Jump to content

Miscellaneous TTC Discussion & Questions


Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, raptorjays said:

Do you think some of those routes should be re-named?

30 Lambton

This is one of few bus routes which has a name of the neighbourhood (not the road name).  However, the neighbourhood of Lambton only covers between Humber River and Jane St, which is only about 1km out of 9km of the route. I know 40 Junction is also similar, but the neighbourhood of Junction covers little more than half of the route. I know route 108 Downsview was changed to Driftwood.. (Even though Driftwood Ave is just less than half of the route)

Meanwhile 100% of the route 78 St.Andrew runs within the neighbourhood.. and 86 Scarborough runs within Scarborough, so it is reasonable. 

Also, there are many routes which has a name of the destination neighbourhood (like 115 Silver Hills, 124 Sunnybrook)

The problem is the name 'Dundas' belongs to 505.. So Dundas West might not be a bad idea. However, if either 30 or 40 was running from Kipling to Dundas West Station, it could have been better to get 'Dundas West'. 

42 Cummer

As a matter of fact, the length of Cummer Ave of the route is only 4km long while McNicoll is about 10km long. So I think it might be better to change them to Cummer-McNicoll (Like 117 Alness-Chesswood) or just McNicoll. 

95 York Mills

Similar to 42 Cummer, 

The length of York Mills Rd of the route is 7km long while Ellesmere Rd is 14.1km. (And few hundred meter of Parkwood Village Dr) Maybe some people living in Scarborough might not be familiar with the name, and there are no buses with 'Ellesmere' as well. Many people will know the bus number, but not the route name. However, I think it could cause confusion in Scarborough because Ellesmere is more well known than York Mills.

 

This is an unpopular opinion, but maybe getting rid of route names like some other major cities might work because of situations like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, blue.bird.fan said:

This is an unpopular opinion, but maybe getting rid of route names like some other major cities might work because of situations like this.

I know many cities in Europe including London doesn't have route names along with the number.

However, many North American Cities have it.. like New York or Chicago. 

I don't know about Cummer or York Mills, but I do think 30 Lambton should be changed since the route name only covers a km of the route. 

Also, they had to change 123 Shorncliffe to 123 Sherway because it only covers about a km or two of the route, and a new branch which doesn't even go to Shorncliffe Rd. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, blue.bird.fan said:
8 hours ago, raptorjays said:

Do you think some of those routes should be re-named?

30 Lambton

This is one of few bus routes which has a name of the neighbourhood (not the road name).  However, the neighbourhood of Lambton only covers between Humber River and Jane St, which is only about 1km out of 9km of the route. I know 40 Junction is also similar, but the neighbourhood of Junction covers little more than half of the route. I know route 108 Downsview was changed to Driftwood.. (Even though Driftwood Ave is just less than half of the route)

Meanwhile 100% of the route 78 St.Andrew runs within the neighbourhood.. and 86 Scarborough runs within Scarborough, so it is reasonable. 

Also, there are many routes which has a name of the destination neighbourhood (like 115 Silver Hills, 124 Sunnybrook)

The problem is the name 'Dundas' belongs to 505.. So Dundas West might not be a bad idea. However, if either 30 or 40 was running from Kipling to Dundas West Station, it could have been better to get 'Dundas West'. 

42 Cummer

As a matter of fact, the length of Cummer Ave of the route is only 4km long while McNicoll is about 10km long. So I think it might be better to change them to Cummer-McNicoll (Like 117 Alness-Chesswood) or just McNicoll. 

95 York Mills

Similar to 42 Cummer, 

The length of York Mills Rd of the route is 7km long while Ellesmere Rd is 14.1km. (And few hundred meter of Parkwood Village Dr) Maybe some people living in Scarborough might not be familiar with the name, and there are no buses with 'Ellesmere' as well. Many people will know the bus number, but not the route name. However, I think it could cause confusion in Scarborough because Ellesmere is more well known than York Mills.

 

This is an unpopular opinion, but maybe getting rid of route names like some other major cities might work because of situations like this.

The 30 LAMBTON along with the 40 JUNCTION is set to undergo a major revamp later this year or the next as these routes will become the 30 HIGH PARK and 40 DUNDAS WEST respectively as part of the Junction Area reorganization.

However, the 42 CUMMER, however, which I envisioned an idea on the FB group chat recently, that this route can be renamed to the 42 McNICOLL and extend the route east from the industrial area to the McNicoll Ave extension east of Tapscott towards Morningside Heights they just built in 2011 (since the McNicoll Bus Garage is currently built anyway).

If anyone is concerned about the 69 since it usually loops the same area, why not break up the 69 WARDEN SOUTH into two parts with the Warden section (2.7km) looping at Warden, Cresentwood, White Birch, and Viewbank, while the Birchmount section (3.2km) becomes the 18 BIRCHMOUNT SOUTH running from St. Clair, Birchmount, Kingston, looping via Harding, Birch Cliff and Kingston.

2 minutes ago, raptorjays said:

I know many cities in Europe including London doesn't have route names along with the number.

However, many North American Cities have it.. like New York or Chicago. 

I don't know about Cummer or York Mills, but I do think 30 Lambton should be changed since the route name only covers a km of the route. 

Also, they had to change 123 Shorncliffe to 123 Sherway because it only covers about a km or two of the route, and a new branch which doesn't even go to Shorncliffe Rd. 

I'd rather see the restoration of the two routes like before when the 87 MALL CIRCLE ceased to exist: the 123B/C/D can be called the 123 SHORNCLIFFE while the 123F may become once again the 124 SHERWAY. 

As for the Bayview area, I think the 28 BAYVIEW SOUTH should absorb the 124 SUNNYBROOK and run it to Evergreen Brick Works as the 28A while the Davisville Stn service may be called the 28B. Shorten the 11 BAYVIEW to run to Lawrence Stn all the way to Steeles. The 162 LAWRENCE-DONWAY can be rerouted to York Mills Stn. as the 162 YORK MILLS-DONWAY replicating the old 101 YORK MILLS-DONWAY bus that existed until 1991.

@raptorjays - Any thoughts or ideas?

  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, raptorjays said:

Do you think some of those routes should be re-named?

30 Lambton

This is one of few bus routes which has a name of the neighbourhood (not the road name).  However, the neighbourhood of Lambton only covers between Humber River and Jane St, which is only about 1km out of 9km of the route. I know 40 Junction is also similar, but the neighbourhood of Junction covers little more than half of the route. I know route 108 Downsview was changed to Driftwood.. (Even though Driftwood Ave is just less than half of the route)

Meanwhile 100% of the route 78 St.Andrew runs within the neighbourhood.. and 86 Scarborough runs within Scarborough, so it is reasonable. 

Also, there are many routes which has a name of the destination neighbourhood (like 115 Silver Hills, 124 Sunnybrook)

The problem is the name 'Dundas' belongs to 505.. So Dundas West might not be a bad idea. However, if either 30 or 40 was running from Kipling to Dundas West Station, it could have been better to get 'Dundas West'. 

42 Cummer

As a matter of fact, the length of Cummer Ave of the route is only 4km long while McNicoll is about 10km long. So I think it might be better to change them to Cummer-McNicoll (Like 117 Alness-Chesswood) or just McNicoll. 

95 York Mills

Similar to 42 Cummer, 

The length of York Mills Rd of the route is 7km long while Ellesmere Rd is 14.1km. (And few hundred meter of Parkwood Village Dr) Maybe some people living in Scarborough might not be familiar with the name, and there are no buses with 'Ellesmere' as well. Many people will know the bus number, but not the route name. However, I think it could cause confusion in Scarborough because Ellesmere is more well known than York Mills.

One simple question:

 

Why?

 

And a bit more complex:

 

What will be gained by doing this? Can you justify any costs incurred? Are people currently confused by the current naming and numbering system?

 

This is one of those situations where "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" applies, methinks.


Dan

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, blue.bird.fan said:

This is an unpopular opinion, but maybe getting rid of route names like some other major cities might work because of situations like this.

I don't know what the popularity of the opinion might be but I think the idea really neither here nor there at this point.  The bus routes got numbered ages ago, the streetcar lines got numbered at the end of the 1970s, and the subway lines got numbered by Andy Byford a couple years ago so that part's taken place. Once transfers disappear as physical fare media's discontinued in favour of Presto, that'll be one less place you'll see route names where they're still printed now, for now.  I've also noticed that more and more often in every day conversation people are using the numbers only instead of the names, so common usage of the TTC route names may just fade away over time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, smallspy said:

One simple question:

 

Why?

 

And a bit more complex:

 

What will be gained by doing this? Can you justify any costs incurred? Are people currently confused by the current naming and numbering system?

 

This is one of those situations where "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" applies, methinks.


Dan

This x 100

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, smallspy said:

One simple question:

 

Why?

 

And a bit more complex:

 

What will be gained by doing this? Can you justify any costs incurred? Are people currently confused by the current naming and numbering system?

 

This is one of those situations where "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" applies, methinks.


Dan

I know it is a meaningless, but do not be allergic and overreact on my question.

I don’t know about Cummer or York Mills, but I think 30 Lambton should be changed.. and it could be changed if that Junction area thing goes through. 

15 hours ago, BYD said:

 

The 30 LAMBTON along with the 40 JUNCTION is set to undergo a major revamp later this year or the next as these routes will become the 30 HIGH PARK and 40 DUNDAS WEST respectively as part of the Junction Area reorganization.

However, the 42 CUMMER, however, which I envisioned an idea on the FB group chat recently, that this route can be renamed to the 42 McNICOLL and extend the route east from the industrial area to the McNicoll Ave extension east of Tapscott towards Morningside Heights they just built in 2011 (since the McNicoll Bus Garage is currently built anyway).

If anyone is concerned about the 69 since it usually loops the same area, why not break up the 69 WARDEN SOUTH into two parts with the Warden section (2.7km) looping at Warden, Cresentwood, White Birch, and Viewbank, while the Birchmount section (3.2km) becomes the 18 BIRCHMOUNT SOUTH running from St. Clair, Birchmount, Kingston, looping via Harding, Birch Cliff and Kingston.

I'd rather see the restoration of the two routes like before when the 87 MALL CIRCLE ceased to exist: the 123B/C/D can be called the 123 SHORNCLIFFE while the 123F may become once again the 124 SHERWAY. 

As for the Bayview area, I think the 28 BAYVIEW SOUTH should absorb the 124 SUNNYBROOK and run it to Evergreen Brick Works as the 28A while the Davisville Stn service may be called the 28B. Shorten the 11 BAYVIEW to run to Lawrence Stn all the way to Steeles. The 162 LAWRENCE-DONWAY can be rerouted to York Mills Stn. as the 162 YORK MILLS-DONWAY replicating the old 101 YORK MILLS-DONWAY bus that existed until 1991.

@raptorjays - Any thoughts or ideas?

That is not a bad idea However, I don’t know if the TTC re-uses a route number which was scrapped. If 124 Sunnybrook is absorbed into 28 Bayview South..

The only problem is that 28 Bayview South doesn’t have high ridership so it might not be necessary to divide it to two branches

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, raptorjays said:

I know it is a meaningless, but do not be allergic and overreact on my question.

I don’t know about Cummer or York Mills, but I think 30 Lambton should be changed.. and it could be changed if that Junction area thing goes through.

Who's overreacting? It's a genuine, if non-trivial question - you are suggesting changes that will impact thousands and thousands of people, and while the impact may seem small or innocuous to you, maybe it isn't to them. Or maybe there are additional knock-on effects that you haven't considered.

 

What I am asking is if you have considered all of those things before you made your suggestion. And frankly considering your response, and the fact that not only have you blown off responding to my questions but also trying to justify it, it seems to me that you really don't give a shit about them. You just want everything to fit some sort of crazy ideal that you have floating around in your cranium.

 

Dan

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

Not every city has names for it's routes. TTC has been using names since the beginning of time. route numbers for buses only began in the 50s and only in the past 2 years they organized the service summary by numbers instead of names.

Some people are better remembering numbers, others names. Why not give them the choice?

Tellingly, after more than thirty years of number-only designations for streetcar routes, both the Flexities and bus shuttles include route names like "KING" and "CARLTON".

If you are wondering why Carlton is named like that when it spends much more time on College and Gerrard, take a look at the route histories on Transit Toronto.

Although I would totally support CARLTON being renamed HOWARD PARK-DUNDAS-COLLEGE-CARLTON-PARLIAMENT-GERRARD-COXWELL-GERRARD-MAIN just to see the sign boxes explode. B)

4 hours ago, raptorjays said:

I know it is a meaningless, but do not be allergic and overreact on my question.

I don’t know about Cummer or York Mills, but I think 30 Lambton should be changed.. and it could be changed if that Junction area thing goes through. 

That is not a bad idea However, I don’t know if the TTC re-uses a route number which was scrapped. If 124 Sunnybrook is absorbed into 28 Bayview South..

The only problem is that 28 Bayview South doesn’t have high ridership so it might not be necessary to divide it to two branches

What's the matter with "LAMBTON"?

By the way, I find it funny that 86 SCARBOROUGH might be okay because it runs in Scarborough. That's like renaming 46 MARTIN GROVE as 46 ETOBICOKE, or maybe giving up on HOWARD PARK-DUNDAS-COLLEGE-CARLTON-PARLIAMENT-GERRARD-COXWELL-GERRARD-MAIN and just calling it 506 TORONTO.

  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Downsview 108 said:

They should rename the entire TTC, Route 515 Foam. 

Have you ever watched a dog chasing after a car, barking like crazy?  It kind of reminds me of foamers chasing buses and the same question applies to both, "What would you do with that thing if you caught it?"

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ed T. said:

Some people are better remembering numbers, others names. Why not give them the choice?

Tellingly, after more than thirty years of number-only designations for streetcar routes, both the Flexities and bus shuttles include route names like "KING" and "CARLTON".

If you are wondering why Carlton is named like that when it spends much more time on College and Gerrard, take a look at the route histories on Transit Toronto.

Although I would totally support CARLTON being renamed HOWARD PARK-DUNDAS-COLLEGE-CARLTON-PARLIAMENT-GERRARD-COXWELL-GERRARD-MAIN just to see the sign boxes explode. B)

What's the matter with "LAMBTON"?

By the way, I find it funny that 86 SCARBOROUGH might be okay because it runs in Scarborough. That's like renaming 46 MARTIN GROVE as 46 ETOBICOKE, or maybe giving up on HOWARD PARK-DUNDAS-COLLEGE-CARLTON-PARLIAMENT-GERRARD-COXWELL-GERRARD-MAIN and just calling it 506 TORONTO.

I also think more people will remember the number rather than the name. 

46 Martin Grove is ok because the majority of the route includes Martin Grove Rd. 

At least Scarborough is a well-known name and people can easily remember.. However, Lambton is just a small neighbourhood which is enough to cover only 1/10 of the route 30 Lambton. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2019 at 3:58 AM, raptorjays said:

Do you think some of those routes should be re-named?

30 Lambton

This is one of few bus routes which has a name of the neighbourhood (not the road name).  However, the neighbourhood of Lambton only covers between Humber River and Jane St, which is only about 1km out of 9km of the route. I know 40 Junction is also similar, but the neighbourhood of Junction covers little more than half of the route. I know route 108 Downsview was changed to Driftwood.. (Even though Driftwood Ave is just less than half of the route)

Meanwhile 100% of the route 78 St.Andrew runs within the neighbourhood.. and 86 Scarborough runs within Scarborough, so it is reasonable. 

Also, there are many routes which has a name of the destination neighbourhood (like 115 Silver Hills, 124 Sunnybrook)

The problem is the name 'Dundas' belongs to 505.. So Dundas West might not be a bad idea. However, if either 30 or 40 was running from Kipling to Dundas West Station, it could have been better to get 'Dundas West'. 

42 Cummer

As a matter of fact, the length of Cummer Ave of the route is only 4km long while McNicoll is about 10km long. So I think it might be better to change them to Cummer-McNicoll (Like 117 Alness-Chesswood) or just McNicoll. 

95 York Mills

Similar to 42 Cummer, 

The length of York Mills Rd of the route is 7km long while Ellesmere Rd is 14.1km. (And few hundred meter of Parkwood Village Dr) Maybe some people living in Scarborough might not be familiar with the name, and there are no buses with 'Ellesmere' as well. Many people will know the bus number, but not the route name. However, I think it could cause confusion in Scarborough because Ellesmere is more well known than York Mills.

 

One could also argue that the 14 Glencairn should be changed back to 14 Chaplin Crescent. The reason it was changed in the first place is the name of the station it serves, namely Glencairn. The 95 is also named "York Mills" because of this. (I think?)

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Orion VI said:

One could also argue that the 14 Glencairn should be changed back to 14 Chaplin Crescent. The reason it was changed in the first place is the name of the station it serves, namely Glencairn. The 95 is also named "York Mills" because of this. (I think?)

Well, no.  The 95 York Mills has existed for far longer than York Mills Station has.  The 14 was also renamed before Glencarin Station was opened.  It was renamed mostly because of a route change that extended it further over Glencarin ave after the North Yonge subway exstention. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, raptorjays said:

That is not a bad idea However, I don’t know if the TTC re-uses a route number which was scrapped. If 124 Sunnybrook is absorbed into 28 Bayview South..

The only problem is that 28 Bayview South doesn’t have high ridership so it might not be necessary to divide it to two branches

The 124 has so it may be easier to replicate the 28 DAVISVILLE service in the 1980s under the 28B branch while the 28A may try. Thanks for the advice @raptorjays

On the other hand, since 1996, there hasn't been a bus service on Prince Edward Dr. north of Bloor (where the original 66 PRINCE EDWARD began), do you think the TTC may able to restore service on that route by absorbing the 55 WARREN PARK? This will replicate the original routing that existed before the service cuts. Presently, the 66 routing is using the old 13 BERRY ROAD routing which was merged in 1970. The length of it between Bloor and Dundas is 1.4km with a 17 minute walk between the two streets, although the condominiums on Dundas and Prince Edward are being built as well as lack of service to a community centre and Lambton-Kingsway JMS.

If they were to revive service north of Bloor, I think IMHO, the 66A can run between Humber Loop and Warren Park via Old Mill Stn. similar to the original with service split into 66C (Warren Park) and 66D (Humber Loop) during rush hours only (66B "Park Lawn/Lakeshore" branch will stay the same and not affected by the change.)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BYD said:

The 124 has so it may be easier to replicate the 28 DAVISVILLE service in the 1980s under the 28B branch while the 28A may try. Thanks for the advice @raptorjays

On the other hand, since 1996, there hasn't been a bus service on Prince Edward Dr. north of Bloor (where the original 66 PRINCE EDWARD began), do you think the TTC may able to restore service on that route by absorbing the 55 WARREN PARK? This will replicate the original routing that existed before the service cuts. Presently, the 66 routing is using the old 13 BERRY ROAD routing which was merged in 1970. The length of it between Bloor and Dundas is 1.4km with a 17 minute walk between the two streets, although the condominiums on Dundas and Prince Edward are being built as well as lack of service to a community centre and Lambton-Kingsway JMS.

If they were to revive service north of Bloor, I think IMHO, the 66A can run between Humber Loop and Warren Park via Old Mill Stn. similar to the original with service split into 66C (Warren Park) and 66D (Humber Loop) during rush hours only (66B "Park Lawn/Lakeshore" branch will stay the same and not affected by the change.)

 

Why tho.  It's clear that ridership on the northern part of Prince Edward isn't high enough to deserve a bus route so what is the point.  If I were to change anything about the 66, I would increase the frequency of buses on the 66B. I ride the route every day and I can attest to some amount of overcrowding on the route.   The explosive growth of the Humber Bay area I think we need higher service, not service on the northern part.

If you look at the nature of the Warren Park-Lambton Kingsway area, you'll see it's (for the most part) a low-density residential area with single-family dwellings.  Overall, I don't think the ridership would justify any more transit service.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

What would be the point of rerouting the 28 to Lawrence? Is there some study that indicates there is more demand for a connection between the Brick Works and Lawrence as opposed to Davisville? These changes don't come for free and a lot of your suggestions feel like rerouting for the sake of it, rather than to fulfill some service need.

There's no point in changing the 69 either. The bus runs in a primarily residential setting and those who need it will be familiarized with how it works at this point. Why add a new route into the mix and force them to relearn the service pattern? It's not even a comparable situation to the set up on the 59 at the turn of the decade, it's a very straightforward easy to follow square.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, BYD said:

The 124 has so it may be easier to replicate the 28 DAVISVILLE service in the 1980s under the 28B branch while the 28A may try. Thanks for the advice @raptorjays

On the other hand, since 1996, there hasn't been a bus service on Prince Edward Dr. north of Bloor (where the original 66 PRINCE EDWARD began), do you think the TTC may able to restore service on that route by absorbing the 55 WARREN PARK? This will replicate the original routing that existed before the service cuts. Presently, the 66 routing is using the old 13 BERRY ROAD routing which was merged in 1970. The length of it between Bloor and Dundas is 1.4km with a 17 minute walk between the two streets, although the condominiums on Dundas and Prince Edward are being built as well as lack of service to a community centre and Lambton-Kingsway JMS.

If they were to revive service north of Bloor, I think IMHO, the 66A can run between Humber Loop and Warren Park via Old Mill Stn. similar to the original with service split into 66C (Warren Park) and 66D (Humber Loop) during rush hours only (66B "Park Lawn/Lakeshore" branch will stay the same and not affected by the change.)

 

You need a time machine dude. All you want is to restore the past. The 66 would barely gets any riders north of Bloor.

 

14 minutes ago, PCC Guy said:

What would be the point of rerouting the 28 to Lawrence? Is there some study that indicates there is more demand for a connection between the Brick Works and Lawrence as opposed to Davisville? These changes don't come for free and a lot of your suggestions feel like rerouting for the sake of it, rather than to fulfill some service need.

There's no point in changing the 69 either. The bus runs in a primarily residential setting and those who need it will be familiarized with how it works at this point. Why add a new route into the mix and force them to relearn the service pattern? It's not even a comparable situation to the set up on the 59 at the turn of the decade, it's a very straightforward easy to follow square.

No point, It just makes the trip longer for people. Many people who comes from downtown or east end would just have a longer trip. Lawrence Stn isn't a major destination and a much lower usage station than others nearby. There are more people transfering from the 11 southbound to the 124 than anymore needing the 28 at Lawrence. I think that's why it was setup that way back then. It gives people on the 11 faster access to the subway

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...