MiWay

[ngdvd]

9 minutes ago, Ed T. said:

Seems nobody is likely to understand you, sorry.

TTC's lack of service in Mississauga is part of wider problem in the GTA. What exactly is so hard to understand about that?

[Articulated]

2 hours ago, ngdvd said:

TTC's lack of service in Mississauga is part of wider problem in the GTA. What exactly is so hard to understand about that?

Why are you so thoroughly convinced that Toronto taxpayers should be required to fund operations into a neighbouring municipality?

And conversely, your argument is that York Region should be operating service along Steeles, despite the road being fully under the City of Toronto's jurisdiction, and the TTC is already choosing to operate two frequent and heavily utilized routes (53/953 and 60/960) along that corridor. Service along those corridors are already better than every corridor in York Region, so there is little to no benefit from YRT running another bus every 30-69 minutes interspersed amongst the existing TTC service. If your argument is "network completeness", you have a very long way to go in understanding how transit networks operate if you think the primary goal should be to have a nice filled-in map.

People don't particularly care what colour the bus is that picks them up, just that their service is frequent and reliable.

[81-717]

1 hour ago, Articulated said:

Why are you so thoroughly convinced that Toronto taxpayers should be required to fund operations into a neighbouring municipality?

And conversely, your argument is that York Region should be operating service along Steeles, despite the road being fully under the City of Toronto's jurisdiction, and the TTC is already choosing to operate two frequent and heavily utilized routes (53/953 and 60/960) along that corridor. Service along those corridors are already better than every corridor in York Region, so there is little to no benefit from YRT running another bus every 30-69 minutes interspersed amongst the existing TTC service. If your argument is "network completeness", you have a very long way to go in understanding how transit networks operate if you think the primary goal should be to have a nice filled-in map.

People don't particularly care what colour the bus is that picks them up, just that their service is frequent and reliable.

The only advantage of having a YRT Steeles route that comes to mind is fare zones. Someone taking a YRT bus south to Steeles, and then transferring onto a Steeles bus, would have to pay both a YRT & TTC fare as it is, while a YRT bus along Steeles would allow them to complete the trip using only a single YRT fare. Then again, there's usually an alternative of taking another YRT east/west route north of Steeles, and then transferring onto a different southbound YRT route (for example, the most direct route between Bathurst/Rutherford & Keele/Steeles is either going east/west on Steeles & north/south on Bathurst, or east/west on Rutherford & north/south on Keele).

[drum118]

Don't know why the southbound stop at Bloor on Dixie is not back in service as its finished other than adding the shelter. You got riders standing at both stops with some drivers bypassing the north one while others stop at both.

The northbound stop at Bloor on Dixie is in service once again and a huge improvement over what was there before. The shelter is now located where the sidewalk was before, with the new sidewalk in front of it at the same level with a bend at each end for the stop. Part of the bus pad is level with a slight slop to the curb. Comply with accessibility requirements now.

The northbound stop for Dundas is back in service as well the shelter for Dixie.

[ngdvd]

3 hours ago, Articulated said:

Why are you so thoroughly convinced that Toronto taxpayers should be required to fund operations into a neighbouring municipality?

And conversely, your argument is that York Region should be operating service along Steeles, despite the road being fully under the City of Toronto's jurisdiction, and the TTC is already choosing to operate two frequent and heavily utilized routes (53/953 and 60/960) along that corridor. Service along those corridors are already better than every corridor in York Region, so there is little to no benefit from YRT running another bus every 30-69 minutes interspersed amongst the existing TTC service. If your argument is "network completeness", you have a very long way to go in understanding how transit networks operate if you think the primary goal should be to have a nice filled-in map.

People don't particularly care what colour the bus is that picks them up, just that their service is frequent and reliable.

Bus colour matters because it's a different fare. The TTC buses along Steeles are the most convenient choice, but they aren't part of the YRT system. That means all those riders on the north-south YRT routes have to pay an extra fare to transfer to the Steeles buses, even if they are travelling from one place in York Region to another place in York Region.

That's why I talk about the lack of TTC service in Malton. People in Malton live closer to Albion Mall than the people in Jane-Finch, but the lack of TTC service not only forces the Malton residents to transfer buses, it also forces them to pay extra fare. A smaller distance, but an extra transfer and an extra fare.

Seems like you are one who has a very long way to go in understanding how transit networks operate, not me.

[Articulated]

4 minutes ago, ngdvd said:

Bus colour matters because it's a different fare. The TTC buses along Steeles are the most convenient choice, but they aren't part of the YRT system. That means all those riders on the north-south YRT routes have to pay an extra fare to transfer to the Steeles buses, even if they are travelling from one place in York Region to another place in York Region.

That's why I talk about the lack of TTC service in Malton. People in Malton live closer to Albion Mall than the people in Jane-Finch, but the lack of TTC service not only forces the Malton residents to transfer buses, it also forces them to pay extra fare. A smaller distance, but an extra transfer and an extra fare.

Seems like you are one who has a very long way to go in understanding how transit networks operate, not me.

And that problem is better solved with proper fare integration between neighbouring municipalities, not by running duplicated services on the same corridors.

[ngdvd]

2 minutes ago, Articulated said:

And that problem is better solved with proper fare integration between neighbouring municipalities, not by running duplicated services on the same corridors.

I never said that fare integration is not a solution. That's exactly why I pointed out the fare integration between Mississauga and Brampton. Steeles is a big gap in the YRT network, simple as that. And fare integration alone won't give Malton residents access to the Finch buses.

[Articulated]

26 minutes ago, ngdvd said:

I never said that fare integration is not a solution. That's exactly why I pointed out the fare integration between Mississauga and Brampton. Steeles is a big gap in the YRT network, simple as that. And fare integration alone won't give Malton residents access to the Finch buses.

No, but you never mentioned in any of your posts today that it was a solution. Instead you kept bounding on and on about how every system needs to operate deep into its neighbours territories and duplicate service.

Extending routes everywhere is also not always the best solution. At some point, routes become too long to manage properly and service quality declines, due to issues in one area affecting service in a far-away area, or just accumulated delays piling up along the route. It either means large gaps and bunching becomes inevitable, or it requires very long recovery times at terminals which is inefficient. Think the 501 Queen streetcar, which has historically had poor service quality for many years thanks to it being merged with the 507 Long Branch car to find "efficiencies". The result of this is that cars are now having 2+ hour one-way trip times, and service to Long Branch or the Beach gets huge gaps due to streetcars encountering delays through Downtown.

A proper integrated system where it makes sense is the best way, really. The example you gave earlier of MiWay and Brampton do this best, where corridors extend a short distance into the neighbouring municipality where it makes sense to do so. But it's not necessary everywhere, and there are much greater political and financial concerns that preclude this. Metrolinx was supposed to be looking into fare integration, but that project seems dead now (once they realized nobody was going to pay more to subsidize the cross-border riders).

[ngdvd]

36 minutes ago, Articulated said:

No, but you never mentioned in any of your posts today that it was a solution. Instead you kept bounding on and on about how every system needs to operate deep into its neighbours territories and duplicate service.

Extending routes everywhere is also not always the best solution. At some point, routes become too long to manage properly and service quality declines, due to issues in one area affecting service in a far-away area, or just accumulated delays piling up along the route. It either means large gaps and bunching becomes inevitable, or it requires very long recovery times at terminals which is inefficient. Think the 501 Queen streetcar, which has historically had poor service quality for many years thanks to it being merged with the 507 Long Branch car to find "efficiencies". The result of this is that cars are now having 2+ hour one-way trip times, and service to Long Branch or the Beach gets huge gaps due to streetcars encountering delays through Downtown.

A proper integrated system where it makes sense is the best way, really. The example you gave earlier of MiWay and Brampton do this best, where corridors extend a short distance into the neighbouring municipality where it makes sense to do so. But it's not necessary everywhere, and there are much greater political and financial concerns that preclude this. Metrolinx was supposed to be looking into fare integration, but that project seems dead now (once they realized nobody was going to pay more to subsidize the cross-border riders).

I never said fare integration was a solution? I mentioned the arrangement between Mississauga/Brampton as the ideal, and I even highlighted the fare integration between them. I would like to see 36 Finch West extended to cancel 22 Finch, the 50 Burnhamthorpe cancelled in favour of 26/76 Burnhamthorpe, etc. As you say yourself, fare integration is a dead idea, so these agencies need to find a different solution. You can dream about future fare integration, I am just talking about what should be done now.

I brought up the lack of YRT service along Steeles because YRT chose to duplicate TTC service with Viva Orange and Viva Green. Duplicating service was YRT's idea, not mine. I talked about a small extension of TTC 36 Finch West into Malton and I suggested an extension of a short route 51 Tomken to Bramalea. I never advocated for "extending routes everywhere" and creating any super long routes. You're just putting words into my mouth.

 

[smallspy]

11 hours ago, ngdvd said:

That's why I talk about the lack of TTC service in Malton. People in Malton live closer to Albion Mall than the people in Jane-Finch, but the lack of TTC service not only forces the Malton residents to transfer buses, it also forces them to pay extra fare. A smaller distance, but an extra transfer and an extra fare.

 

But that's a political problem, not a transit one.

 

No amount of drawing lines on an imaginary map, or thought exercises about what buses can go where will fix that. What you are proposing is simply not possible because of it.

 

Are the lines and rules silly and arbitrary? Yes. But until they get fixed, the various transit agencies in the GTA have to abide by them and work within their framework. It's simply not within their best interests to do otherwise.

 

Dan

[ngdvd]

8 hours ago, smallspy said:

 

But that's a political problem, not a transit one.

 

No amount of drawing lines on an imaginary map, or thought exercises about what buses can go where will fix that. What you are proposing is simply not possible because of it.

 

Are the lines and rules silly and arbitrary? Yes. But until they get fixed, the various transit agencies in the GTA have to abide by them and work within their framework. It's simply not within their best interests to do otherwise.

 

Dan

There are no rules that force the TTC to not serve Westwood Mall. 22 Finch goes further into Toronto than an extension of 36 Finch would go into Mississauga.

The TTC isn't forced to provide bus service along Steeles for York Region residents either, but they do it anyway, because it is beneficial to Toronto residents as well. Likewise, a 1km extension of 36 Finch to major transit hub like Westwood Mall instead of terminating at Indian Line Park would also open up many new possibilities for Toronto transit riders. I never imagined that the idea of a 1km extension of an existing bus route can garner so much confusion and controversy and resistance, but I guess that's the internet for ya.

[smallspy]

15 hours ago, ngdvd said:

There are no rules that force the TTC to not serve Westwood Mall. 22 Finch goes further into Toronto than an extension of 36 Finch would go into Mississauga.

 

There are no rules, but the onus is on the TTC to make the service "worthwhile" in the sense that it has to meet a bunch of specific targets regarding ridership and fare recovery if it is net-new service - which this is. If the TTC can't make that be the case, then why should they offer it?

 

The fact that the 22 comes further into Toronto is an indictment of the service from Mississauga, not the other way around. MiWay is well within their rights to end the service at the border, and they do in many other cases.

 

15 hours ago, ngdvd said:

The TTC isn't forced to provide bus service along Steeles for York Region residents either, but they do it anyway, because it is beneficial to Toronto residents as well. Likewise, a 1km extension of 36 Finch to major transit hub like Westwood Mall instead of terminating at Indian Line Park would also open up many new possibilities for Toronto transit riders. I never imagined that the idea of a 1km extension of an existing bus route can garner so much confusion and controversy and resistance, but I guess that's the internet for ya.

 

The TTC doesn't provide service on Steeles for York Region residents, it provides them for Toronto residents. They only provide Toronto transfers. That some York Region residents are able to take advantage of that is a fluke more than by design, and frankly that situation's been the case since the advent of the fare zones.

 

Here is a serious question: what would be th+e actual projected ridership from Finch to Westwood Mall? I don't know the numbers, and I have my doubts that the TTC has ever looked at it. Maybe offer to them as a suggestion through the official channels, rather than bitching to us here who can't do anything about it?

Dan

[Mike]

57 minutes ago, smallspy said:

The fact that the 22 comes further into Toronto is an indictment of the service from Mississauga, not the other way around. MiWay is well within their rights to end the service at the border, and they do in many other cases.

Here is a serious question: what would be th+e actual projected ridership from Finch to Westwood Mall? I don't know the numbers, and I have my doubts that the TTC has ever looked at it. Maybe offer to them as a suggestion through the official channels, rather than bitching to us here who can't do anything about it?

Route 22 serves specific high traffic destination in Toronto -> Humber College and Etobicoke General Hospital hence the need to go "far into Toronto".  Looking at the stores at Westwood Mall there is nothing of particular interest there aside from maybe a Walmart that would justify going there instead of any number of other malls along Finch within Toronto.  

[T3G]

34 minutes ago, Mike said:

Route 22 serves specific high traffic destination in Toronto -> Humber College and Etobicoke General Hospital hence the need to go "far into Toronto".  Looking at the stores at Westwood Mall there is nothing of particular interest there aside from maybe a Walmart that would justify going there instead of any number of other malls along Finch within Toronto.  

I don't think it's so much about what's at Westwood Mall, but more so about the connections offered at Westwood Mall to elsewhere within Mississauga.

I would think more people would benefit from extending more of those routes to Humber College rather than dragging the singular 36 there. Westwood Mall is a strange terminal point, the community is not contiguous with the rest of Mississauga and there is very little there that makes it a destination.

[Mike]

2 hours ago, T3G said:

I don't think it's so much about what's at Westwood Mall, but more so about the connections offered at Westwood Mall to elsewhere within Mississauga.

I would think more people would benefit from extending more of those routes to Humber College rather than dragging the singular 36 there. Westwood Mall is a strange terminal point, the community is not contiguous with the rest of Mississauga and there is very little there that makes it a destination.

Didn't think of that - extending from Westwood to create a hub at Humber College instead.  It makes sense  especially since 36 might not even run to Humberwood once Finch LRT opens.

Wouldn't be surprised if when LRT opens, 36 disappears from Humberwood and 37 is extended to Humber College instead.  Or perhaps a circular route can be established running from Humber College via Albion Mall to Woobine Centre and then via Humberwood back to Humber College.

[smallspy]

4 hours ago, Mike said:

Route 22 serves specific high traffic destination in Toronto -> Humber College and Etobicoke General Hospital hence the need to go "far into Toronto".  Looking at the stores at Westwood Mall there is nothing of particular interest there aside from maybe a Walmart that would justify going there instead of any number of other malls along Finch within Toronto.  

Oh, I'm well aware of why route 22 does what it does. It's no different as to why Brampton runs to York University, or why DRT runs to UofT Scarborough.

 

But they could also just as easily just drop passengers off at the border of Toronto and let them fend for themselves. In those cases, the respective agencies have done the research and realized that their ridership will be higher by doing things this way and offset the additional costs that the lengthened service will bring.

 

I'm not convinced that any TTC extension to Westwood would offset its additional costs, but I can certainly be enticed to think otherwise.

 

Dan

[Gil]

4 hours ago, T3G said:

I don't think it's so much about what's at Westwood Mall, but more so about the connections offered at Westwood Mall to elsewhere within Mississauga.

I would think more people would benefit from extending more of those routes to Humber College rather than dragging the singular 36 there. Westwood Mall is a strange terminal point, the community is not contiguous with the rest of Mississauga and there is very little there that makes it a destination.

Why duplicate the service of MiWay's 22 FINCH with an extension of the TTC's 36 FINCH WEST to Westwood?  Unless you're coming from a point east of John Garland/Martin Grove boarding a the 22 FINCH avoids the double fare and will allow you free transfer to the MiWay and Brampton Transit routes (and the 52 LAWRENCE WEST up to Pearson) that serve Westwood Mall.  Aside from the mall the community centre, library and public high school are all adjacent to the terminal which sits at the north end of the mall.

The TTC did a public consultation with the community as part of the route restructuring for the opening of the Finch LRT, and it either didn't come up or didn't come up high enough as a list of services they wanted.  Again, extending the 36 FINCH WEST to Westwood would trigger a double fare for such a short distance.  Those living in Rexdale or Humberwood could easily access any of the other MiWay routes (11 MALTON, 22 FINCH or 30 REXDALE) directly to get to Westwood if needed without the double fare.

I'm torn between extending the Finch LRT down to the Woodbine redevelopment and terminating at a future GO station there and having it continue west on Rexdale/Derry and then south on Airport to meet up with the Eglinton LRT at the transit terminal proposed there.  Granted, through-routing the two may be a bit more complicated.  Either terminus would provide connections to GO Transit and possibly VIA.  While the Pearson option wouldn't provide direct access to the warehouse jobs in the area, it would provide some additional service to the area.  Perhaps in conjunction with those employers MiWay could offer additional service for that "last mile".

[Xtrazsteve]

9 hours ago, Gil said:

Why duplicate the service of MiWay's 22 FINCH with an extension of the TTC's 36 FINCH WEST to Westwood?  Unless you're coming from a point east of John Garland/Martin Grove boarding a the 22 FINCH avoids the double fare and will allow you free transfer to the MiWay and Brampton Transit routes (and the 52 LAWRENCE WEST up to Pearson) that serve Westwood Mall.  Aside from the mall the community centre, library and public high school are all adjacent to the terminal which sits at the north end of the mall.

The TTC did a public consultation with the community as part of the route restructuring for the opening of the Finch LRT, and it either didn't come up or didn't come up high enough as a list of services they wanted.  Again, extending the 36 FINCH WEST to Westwood would trigger a double fare for such a short distance.  Those living in Rexdale or Humberwood could easily access any of the other MiWay routes (11 MALTON, 22 FINCH or 30 REXDALE) directly to get to Westwood if needed without the double fare.

I'm torn between extending the Finch LRT down to the Woodbine redevelopment and terminating at a future GO station there and having it continue west on Rexdale/Derry and then south on Airport to meet up with the Eglinton LRT at the transit terminal proposed there.  Granted, through-routing the two may be a bit more complicated.  Either terminus would provide connections to GO Transit and possibly VIA.  While the Pearson option wouldn't provide direct access to the warehouse jobs in the area, it would provide some additional service to the area.  Perhaps in conjunction with those employers MiWay could offer additional service for that "last mile".

Let's be clear. TTC/City of Toronto's job is not to provide service outside the city (service area). All routes extending outside the 416 are requests and contracts from the 905 regions. So this would never even come up in the Line 6 public consultation cause it's impossible to implement by the TTC themselves. 

Unless their is a governing body that looks into inter-municipal "local" travels and subsidizes them, I don't see things going to change. Currently, for the TTC to offer a route from Finch LRT to Westwood, people would have to bring this to Mississauga's city council's attention and have to approve and fund such a route. 

The 52 Lawrence West operating in Mississauga is paid by Mississauga. The can give up anytime and the TTC would cut the 52B/D branches. So would Mississauga rather have a Miway route or pay the TTC for an extension is totally up to them. If they think it's more beneficial like the 52 or once upon a time the 32B extension, they would request and pay for such extensions.

[T3G]

17 hours ago, Gil said:

Why duplicate the service of MiWay's 22 FINCH with an extension of the TTC's 36 FINCH WEST to Westwood?  Unless you're coming from a point east of John Garland/Martin Grove boarding a the 22 FINCH avoids the double fare and will allow you free transfer to the MiWay and Brampton Transit routes (and the 52 LAWRENCE WEST up to Pearson) that serve Westwood Mall.  Aside from the mall the community centre, library and public high school are all adjacent to the terminal which sits at the north end of the mall.

It is not my proposal, so I'm not sure why you're quoting my post. I am merely trying to understand where the proposal is coming from. One argument for why someone may not like the 22 Finch is the unattractive frequencies that the route runs. The TTC's 36 is much more frequent.

As I said, dragging more Mississauga buses to Humber College strikes me as being the more useful option of the two.

  

7 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

Let's be clear. TTC/City of Toronto's job is not to provide service outside the city (service area).

I do not live anywhere near the concerned area, so I have no horse in this race, but self interested chauvinism questioning why one municipality should pay for services running across an imaginary line to another municipality does not interest me. This argument would fly if each city was separated from one another by farmland, but thanks to the endless amounts of sprawling hell we have chosen to build, we need a cohesive approach and not tribalistic bickering. If an agreement can be worked out to run a great honking subway to Vaughan, cross border buses should be no issue.

[smallspy]

7 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

Let's be clear. TTC/City of Toronto's job is not to provide service outside the city (service area). All routes extending outside the 416 are requests and contracts from the 905 regions. So this would never even come up in the Line 6 public consultation cause it's impossible to implement by the TTC themselves.

 

The TTC has provided service outside of Toronto when it felt the ridership was there, and without request from the neighbouring agencies. And some of it was quite recent in its history. There seems to be no reason why they couldn't do it again if they so desired.

 

So it's obviously not impossible, seeing as how the TTC has done it.

 

Dan

[Xtrazsteve]

3 hours ago, smallspy said:

 

The TTC has provided service outside of Toronto when it felt the ridership was there, and without request from the neighbouring agencies. And some of it was quite recent in its history. There seems to be no reason why they couldn't do it again if they so desired.

 

So it's obviously not impossible, seeing as how the TTC has done it.

 

Dan

I guess you’re right if you mean the 53B looping in Markham. They determine it was better at the time as there’s nothing south of Steeles to loop around at the time. 
 

I feel like if TTC staff put forward a proposal for such a service. It’ll be challenging for it to pass through TTC board made up of mostly politicians that would have you defend why should they spend money on a service outside Toronto than improving service within the city. Especially when they’re other locations nearby. 

[smallspy]

2 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

I guess you’re right if you mean the 53B looping in Markham. They determine it was better at the time as there’s nothing south of Steeles to loop around at the time. 
 

 

And the 32 looping through the Explorer Dr area. And a bunch of others in the 1970s, too.

 

2 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

I feel like if TTC staff put forward a proposal for such a service. It’ll be challenging for it to pass through TTC board made up of mostly politicians that would have you defend why should they spend money on a service outside Toronto than improving service within the city. Especially when they’re other locations nearby. 

 

Why would it? The board doesn't normally look at individual route requests. They certainly haven't done it in the new routes suggested in the last several annual service reviews, or for the various subway & LRT openings.

Dan

[Gil]

58 minutes ago, smallspy said:

And the 32 looping through the Explorer Dr area. And a bunch of others in the 1970s, too.

...

Dan

I don't know how much of the short-lived extension of the 32 west of Etobicoke Creek was a request from Mississauga vs. a means to serve that one segment of Eglinton, which technically was in Toronto but completely inaccessible by TTC.  They obviously didn't want to spend the money to build a loop at Rakely on the Toronto side of the street and the truck traffic on Rakely itself probably meant it wasn't feasible to layover at the end of the street.  The ironic thing is there's a Drive Test location there but you needed a car to get to it!  Service on Eglinton has improved with the addition of the 35 EGLINTON and the Transitway, but those are relatively recent additions to the network and still require an additional fare when coming from Toronto to get to.  There really isn't an option to loop north of Eglinton with the section of Skymark still unopened between Spectrum and Satellite pending development, so this will continue to be a part of Toronto that lacks access to the TTC.

[PrimeTio]

2151 has the new driver protective shield.

[transitfan100]

6 minutes ago, PrimeTio said:

2151 has the new driver protective shield.

Is it the ones that protect drivers from assault like Brampton and TTC?