In case you have nothing else to worry about in this election season, the TTC unleashed one of the less helpful bits of debate a few weeks ago with a proposal to change the names of some of the stations on the Spadina Extension.
The staff proposed that:
- Finch West, York University, Steeles West, Highway 407 and Vaughan Centre retain their original names
- Sheppard West be renamed as Downsview Park
- The existing Downsview Station be renamed Sheppard West
Metrolinx wrote asking that Highway 407 be named something else, but with no suggestions, as this could be too generic a name as other major transit nodes will eventually exist along this highway.
Vaughan Council wrote and appeared by deputation asking that their station be named Vaughan Metropolitan Centre in keeping with the name of their new development district.
Commissioner Perruzza weighed in with a proposal that Finch West be renamed University City Heights.
Update: This name was actually applied with some objections by residents to the Jane-Finch location, two kilometers to the west, by Councillor Perruzza. See the Toronto Star from January 2009 for more info.
After a great deal of rather pointless discussion, given the much weightier items on the agenda, the whole matter was referred to the new, post-election Commission. The approved motion reads:
1. REFER CONSIDERATION OF THE NAME FOR THE VAUGHAN CENTRE TO THE NEXT SCHEDULED COMMISSION MEETING; AND
2. REFER CONSIDERATION OF THE NAMES FOR THE FINCH WEST, STEELES WEST AND DOWNSVIEW STATIONS BACK TO STAFF TO CONSULT WITH THE PUBLIC ON NAMES FOR THOSE STATIONS AND REPORT BACK ONCE COMPLETED.
The motion makes no reference to what we now think of as Sheppard West Station, but I’m sure that will be in the hopper too as it is an essential part of the discussion about which station gets to keep the “Downsview” name.
I am looking forward to the scrolling station name for Vaughan on those undersized destination signs fitted on the TR cars.
As for “University City”, this appears to be a last-ditch move by a soon-to-be-ex Commissioner to impose his idea of what Finch and Keele should be called on the City. It remains to be seen whether this has general support in the neighbourhood.
Steve Munro 
I’ve said this elsewhere, but I find it disappointing that the TTC decided against naming Finch West station after the intersection (a.k.a Keele-Finch). The reasoning they gave, I thought, was suspect. As a means of identifying where the stop is in the city, it’s a lot more effective than “Finch West”.
LikeLike
On Station names….
I think, Vaughan Centre will have to do……but the TR’s do need a longer sign in front.
With respect to Finch West; I believe the ‘marketing’ name for the area is ‘University Heights’….not sure where City came into it……
On Downsview, while I understand why Downsview Park makes sense as a name for the station previously to be known as Sheppard West; I tend to think the name change is an unnecessary cost, and will be confusing for at least a year or 2. Why bother?
Steve: You are correct about University Heights, and I will fix the article. My error. Now if only there was an actual “heights” worthy of the name somewhere nearby …
LikeLike
The report says, “the TTC has never used any name which is intended to promote or advertise nearby developments, commercial enterprises, or attractions.”
The people on the transit-toronto come up with a list:
Union, named after the then privately owned railway station.
Museum, a nearby attraction.
Old Mill, there are three or four roads called Old Mill nearby so it is debatable.
Yorkdale, there is a Yorkdale road, but we shouldn’t kid ourselves about what it is really named after.
LikeLike
Geez, why not just “Vaughan Centre” like North York Centre and Scarborough Centre?
There might be some value in inverting the Downsview/Sheppard Names, if the new station is closer to where the park will eventually be.
LikeLike
“Metrolinx wrote asking that Highway 407 be named something else, but with no suggestions, as this could be too generic a name as other major transit nodes will eventually exist along this highway.”
And “Museum” station is just fine, since there is only one museum in Toronto?
Renaming stations is an exercise in causing confusion for very little gain. I’ve got a long list of higher priorities for these people.
LikeLike
Not “Highway 407”? I guess with the same guys in charge, they would rename “42nd Street” and “34th Street” in New York City for the same reasons.
LikeLike
Just call them Sheppard West, and West Sheppard West … 🙂 … either that, or we’ll honour your 40 years of transit advocacy by naming one of them after you Bay-Yorkville style. On second thought, that might be light-rail blasphemy … so we’ll name an Eglinton LRT station after you instead … maybe the one closest to your old neighbourhood while growing up?
Steve: The problem is that Munro Street is nowhere near Mt. Pleasant and Eglinton.
LikeLike
While its true that Sheppard West may be closer to Downsview Park, I’m not sure its important enough to consider rejiggering the station names. Any slightly out-of-date information or directions would then cause massive confusion for visitors and people unfamiliar with the TTC as they find themselves at the wrong station. I just don’t think Downsview Park is that much of an attraction to warrant the change.
Steve: Ah yes, but Parc Downsview Park has money they want to spend on the station, provided that they get to name it. Maybe someday there will be something there to attract people on a regular basis.
LikeLike
Station names should really be kept short and representative of their geographical location, so “Vaughan Centre” is fine. Not only is it more difficult to display longer names on destination signs, but names like “Vaughan Metropolitan Centre” (5 more syllables) are a mouthful, and are harder to remember – especially for those who are not as fluent in English.
It’s also a shame that the TR’s have an undersized destination sign. But for a long name like, “Vaughan Metropolitan Centre,” it would probably be better to abbreviate it (e.g. as VMC) rather than having a scrolling sign. With the speed at which a train enters a station, it would be difficult for most people on the platform to read the full destination name as it scrolls by – the train speed or scrolling speed of the sign would be too fast for most people to read.
LikeLike
I sure hope common sense prevails in the end. I can just imagine how ridiculous the destination signs on the northbound University-Spadina platforms would look if Vaughan gets its way and they try to squeeze in the entire name: “Next station Dupont / Northbound to VaughanMetropolitanCentre.”
And “University City”…oh dear. Even if that *was* the generally accepted name for the area, I’d still argue that Finch West is a better name for the station. I think it’s a strength of our system that the station names are so transparent. If someone wants to go to Finch, they get off at Finch. There’s no need to learn an extra layer of knowledge about which station names correspond to which streets (except on the University line).
LikeLike
Here is how I look at things. The current Downsview station should be renamed Sheppard West given that it is located alongside Sheppard Avenue West. The station to be located at Downsview Park should be named Downsview. The reasoning for this is that when a tourist or someone else who is not familiar with Toronto wants to find Downsview Park for such things as a concert or Canada day celebrations… they will look for head for Downsview Station thinking it is the park. If we go for the status quo, people will inevitably end up getting lost by heading to the wrong station. When I think Sheppard West, I think of a main thoroughfare and not a park. If someone says to me Downsview I think of CFB Downsview a.k.a Downsview Park.
LikeLike
Well, I’ve always felt that the present Downsview station should’ve been called Sheppard West in the first place but this renaming they want to do could conceivably cause some confusion. A word to the wise would be to find some way to make damn sure that there’s no cofusion whatever it takes.
LikeLike
Most of the names and renames make some sense except one. The intersection at Finch & Keele does not have any kind of university city “feel” as York Campus is located further north. The actual intersection itself has gas stations, variety stores and apartments on its corners. University of Toronto St. George campus is in the heart of the city and therefore has much more of a “city feel” to it. Besides that, if the next station up the line from Finch West is to be called York University, won’t there be some confusion there?
LikeLike
Why will there be a subway station at a highway (407)? Ridiculous. And even the York University name is ridiculous. You don’t see them calling St. George station UFT. The TTC should stop at Steeles Ave. It’s called the TTC (Toronto Transit Commission) for a reason. That’s the problem when you have councilors on the TTC commission. I remember there was once a guy named David Gunn as TTC chair and he was brought up from the U.S after heading a transit system down there. He obviously was not a councillor. The TTC should be run without government interference and make its decision of where to put subways. It’s amazing that the provincial gov’t has money for the subway when its north of Steeles but not for Toronto. I wonder which Liberal minister had a hand on that. Subways should be built in Toronto first. Even the Yonge extension into Richmond Hill should not take place. I cannot believe there is not more of an uproar in Toronto over these 2 extensions outside of Toronto into Vaughan and Richmond Hill. If those people want subways they should have stayed in Toronto or let there cities build them.
Steve: Actually, the subways north of Steeles is funded by Ottawa, Queen’s Park and York Region. The TTC and Toronto are not paying for it.
David Gunn was Chief General Manager, not Chair. He left because of falling out with certain members of City Council.
TTC run without government interference? Considering the amount of tax money that supports TTC operations and capital projects, I want political oversight. TTC management are very good at coming up with dubious projects, but expecting that various governments will fund them. Even if you don’t have politicians on the TTC board itself, the spending decisions will be made at Council and at the Provincial Cabinet.
LikeLike
Yes I know that the other governments are funding the subway north of Steeles but who will fund the operation once they are built since I have read that this is an issue that the TTC wants settled.
Steve: The TTC agreed that they would fund the operation of the entire Spadina line in return for all of the fare revenue. That’s a losing proposition, but so is the rest of the line. There is no sign of any special subsidy on the horizon.
Before the Bloor subway was built, the Queen subway was to have been built but the TTC noticed that the Bloor Streetcar was getting really busy so the subway was built there. I am sure that was not popular politically.
Steve: Actually, it was a political decision to build under Bloor because this line would be easier to extend into the suburbs.
I could not remember the title Gunn had but why is it today we never hear about a Chief General Manager of the TTC and their views about where the TTC is heading and all the day to day issues? Is there no longer a Chief General Manager? And if one exists we never heard from them. All we hear is from Adam Giambrone as TTC chair.
Steve: Gary Webster is the CGM, and he is interviewed regularly, recently in The Star on October 11. However, he is overshadowed by Giambrone.
I read recently of a report commissioned by the TTC back in 1910 and done by a consultant company. One of the things it stated was that political influence would hinder the TTC. Don’t tell me that the TTC would ever have decided to build a subway into Vaughan or Richmond Hill if it was not for politicians when the City of Toronto itself still needs more subways. Politicians come and go and TTC decisions should not be based on the whims of any current government in power at any particular time.
Steve: The TTC did not exist in 1910, and most transit service was provided by a private company, the Toronto Railway Company. The TTC was formed by the City in 1921 because the TRC refused to extend or maintain their system into the then-growing suburbs — places like The Danforth, Bloor West and St. Clair. In 2010, the TTC will receive over $400-million in operating subsidy and another comparable sum for capital projects from City taxes. Other capital revenue comes from Queen’s Park and Ottawa. For all of that money, political oversight is essential. Governments have interfered with TTC decisions, but there are cases where TTC management was complicit in those events.
LikeLike
Virginia, the Liberal cabinet minister mainly responsible for foisting this subway on us is Glen Sorbara, who is now retired from cabinet.
As for naming the Downsview puppies, how about leaving the current Downsview as is and renaming Sheppard West as Downsview 2, like TSN and TSN 2? How about Sorbara instead of Vaughan Centre? (Who really knows where Vaughan Centre station is in relation to the development anyway? Might as well give full flower to Sorbara’s ego–and Sorbara fits better on the destination sign.)
LikeLike
Downsview was originally going to be called Sheppard West in the 90s, but there was a naming contest and the community chose Downsview instead. The terminal station should be called Highway 7 West, or Avenue 7 West (York is thinking of changing the avenue’s name) — so, let’s stick to street names. As for St. George, I always thought it should have been called Bedford.
LikeLike
I work at a church in the Keele and Sheppard location. A few years back we tried along with the city to reinvent the area by simply referring to it as “University Heights.” The concensus was that people disliked the new name and took pride in the fact that they were from “Jane and Finch.” Although they wanted “Jane and Finch” to become less violent, more family friendly, higher educated, they wanted to retain the name. The name for better or for worse was who they were. Changing the name was looked at a band aid solution and an insult to the community.
LikeLike
Obviously we need clear station designations for the Vaughan Subway. Wouldn’t want to confuse either of the passengers.
LikeLike
I agree with Metrolinx’s proposal to rename Highway 407 station as I am sure it will become confusing for Transitway users in the future. Ideally the station should be called “Jane”, but since a station with that name already exists, the only other route is to name it after a nearby landmark, which is the Beechwood Cemetary (there is actually nothing else there at the moment). If the station had been located on the north side of the 407, it could have been named “Interchange” or “Peeler” after nearby roads. I would have no issues with naming the station “Beechwood” . Eventually, people will start associating the name with the location. Its all a matter of time.
In regards to renaming Finch West station, I am all for it. The currently proposed name doesn’t really tell you how far along Finch Avenue you are. Why not call it “Elia” – the historical name for the area? Its a heck of a lot better than “University City”, which as someone else pointed out, may cause confusion because it is located right before the York University stop. Regardless, I am glad the TTC is asking for the public’s opinion on this one. They should have the community vote on the name.
LikeLike
I favour more rational station names throughout the system. A naive tourist traveling to “Royal York” or “Woodbine” would be very disappointed to find no hotel or racetrack, respectively. At the very least, the stations could be fully renamed after the associated street, like “Royal York Road” and “Woodbine Avenue”, like “Main Street” (and also like most of the NYC subway stations).
Steve: Dare we try to explain why “Main Street” is a minor local road in The Beach, and its name arises from the former village of East Toronto? As for “Woodbine”, this was originally the name of the residence of Joseph Duggan, proprietor of the Woodbine Park Hotel, and later the race course. Try explaining why “Greenwood” station does not take you to the (former) track at Greenwood. Toronto’s street names are comparatively well-behaved when I look at some cities whose local (town to town) streets never adopted a common nomenclature and street names change unexpectedly at every major intersection.
LikeLike
Why not subtitle the currently named ‘Sheppard West’ station at Sheppard & the CN/GO Barrie Line, as ‘Sheppard West – Downsview Park’ like ‘Bay – Yorkville’ is. The existing Downsview Station does serve Parc Downsview Park (more or less), and should keep the community’s selected name Downsview.
LikeLike
Metro actually wanted Queen before Bloor, not TTC. There is a great piece in the Archives where Metro transportation staff face off with Norman Wilson about whether to build XTown Bloor (favoured by TTC) or the Flying-U (favoured by Metro). Norman Wilson was pretty blunt by diplomatic standards, and basically said the inputs Metro used for their modeling of the Flying U were rigged to support the political agenda of the City of Toronto, and Norman wouldn’t be swayed by such garbage. XTown Bloor actually won against the political whims of the day, and TTC was capable of doing such in the late 1950s as they weren’t subsidized yet at that time.
LikeLike
*sigh*
So its pretty well confirmed that the line will be extended to the middle of butt-bleeping nowhere right?
It’s no wonder why we can’t seem to get things right in terms of public transit in the GTA.
LikeLike
I’m surprised the Feds aren’t pushing for “Gare Parc Downsview Park Station”. By the time the subway extension is complete there won’t be much of a Downsview Park left to name the station after as they’ll have lopped off most of the land for residential development. If anything it will be the name of a community by then.
LikeLike
David Aldinger wrote, “A word to the wise would be to find some way to make damn sure that there’s no confusion whatever it takes.”
I suspect that the only way to do the renaming to minimize confusion would be to rename Downsview to Sheppard West within the next year or so — well before any part of the extension opens. By the time the new station with that name opens, people will be used to the Sheppard West name for the existing station.
Virginia said, “Why will there be a subway station at a highway (407)?”
Partly to provide a park-n-ride connection and, more importantly, to provide a connection with the 407 Busway to be built. I have reservations about naming the station “Highway 407”, but it seems to me that there should be a common name for what will be the whole terminal involving both the subway and the busway. Of course, it could be named “407-Jane” along the lines of “Bloor-Yonge” and “Sheppard-Yonge”.
Virginia continued, “The TTC should stop at Steeles Ave. It’s called the TTC (Toronto Transit Commission) for a reason.”
While I am not in favour of the entire extension on the grounds the ridership needs would be better served by light rail, this “it should stop at Steeles” reeks of a “municipal xenophobia” that is at the root of some of our problems. We need better integration of our transit services, not more isolation. If you disagree, then perhaps we should seriously think about removing ALL Toronto “stuff” from the 905, starting with water reservoirs! (Sarcasm intended!)
LikeLike
I would add my name to those who feel the names Downsview and Shepherd West should be swapped. I strongly feel that having the station inside Downsview Park named Sheppard West while the station on Sheppard West but outside Downsview is called Downsview will only confuse people.
However, if they are going to make this change, it really needs to be done soon. Allowing six months for permissions and planning plus a year or more to switch over all signs and maps, this would mean that the change of the current station could be finished by mid to late 2012. Since the Vaughn extension is scheduled to open in 2015, people would have three years to adjust to the new name. This should minimize any confusion among current riders when the new station is opened.
As to University Heights, I consider this a terrible idea. Admittedly I was quite young at the time and living north of Ottawa (so we got the Ottawa Citizen rather than a Toronto paper) but I seem to recall that there was a significant outcry against the use of area names as people found them much less useful than the street names used on the original line. I have always understood that this is one of the reasons why virtually all of the stations on more recent lines are named for the cross street.
The only other exceptions to street names that I can find seem to be cases where there is a civic centre or where the structure named is extremely well known:
On YUS:
1) Union – the Station is of primary interest to many TTC patrons, and is one of the oldest and best known structures in the city.
2) North York Centre – this was forced through by Mel Lastman, and given that his loudest reason was that the city hall deserved closer access to the subway it is not surprising it was named this way. (If there is any surprise it is that it is not named Mel Lastman.) I would also note that there are no adjoining major thoroughfares.
3) Museum – the ROM is a major and very well-know attraction, certainly far more than Charles Street. I would note that while it is not “the only museum in Toronto”, it is the primary one, and whenever someone speaks of “the Museum” without further specification, the ROM is presumed to be the one intended.
4) Downsview – this should have been named Sheppard West, but Downsview did perhaps have the advantage of locating it accurately and Downsview is certainly well known.
On SRT:
Scarborough Centre – Since the station is part of the complex – and visibly so – it is not surprising that it does not follow the normal standards.
So far as I can see the BD and Sheppard lines have no stations that are not named after cross streets. (Contrary to a previous post, Old Mill is located on Old Mill Trail. Note the beginning of the detailed description of the Southbound 66A bus: “These buses operate from Old Mill Station via south on Old Mill Trail, west on Bloor Street West…”)
Steve: Yes, but Old Mill Trail is only called that because of the Old Mill and the inn that once stood nearby. I think it was the landmark, not the street, that led to the station name.
Naming a station after a local neighbourhood, a name that is very little known would be extremely foolish. It doesn’t give the rider who is a stranger to the city (or even most megacity residents) any aid in locating the station. Personally, I feel that the local community should be the last people consulted for a station name; it is the wider public that needs a short, easy to remember name that preferably describes the location in a way that will be familiar to the greatest number. University Heights fails on more than one counts: it is relatively long and it does not describe the location, which is neither at a university nor a notable height.
Also, given that this name was created as a ‘rebranding’ of Jane and Finch, surely it should be kept to be used for the proposed LRT station at that intersection, so it won’t have to be shown on maps as “Jane-Finch”. If they are going to go for a neighbourhood name, at least they could go for a traditional one:
Steve: Not to mention that Jane and Finch is a full 2km west of Keele Street. We may as well call Downsview Park station “York University” by that sort of measure.
LikeLike
I would add my name to those who feel the names Downsview and Shepherd West should be swapped. I strongly feel that having the station inside Downsview Park named Sheppard West while the station on Sheppard West but outside Downsview is called Downsview will only confuse people.
However, if they are going to make this change, it really needs to be done soon. Allowing six months for permissions and planning plus a year or more to switch over all signs and maps, this would mean that the change of the current station could be finished by mid to late 2012. Since the Vaughn extension is scheduled to open in 2015, people would have three years to adjust to the new name. This should minimize any confusion among current riders when the new station is opened.
As to University Heights, I consider this a terrible idea. Admittedly I was quite young at the time and living north of Ottawa (so we got the Ottawa Citizen rather than a Toronto paper) but I seem to recall that there was a significant outcry against the use of area names as people found them much less useful than the street names used on the original line. I have always understood that this is one of the reasons why virtually all of the stations on more recent lines are named for the cross street.
The only other exceptions to street names that I can find seem to be cases where there is a civic centre or where the structure named is extremely well known:
On YUS:
1) Union – the Station is of primary interest to many TTC patrons, and is one of the oldest and best known structures in the city.
2) North York Centre – this was forced through by Mel Lastman, and given that his loudest reason was that the city hall deserved closer access to the subway it is not surprising it was named this way. (If there is any surprise it is that it is not named Mel Lastman.) I would also note that there are no adjoining major thoroughfares.
3) Museum – the ROM is a major and very well-know attraction, certainly far more than Charles Street. I would note that while it is not “the only museum in Toronto”, it is the primary one, and whenever someone speaks of “the Museum” without further specification, the ROM is presumed to be the one intended.
4) Downsview – this should have been named Sheppard West, but Downsview did perhaps have the advantage of locating it accurately and Downsview is certainly well known.
On SRT:
Scarborough Centre – Since the station is part of the complex – and visibly so – it is not surprising that it does not follow the normal standards.
So far as I can see the BD and Sheppard lines have no stations that are not named after cross streets. (Contrary to a previous post, Old Mill is located on Old Mill Trail. Note the beginning of the detailed description of the Southbound 66A bus: “These buses operate from Old Mill Station via south on Old Mill Trail, west on Bloor Street West…”)
Naming a station after a local neighbourhood, a name that is very little known would be extremely foolish. It doesn’t give the rider who is a stranger to the city (or even most megacity residents) any aid in locating the station. Personally, I feel that the local community should be the last people consulted for a station name; it is the wider public that needs a short, easy to remember name that preferably describes the location in a way that will be familiar to the greatest number. University Heights fails on more than one counts: it is relatively long and it does not describe the location, which is neither at a university nor a notable height.
Also, given that this name was created as a ‘rebranding’ of Jane and Finch, surely it should be kept to be used for the proposed LRT station at that intersection, so it won’t have to be shown on maps as “Jane-Finch”. If they are going to go for a neighbourhood name, at least they could go for a traditional one: Elia
LikeLike
It should be pointed out that, given that the Spadina extension is under construction now, NOW is a good time to have a good hard look at the names of these things. If we decide to change “Downsview” station to “Sheppard West”, now’s a good time to do it, as we only have to roll in the cost of replacing a few signs into the overall construction cost.
However, while “Sheppard West” might be a good station stop for “Downsview” now, one wonders what will happen if and when the Sheppard subway is extending west to meet it. Should we name the thing “Allan-Sheppard” instead (which, given that the real Alan Shepard went into space, is surprisingly appropriate)? Or when the Sheppard line is extended west, do we suffer through the compound name of “Sheppard West-Dufferin North”?
LikeLike
Virginia,
You’re rather confused about the structure of the TTC, which has been basically the same since 1987. We have a Chief General Manager that the councillors sitting on the commission and the City of Toronto hires. David Gunn came up and was hired by the same commission that is now chaired by Adam Giambrone. He was followed by Rick Ducharme and the post is currently held by Gary Webster.
I agree with you that it makes little sense to extend the subway north of Steeles, but the fault there doesn’t lie with the TTC or Toronto councillors. The province, Ottawa and York Region is paying for the full cost of the project. They’re providing the money, so they get to call the tune. The powers of Toronto councillors to stop the thing is rather limited. Especially if they decided that they want the line to go UP to Steeles, and they want the province to pay for the lion’s share of it.
LikeLike
How expensive would it be to change the name from Downsview to Sheppard West on all the entrance/exit signs, subway maps, signs at subway level, Ride Guides, bus route signs, transfer boxes, etc.?
LikeLike
Virginia,
My last comment is, while I share your frustration with some of the bad decisions that have occurred in transit these past few years (or, even, decades), political interference is simply a fact of life. The TTC is not a private business and never can be. As Steve notes, in spite of how high fares are, and how crowded the vehicles are, the TTC still needs $400 million per year in government subsidy in order to keep operating, PLUS hundreds of millions of dollars each year to pay for new vehicles, repair old vehicles, or maintain tracks and property. Every penny of THAT is government subsidy.
And yet the TTC is the most efficient public transit agency by subsidy in North America. That $400 million operating subsidy represents a 75% farebox recovery ratio, or a 25% subsidy of costs. Montreal’s farebox recovery ratio is around 50%. New York? 62%.
So, your tax dollars and mine are going to the TTC, and they’re going to the TTC because it is an important social service. It maintains mobility for those who would not otherwise have it, and it is a relief valve for our tax subsidized road network that would gridlock otherwise. And as taxpayers and as citizens, we deserve to have a say in how the TTC is run. The only way to do this is to elect politicians based on their platforms of how they would operate the TTC.
In 2003, enough Ontario voters elected a government that decided that our tax dollars would be best spent extending the Spadina subway to Steeles Avenue and beyond there to Vaughan Centre. In 2007, we re-elected that government. And Ontario, Ottawa and York Region are paying the full cost of the extension north of Steeles.
Whether we like it or not, our politicians are the only means we have to exert control over the TTC. We have an obligation to hold them accountable every election. It think you would be disappointed if we cut the political connection between the agencies which fund the TTC (with our tax dollars) and the TTC itself . It won’t produce the magical swoon of good planning decisions that you hope for. And, if the TTC screwed up, who would you hold accountable?
The arrangement that we have is, in my view, the worst one possible — until we start to think about alternatives. If we want the TTC to engage in better planning decisions, the solution is MORE politics — and a better educated set of voters to elect politicians to enforce the decisions we want.
Steve: If you want a good example of a less accountable organization, just look at Metrolinx/GO. The board, supposedly private sector experts, does little but rubber stamp staff proposals. It holds few public meetings and does not entertain any public participation at them. The emperor’s new clothes are never exposed for what they are. That’s the provincial model where responsibility is severed between elected representatives, and Ministerial bodies nominally in charge of policy. You may also recall that GO Transit is not renowned for its customer service, an it runs a system that carries only a fraction of the TTC’s total ridership.
LikeLike
Having the two Sheppard stations “aligned” is going to make the network much simpler to navigate in the long run. The name-swap has the potential to cause some confusion but the TTC could do a lot to prevent that by renaming the current Downsview station as soon as possible. That way everyone has plenty of time to get used to the Sheppard West name before the new Downsview Park station opens.
“As for St. George, I always thought it should have been called Bedford.”
Really? That seems completely backwards to me. Way more people who use that station are coming from/going to St. George St than they are Bedford Rd. Why name it after the less significant street?
Steve: And while we’re on the subject, alternatives to “Museum” do not abound. “Queen’s Park” (the name of the street where the station is actually located) is already taken by the next stop down the line, just south of the landmark, but at College and University. “Planetarium” would certainly have been dated, and in any event the building didn’t exist when the station was built. “Hoskin Ave” is nearby, but a bit of a hike. “Avenue Road” really wouldn’t work, and “Park Plaza” would never do as it’s a commercial establishment. “Victoria College”?
No, the Museum (the big one) is well known and it’s a fine name for the station.
LikeLike
Virginia said …
“Before the Bloor subway was built, the Queen subway was to have been built but the TTC noticed that the Bloor Streetcar was getting really busy so the subway was built there. I am sure that was not popular politically.”
Swansea and Mimico were pushing for an all-Queen subway in the 50s (remember, this was before 1967 when Metro was consolidated down to six boroughs). Metro, on the other hand, wanted a hybrid Bloor-Queen subway, while the TTC favored Wilson’s Bloor-University concept. Ultimately the TTC won, so I wouldn’t say the decision was political.
“Don’t tell me that the TTC would ever have decided to build a subway into Vaughan or Richmond Hill if it was not for politicians when the City of Toronto itself still needs more subways.”
We’re not building a subway into Vaughan, we’re EXTENDING an existing subway into Vaughan. Politically, that’s a lot easier to do, especially when 3/4 of the extension is still in Toronto. As for a new subway downtown to satisfy “south of Bloor Spadina envy” (and I take it that’s what your post is all about), even Streetcars For Toronto knew in the early 70s that the Queen line (DRL) wasn’t going to happen, and that was almost 40 years ago. In the suburbs, there is a perception that the downtown area is already well served by streetcars.
Steve: Er, my post is about station naming, not about the Queen and/or Bloor subways. Thanks to all who have corrected my history about the two proposals as I did quite genuinely think that the impetus for the BD line was political. In the 2010 context, the problem south of Bloor is not “envy”, but rather an excess of demand over capacity. Oddly enough, despite all that suburban growth, people still want to come downtown.
LikeLike
Mimmo: Sheppard West was the original provisional name for Downsview. The naming contest pitted the names Downsview and Wilson Heights against one another. The community felt that Downsview reflected them more than Wilson Heights. I don’t know how they’ll feel about getting the name pulled from them. They could go to the runner up and call it Wilson Heights, but that would run counter to the TTC’s logic of using a north-south name for a north-south line.
Darwin: The name Union was to signify multiple private train operators serving a single station in Toronto. Prior to the station, each company had their own station. As for Museum, don’t forget at the time the line was built there was also the McLaughlin Planetarium next door. There’s also the Gardiner Museum across the street which opened later. A generic name seems to work here.
As for Vaughan Metropolitan Centre, they’re trying to pull a Mississauga and create a downtown out of nothing. The “Centre” in North York and Scarborough’s cases stemmed from their respective city halls being located there. I don’t know if Vaughan plans to move theirs to the fabricated “downtown” from it’s current location up in Maple. If they do, then perhaps they can justify dropping the Metropolitan from the name. While it sounds flashy, I don’t think they thought out all of the logistics with such a long name!
LikeLike
Sorry to go a bit off-topic here, but regarding operational funding of the line, would the TTC be able to break [even] if York Region maintained and operated the Vaughan and 407 stations?
Steve: York Region is already responsible for the surface facilities, but not for the stations, the trains, or all of the equipment such as signals, track, ventillation, power and lighting. The short answer is “no”.
LikeLike
I note that New Yorkers have 3 or 4 lines (depending on where) going north through the city. They seem to have no problems with 3 stations called Canal St, 4 called 14th St (although one is also billed Union Square), and 4 for 23rd, 110, 123, 125, and 3 for a lot of others.
They also have 2 called Park Pl — one in Manhattan and one in Brooklyn, same for 59 and 77.
A lot of stations have dual names — street and local landmark.
So, it seems that if you know what you’re doing, the names don’t have to be absolutely unique.
LikeLike
“Steve: The TTC agreed that they would fund the operation of the entire Spadina line in return for all of the fare revenue. That’s a losing proposition, but so is the rest of the line. There is no sign of any special subsidy on the horizon.”
After several years of living on the Yonge line and getting on at Sheppard, and later Eglinton, I have rather enjoyed using the University branch over the last year. I can usually get a seat at St. Clair West or Dupont if I time it right to catch a short-turned train. I can’t wait for the extension to be completed so I can watch train after train filled largely with people who are getting subsidized off my property tax dime pass me by. When are zone fares coming back again?
Steve: This is a double-edged sword. Fare by distance is all the rage in some quarters, but as I have already written here, this would substantially increase the cost of commuting for the longer-distance trips on the TTC. People who make such trips already have to put up with many annoyances and tend to regard the TTC as something they would get away from if they could. Raising their fares, and at the same time giving the “pampered downtowners” who make short trips a cheaper ride, is simply not going to happen. We have to regard the subsidies paid to carry people on transit as a preferable cost to the alternative of providing them with road space. This argues for regional if not provincial financial support rather than counting entirely on Toronto to foot the bill.
On another topic Steve, any thoughts on the article today in the Globe and Mail about Mayor Ford’s transit plan being costed by the TTC and found….wanting?
Steve: I am awaiting details of the TTC’s report on this subject. It is supposed to be available on the City’s website, but isn’t up yet.
LikeLike
It would be easier to name the new station “Chesswood”, as it sounds nice, and Chesswood street is only 200 m away. Then, there is no need to rename Downsview station.
LikeLike
“It would be easier to name the new station “Chesswood”, as it sounds nice, and Chesswood street is only 200 m away. Then, there is no need to rename Downsview station.”
The problem with Chesswood is that it’s a North-South street and the Spadina Extension is generally a North-South line. Every other station in the system that’s named after a street is named after one which runs perpendicular to the direction of travel.
It’d be a bit like calling St. Clair West station “Lyndhurst”. Nice sounding name for a station, but it deviates from the pattern in a way that would just end up being confusing.
LikeLike