In a report on the supplementary agenda for June 13, the TTC proposes to increase service in response to unexpected growth in riding.  This will not actually happen until November, mainly to allow hiring of new operators to catch up with requirements, and the intent is that these changes will remain into the base budget for 2008.

The 2007 service budget includes provision for increasing the weekly operation of 142,000 service hours by an additional 2,400 in the fall, but this will not be enough to handle all of the crowding.  This report proposes 1,900 more hours of service.

The improvements will come mainly in the off-peak because that is where demand is growing, and they can be implemented without any new fleet.  The list of candidate routes and time periods is not included in the report, but I will publish the information whenever it comes my way. 

Mike Olivier sent in a note about San Francisco’s pilot project to improve service quality on the J-Church line, the least reliable of their streetcar services.

“What’s needed for King & Queen is a comprehensive evaluation of the route, much like what San Francisco Muni is doing with the J-Church Pilot Program:”

Today, Monday, March 5, we began a new on-time performance pilot project on the J-Church light rail line. The pilot will be conducted during peak service times over a 120-day period. The J-Church study will conclude on Friday, July 13, 2007. Working together we successfully completed the 1-California pilot, which resulted in an increase in on-time performance from 81% to 88% over the three-month pilot period. I am confident that through our continued collaboration and hard work we can expand this success to the J-Church.

As part of the Transit Effectiveness Project’s (TEP) Early Action Plan, we will apply the findings from the 1-California pilot to a rail line. These projects will help us cultivate our understanding and develop our plans for improving on-time performance system wide.
Our recent on-time performance (OTP) reports reflect that the J has the lowest OTP of the rail lines. I know that working in concert, all divisions will contribute to improving the J-Church.

The pilot will include on-going analysis to compare the pilot performance to the initial data, including collecting weekly data on OTP, vehicle loads, and overall performance of operations and enforcement.
A detailed description of the pilot follows. It includes the project objective, description, and improvement strategies. Thank you for your contributions to the success of the 1-California pilot, and for your daily commitment to keep San Francisco moving.

Pilot Description

Objective: Continue to implement the Transit Effectiveness Project’s Early Action Plan by applying the findings from the 1-California to a rail line to strengthen our understanding of how to achieve improved on-time performance system wide

Project description: Multidisciplinary effort to improve the J-Church peak periods service over a 120-day period

Test route: J-Church (average weekday ridership – 18,700; beginning OTP 61.9%)

Pilot begins March 5, 2007 and will conclude July 13, 2007

For the remainder of this text, follow the link above.

The program has been extended by 60 days according to more recent updates on SFMTA’s site.  For interesting reading, have a look at the Community Advisory Committee meetings especially April 2007.  Comments from the members indicate that many of the problems we have in Toronto can also be found in San Francisco including concerns that poor service management is a culprit in service quality. 

What I find most striking about this plan is the clear commitment to make the service work.  This involves many aspects of the organization and the city, and a recognition that things actually can be improved.  It is not a catalogue of whines about what cannot be done, about how we are too busy, about how department “x” won’t co-operate.

Such an approach is long overdue at the TTC, although I fear we will need the combined pressure of politicians on the Commission and a new Chief General Manager to make it happen. 

This exercise should not be used as an excuse to tighten the funding screws in a “see, we told you, then can do better with what they have” fit of self-righteousness.  Some improvements may cost money:  making sure that there are operators and vehicles available to run all of the scheduled service all of the time means that on some days you will have more than you need, and the bean counters will not be happy. 

Keeping service well-spaced will require active intervention and, where necessary, dealing with the minority of operators who abuse the schedules for their own convenience.

Real transit priority will mean taking green time away from cars at some key intersections, and making sure that the priority signals are actually working all of the time.

None of this is particularly difficult provided there is a will to make the system and the service better.