey, I'll profit by having the subway run up to Highway 7, so let's use public money to fund its construction.

 

[samsonyuen]

True. Specialists in city and transport planning should be more in control of the planning aspects of building up TTC service.