According to an article in the Toronto Star, Councillors Karen Stintz and Glenn De Baeremaeker are proposing an ambitious transit plan for the city to move forward upon. Unlike other proposals, this one includes a funding component which could generate the funds necessary to bring the proposal from concept to reality. Continue reading
According to an article published on YorkRegion.com, the bus terminal to be built near Highway 7 and Jane Street on the Spadina subway extension will be named “SmartCentres Terminal – Vaughan Metropolitan Centre” after a deal was reached with the landowner, big-box retail developer SmartCentres. I am not necessarily opposed to selling naming rights to structures given, that it can raise significant capital to offset the cost of the project. But, we need to make sure that adding an appropriate corporate name to a bus terminal or subway station does not cause unnecessary confusion to the travelling public.
Station names should reflect the geographic location of the facility or the landmark riders are likely travelling to, and should be unique within the Greater Golden Horseshoe to eliminate any chance of confusion. In this case, those objectives have not been compromised. However, the subway station is still slated to be named Vaughan Centre by the TTC who is supervising construction and operation. In a previous post, I spoke about Square One in Mississauga. Miway refers to the bus terminal there as “City Centre Terminal”, Brampton Transit refers to the same facility as “Square One”, and GO Transit refers to their terminal across the street as “Square One Terminal”. I feel that riders do not differentiate between these two facilities and the mall itself, and that a single name would help integrate the various transit providers in the eyes of riders. I feel that the same argument applies here, and that the subway station should be named Vaughan Metropolitan Centre to match the bus terminal and Vaughan’s name for the neighbourhood.
Immediately after Toronto city council voted in favour of reverting to the at-grade LRT transit plan for Eglinton, Finch West and Sheppard East, I wrote a post saying that I felt that it was a vote to apply the most cost-effective solution to a transit problem (curiously, this was the post that crashed my old blog). I have always been of the opinion that both modes could provide the local service and development style we desire, so unless there was a need to go under narrow streets, needed capacity was the only justification for the added expense. Since developing Sheppard to the point where the capacity was needed would not be in keeping with our development vision, the right decision was made. However, there are proposed corridors where the capacity of an underground line is needed from day one. Continue reading