Looks like they sped it up. No need to offer to buy, they can just expropriate…and no need to have public consultations or meetings…

Saw an escalator that changed directions if nobody was using it and you approached from the other direction today…great for those subway stations that aren’t very busy…

Ontario and Quebec need to get with the program…

Curious how the budget/staffing for this scales as new ones are created…is there currently a limit on the number of them the city can support? Or is it basically that as council adds them the budget is automatically increased to support the maintenance of them?

But then if you get a perfect run with no delays…that might be a functional success, but a service failure…so there is maybe an operational/functional cone of success, and a service cone of success…

If you are doing 30 on a 40, maybe it’s still success…but 20 on a 40 maybe not (although could change during rush hour for example)…what is the best a route can do, and what is acceptably the worst it can do…after which the only solution is management…

Was thinking more about how to define a cone of success - could obviously be done using historical data/averages…but also could expand based on speed limit, stoplight duration, or expected times at stops…ie if you get stuck at a light it’s not really a failure, but any longer than that would be

If you then compare that with the original you could maybe quantify what semi regular management could achieve…

I’m kinda interested in how many management points each route requires…and what service would look like in that situation…on the graph this would look like 0ing out the time every 5th stop or something…

Yes. So the first stop shouldn’t have a goal of +-3 minutes…it should be more like +-30 seconds….

Part of TTC’s problem is they use bands of success (+-3 minutes or whatever it is)…but a cone of success should be the result of management (everything should be +- 0 seconds at the management point and expand from there, once it hits +-5 minutes you need to manage to bring it back in line)…

But the biggest benefit is figuring out whether just endpoint management would work…basically if they mostly stay within the cone of success then there should be positive benefits to just endpoint management…if it goes outside the cone of success (or the cone gets too wide), you need more management

(And at endpoints obviously)

And intermediate travel times. I think on the longer routes it will be a mess. But on the short ones, unless there is some place where there is a lot of variety they should mostly track together at the same time of day…but if there is a variable delay location you want to manage right after it

Whereas if they don’t all end at the same time, then an intermediate management point would be needed to get them back together. Maybe color them in shades of green, red, blue for morning, afternoon and night service…

Can you do a trip chart where all the trips start at 0 time…this would show what would happen if they managed the endpoint…how much, and where the delays are…in theory if they all end at the same end time (or in a cluster) then endpoint management would be very successful…

That way things like transit city, smart track etc. could have gone through an initial scoping before hitting council…

I’d also give her a bigger budget to create external consultant reports that could propose changes at committees…with maybe a quarterly report with 100k behind each of them…allowing her to pull in outside experience to push committees to improve…

Would have been a disaster under Ford as his staff would have run wild…I think the better option is maybe give the mayor the ability to introduce items at all meetings (ie ttc, etc) and vote in absentia, and make motions in absentia…