Service Changes for September 2009 (Updated)

Many service changes are coming this fall to the TTC network and they fall into a number of broad categories.

Seasonal Changes

The summer service changes are, for the most part, reversed in September as tourist/amusement traffic falls off and school traffic returns.  Subway and RT services return to normal “winter” levels.

Construction Changes (streetcar lines only)

The Dundas Street watermain work between Bathurst and Dovercourt is supposed to complete by the end of August, and both the 505 Dundas and 506 Carlton routes will revert to their May 2009 routings and service levels. 

Updated September 4:  The 505 Dundas car will operate via Spadina and College west to Lansdowne and thence to Dundas West Station.  A bus service will operate from Dundas West Station to Beverley Street (the west side of the Art Gallery of Ontario).

Work at Bingham Loop will continue, and the 502/503 services on Kingston Road will continue to operate with buses until the October schedule change.

Work at Queen & Church on watermains and track will continue, and the diversion of Queen and Downtowner routes around this area remains until the roads are open for traffic, possibly in late September.

Updated September 4:  The Queen and Downtowner routes will revert to their standard routing.

Work on Roncesvalles will continue until late 2010.

Fleet Availability

In February 2009, there were many service cuts in response to the poor availability of hybrid buses.  This situation continues to some extent, but some of the February cuts have been restored with a few service improvements added.

I have formatted the information in my usual manner for this site, boiling down a much longer TTC document to show service and riding levels, headways, and the rationale for changes (or lack of them).  In this case, I have colour coded the chart to make it easier to see the types of change applicable to each route.

  • Blue:  A service restoration and/or improvement
  • Orange Italics:  A service cut that was made in February 2009 and remains in place.  Note that the headway changes shown for these cases took place in February and are simply continuing into September.  In some cases, the before and after ridership has been updated by the TTC with recent counts.
  • Red Italics Underscored:  A service cut that was made in February has been confirmed as permanent in response to lower ridership.

In theory, when bus availability improves later in 2009, the “orange” list here will see service restored at least to pre-February levels.

70 thoughts on “Service Changes for September 2009 (Updated)

  1. As an example of the infuriating lousy service that we all too frequently get, I hold up my epic adventure of last Wednesday, September 2.

    I was staying in Vaughan, and decided to go downtown for the memorial at 6:00 before going to the Ward 20 Cycling meeting at City Hall at 6:30.

    I decided to go multi-modal. But, of course, I can’t take my bike onto the subway during peak hours. And there are not too many alternatives. So I decided to ride my bike to get on the Bathurst 7 bus just south of Steeles. Since it was the end of the line, I figured that the probability was high that I could get one of the measly two bike rack slots.

    Of course, only two slots means that getting a spot is totally unreliable, so cyclists are strongly deterred from going multi-modal and using them, so the usual suspects then say “they are not being used, proving there is no demand for multi-modal.” But that’s a whole other topic!

    Steve: I may as well jump in here and say that I have always had my doubts about the usefulness of two bike racks if this seriously caught on. However, I think that the cycling advocates take their victories where they can find them. Your argument is circular. If cyclists cannot find space because the slots are taken, then someone is using them and usage stats should be good. If usage is low, then you should have no trouble getting one. It cannot be both at the same time. But, as you say, that’s a whole other topic.

    I arrived at the bus stop at 4:50. Plenty of time, right? The Bathurst bus runs every six minutes, according to the TTC. Six minutes went by, no bus. I talked to my fellow-victims at the bus stop, and some of them had already been waiting 10 minutes. It took twenty more minutes for a bus to show up! I put my bike on the rack in front, and went into the sardine can.

    Steve: On a clear Saturday morning with little traffic, four, count them four Bathurst buses managed to arrive southbound to St. Clair as a parade. I am sure, however, that the TTC’s much vaunted new line management capabilities will fix this problem. That would be a shame, in a way, because the service is so unreiable right past their main operations centre.

    Thirty minutes of no bus service meant that the bus was packed all the way down Bathurst with the sort of “every centimetre of my body in contact with a fellow passenger” overcrowding that leads people to say TTC stands for “take the car.”

    And, of course, we stopped for every bus stop – even the ones that were irrationally close together. Why can’t someone, who looks able-bodied to me, while waiting 30 minutes for a bus, stroll 20 metres to the main bus stop?

    Needless to say, I missed the memorial and was barely on time for the Ward 20 meeting.

    Coming back, it was past peak hours so I was going to be able to take my bike on the subway. So my plan was to take the subway to Downsview Station and then take the 105 Dufferin bus to Rutherford Road in Vaughan and then bike the rest of the way. Normal multi-modal trip, right?

    Except the 9:30 PM 105 Dufferin bus didn’t show up. Even although Downsview is the end of the subway line, the TTC only runs a continuing bus once every 1/2 hour!!! 21 victims were left on the platform waiting, and waiting, and waiting. Nobody came out to tell us what was going on. After 30 minutes, the 10:00 PM bus finally showed up. At least the driver didn’t have the nerve to try to collect an extra fare from all of us going north of Steeles.

    Bottom line: except for the bit on the subway, I could have gone a lot faster just riding my bike the whole way. And if I was half my age I probably would have done so. But at the age of 47 and after three major surgeries my cycling range is only about 15 km – and even that’s a push. 15 km will get me around the downtown, but I’m reliant upon the TTC (and GO) to get any further afield.

    Wednesday’s adventure is not the first example of incredibly lousy service I’ve encountered. I’m not just a dissatisfied customer. Dissatisfaction was left behind a long, long time ago. I’m a furiously angry customer feeling serious hate for being abused and having my life arbitrarily jerked around.

    Steve: I am looking forward with glee to the day when the TTC manages to (a) have “we have a delay” messages for surface routes, and (b) connect the message system directly to the vehicle monitoring system. Senior officials of the TTC will never get any work done for all the incoming messages to their own Blackberries.

    On the bright side, in a few years, the worst “service” will be scheduled every 20 minutes, and if there’s a bus missing, you should only have to wait 40.

    Like

  2. Steve, I’m curious as to what kind of stop spacing you have for the TTC’s 500-series routes. It’s a bit much to say we’re kicking around the idea of streetcars out here — at this point, it’s more of a pepper game — but for 400-metre walking distance service radii at stops, and given that a typical inner-city block out here is close enough to 150 metres east-west and 80 metres north-south for government work, it seems easiest in the early going to sell stop spacing in the range of 300 metres.

    Steve: Stop spacing on the streetcar routes has long been dictated by the location of traffic signals except for those few locations where there is a long stretch without one. (Some on the 504 come to mind — Broadview from Gerrard to Danforth, King through western Parkdale, Roncesvalles Avenue.) Traffic lights in turn have historically been placed on major streets, although with the proliferation of old crosswalk locations that are morphing to full signals, this is no longer true. The stops reflect the “old” arrangements.

    (Before anyone starts yet another campaign against the stops at King & Victoria, or Queen & Simcoe, yes I know that there are exceptions. I happen to agree that these two are quite superfluous, even though I use King & Victoria myself on occasion.)

    Essentially, unless you can guarantee transit pre-emption, not just priority, at traffic lights where the streetcars won’t be stopping, there might as well be a carstop at each light.

    On the 501, stops downtown are close together because of street spacing as much as anything. Going east from Yonge, there are stops at Victoria, Church, Jarvis, Sherbourne, Ontario, Parliament, Sackville, Sumach, River, Don Roadway and Broadview. That’s 2.5km with 11 stops for a spacing of about 225m. Arguments can be made for getting rid of a few of these, but it’s not as easy as it looks — it’s not just a matter of respacing the remaining stops. This is also an area where almost all riding originates by walking trips from adjacent areas over a fine-grained street grid. The same is not always true for some suburban routes.

    To the west, the stops are at Bay, York, University, Simcoe (WB only), McCaul, John, Peter, Spadina, Augusta and Bathurst. That’s 10 stops in 2.1km, or 210m each. Strong arguments can be made for getting rid of both the York and the Simcoe stops, but this would only get the spacing up to 262m. One could also argue about McCaul, but it’s a turnback point.

    I agree that in Hamilton you are facing a similar situation with shorter blocks, and the planners have to avoid imposing a design that ignores the actual layout of the city. Unless they can figure out a way to get LRVs past red lights faster than Toronto does (in which case, please show Toronto planners how to do it, just as you did with monthly passes almost 30 years ago), there is no point in having widely spaced stops with closely spaced traffic signals.

    Like

  3. STEVE: Unless they can figure out a way to get LRVs past red lights faster than Toronto does (in which case, please show Toronto planners how to do it, just as you did with monthly passes almost 30 years ago), there is no point in having widely spaced stops with closely spaced traffic signals.

    I have never understood what is wrong with the C-Train (Calgary Model)

    Where their LRT crosses traffic lights in same way as any HRT (frieight/VIA) service might with full railway crossing infrastructure, with lights and guards that override normal traffic signals.

    Loading is always farside, which makes sense, in the context where you are never delayed crossing to said stop, and there are no crossings/lights exiting the stop.

    Why can’t we do this in Toronto?

    Steve: Crossing gates may be a bit much for Spadina or St. Clair, but Toronto is far more concerned with left turning cars than with transit vehicles. Those who claim Toronto has a “war on the car” have no idea what real transit priority looks like.

    Like

  4. “Toronto is far more concerned with left turning cars than with transit vehicles. Those who claim Toronto has a “war on the car” have no idea what real transit priority looks like.”

    Exactly! And further proof that Ottawa is a more transit-friendly city: There are numerous advance lights for buses scattered all-over, even in areas where development has not caught up yet to its potential. Whether it’s to allow a bus to pull away from a curb bus stop, or to get a jump on traffic, the bus gets priority even over left-turning cars!!!

    Like

  5. Steve said:

    “On the bright side, in a few years, the worst “service” will be scheduled every 20 minutes, and if there’s a bus missing, you should only have to wait 40.”

    That is assuming that the line is line enough to warrant two buses.

    Like

  6. Steve said:

    “On the bright side, in a few years, the worst “service” will be scheduled every 20 minutes, and if there’s a bus missing, you should only have to wait 40.”

    Why can’t there be a spare bus sitting at stations with a spare operator at the station ready to continue the route asap. Of course I don’t know the protocol for something like that, but it’s something to think about.

    Steve: This sort of thing is done for peak period gap management in a few locations, but not off-peak and certainly not system wide. There is always a debate about the value of many buses (and operators) sitting around the system on standby versus actually improving service where it’s badly needed. Which is more important?

    Like

  7. Steve said: Also, there’s the question of whether Jane is the logical western terminus.

    Are you suggesting Scarlett is more logical, or Runnymede? I happen to lean towards Runnymede, due to the bus patterns in the area. The 71 can stop running to Gunns and the “B” service become the main route if they routed the 512 into the Junction loop at Runnymede/Dundas.

    Steve: I don’t have a specific location in mind, but Jane seems to have been chosen simply because a TC line might cross there some day. Not that long ago, the TTC was looking at extending the St. Clair line to Kipling Station, and provision was being made to allow for streetcars crossing under the CPR at Scarlett Road.

    In this whole thread, the real issue is the travel pattern in the entire St. Clair West strip east from Scarlett Road. Where do people actually want to go? Do we gerrymander the bus routes to serve a fictitious “demand” on St. Clair? Study demand patterns first, draw route maps second.

    Like

  8. I saw a service update on I think it was the Warden bus, every 4 minutes 15 seconds to 3:35, a whole 40 seconds … how many buses do they add, 1? Forget the fact that the 68 Warden buses are horribly never on time, others who commented on your site in the past agreed with me. Also since the buses are PACKED 11am-3:30pm (non-peak time). Either a lot of drivers have given up their cars due to the economy and stuff (which is possible) or they just don’t have enough buses.

    How the blank can they run every 10/20 minutes if they can’t even keep up right now at max. 30 minutes?

    One commenter above mentioned a bus was so packed and it stopped in every stop even the ones that were near each other.

    The 24 Victoria Park/324 Victoria Park Night has a bus stop at Eglinton on the South East corner, then one on the North East corner.
    The 68 Warden has the same issue at Warden and Eglinton.
    The SW corner stop on Sheppard and VP is for the 85 Eastbound, The SE corner stop is for the 190, why not combine both?
    The 85 Wesbound stops in both the NE and NW corner of VP/Sheppard, I think the 190 WB stops at the NW corner stop.

    The 24 VP bus has a stop on the SE corner (on VP), the 169 has a stop on VP/Sheppard, NE corner but on VP side, I believe this is called farside. This farside stop for the 169 is understandable, why not combine the 24VP @ Sheppard stop with the farside for 169?

    I could go on and on about “double stops”. There is such thing as too many stops close to each other slowing the service.

    Oh yeah, the last bus (mon-fri) for 68 Warden from the station is 1:40am … many times it leaves early as in 3-5 minutes early. When that happens I have to go east to Kennedy stn. to catch either the Eglinton East night bus to VP to catch the 324 that takes me home, or the 43 Kennedy which last bus is 2:10am (just pass 2am), up to Finch then take whatever Finch bus.

    That 1:40am pile of something just adds to the bigger pile of something.

    Eventually the pile will be so big that it will be take 50 years to fix things … wait, isn’t that pile of somethings already too big that they don’t even have the money to fix things?

    Fix the current system before expanding. If you can’t keep up 30 minutes then there is no way you can make it 20 minutes or even 10 minutes.

    Like

  9. Those changes on the 104 et al make a lot more sense. Sending people back down Wilmington and bypassing Downsview was just weird.

    Buses southbound at Finch and Dufferin look like they are about to triple. Can’t tell from there whether the 196 will stop on the north side or the South. As I can’t see many people going west from that route, I’d hope only the south side would be a stop.

    Of course eastbound would be helped if they actually worked on the sinkhole. Nobody touched it the last week.

    Like

  10. OgtheDim wrote: Those changes on the 104 et al make a lot more sense. Sending people back down Wilmington and bypassing Downsview was just weird.

    Buses southbound at Finch and Dufferin look like they are about to triple. Can’t tell from there whether the 196 will stop on the north side or the South. As I can’t see many people going west from that route, I’d hope only the south side would be a stop.

    Of course eastbound would be helped if they actually worked on the sinkhole. Nobody touched it the last week.

    I live one block up Honiton from the stop on Overbrook Place. Right now having the 36/309 going by my house makes my life so much easier, as I go to Humber and now don’t have a single transfer from my house. But when the sinkhole is fixed the TTC is going to make a HUGE mistake with the 104 Faywood.

    They simply can’t change the Faywood route. It is so vital to my neighbourhood to have it running down Overbrook, and I’m not just saying that because I live next to it. Senior citizens, parents taking their kids to C.H. Best Elementary School, and regular Joes like myself all rely on the 104 Faywood running on Overbrook and Dufferin. To change this route would be a death blow to something that is vital to our neighbourhood. It not only runs more frequently than both the 105 and 117, but it also provides more convenient service to the Faywood/Wilmington/Overbrook areas. The 105 runs a block away, and aside from some Mackenzie students after the final bell, you don’t see people in our neighbourhood take either route up Wilson Heights at all. Why? Because the 104 Faywood is our neighbourhood bus. The 105 takes you to Steeles, but the 104 takes us home.

    Another thing is that I talked to a driver on the Faywood before I went away for the summer. I told him I saw the plan for this route change. He couldn’t believe it, and said the service will suffer because of the long lines making the left turn from Finch to Dufferin. And he’s right. I see that left-turn lane all the time (this is before the sinkhole), and sometimes it’s backed up halfway down the block.

    Bottom line: the TTC can’t screw up what I believe is the best neighbourhood bus route in the city. I know this because I use it, and anyone else in my neighbourhood would agree with me in a second.

    Sorry for the long-winded rant but I had to say something. Steve who can I call and complain about this to? Do I call the division? And should I start a petition around the neighbourhood?

    Steve: Best bet is your local Councillor with a copy to the TTC. The real question is how widely circulated the change was in the community, how much advance notice and consultation did you have?

    Like

  11. Steve wrote about the TTC bus bike racks:

    “If cyclists cannot find space because the slots are taken, then someone is using them and usage stats should be good. If usage is low, then you should have no trouble getting one. It cannot be both at the same time.”

    Kevin’s comment:

    It depends upon one’s risk level. If I am going to work, what probability am I (and my boss!) prepared to tolerate of me being late?

    Just speaking for myself, I figure that I can be late to work about once per month without serious consequences. Given approximately 20 work days in a month, this means a 5% tolerance level of being late to work.

    So if multi-modal commuting is going to be successful, the combined probability of the two bus bike racks being full AND any other TTC delay has to be less than 5%.

    Suppose we assume a “best-case” scenario that the TTC never, ever has a delay (ha, ha). This means that the bike racks being full 5% of the time is enough to deter multi-modal commuting.

    To put it another way, there can be a space available 95% of the time, and I’ll still say “that is not good enough reliability” and be deterred from using the bus bike racks.

    Steve: This speaks to a fundamental problem of bike racks — they are limited in quantity by the number of buses. At the risk of sounding condescending, is it the transit system’s role to provide transport for your bike? That’s good for a long debate (and a pitched battle here that I am not prepared to entertain).

    Like

  12. Steve asked:

    “…is it the transit system’s role to provide transport for your bike?”

    Kevin’s answer:
    Multi-modal transportation can work, but not the way the TTC is going about things. Since there are only two slots on the bus bike racks, this isn’t a reliable method for mass use.

    In high bicycle use areas, like The Netherlands, there is usually no bus bike racks or any other provision for taking bicycles on busses. It would be impossible to satisfy demand. However, the regional train network is excellent, and large numbers of bikes are taken on trains – even during peak hours. However, in some cases, an extra fee is charged and not all peak hours trains allow bikes.

    A huge number of Dutch people ride bikes to and from railway stations and bus stops and park them there. What makes that work is adequate, secure bike parking at bus stops and train stations, and a local police force that takes bike theft seriously. Since Toronto’s not-so-finest don’t take bike theft seriously, this police failure to uphold the law seriously impairs multi-modal transit in Toronto.

    I see the future of multi-modal transit in Toronto using two basic methods. Neither of which involves bus bike racks. The first is folding bicycles. They can be taken on GO trains and all TTC vehicles, so there is seamless multi-modal transit.

    The second is Dutch-style secure bike parking. The proposal for Victoria [Park] Station and the bike station at Union Station are steps forward.

    Steve: I agree. Cycling infrastructure needs to be built, not patched on, and should be at a quantity and quality where your 95% availability target can be bettered. Of course, the TTC service is almost certainly not at 95%, and you are going to be late for some reason utterly unrelated to your bike at least once a month.

    Like

  13. I only knew about the change because I read it on Transit Toronto back in March or April. There’s been zero notices about the upcoming changes in the neighbourhood.

    Steve: According to the recommendations in the report, a copy was sent to all local Councillors.

    Like

  14. To Simon S-G:

    Yeah, you are spoiled right now with the 36 bus going down Overbrook. Meawhile, people are waiting for 25 minutes at Finch for a 36 and there is still nobody working on the sinkhole. You’re going to end up with a 3 block walk home from 2 routes coming from the local subway. Sounds like the rest of the city north of Eglinton.

    I’m curious as to the TTC’s wording on this though. How do they know the “change in weighted travel time shows the net benefits of a shorter walk on Wilson Heights are greater then the inconveniences of a longer walk to customers on Overbrook.” When do time differences = population numbers.

    Steve: For what it’s worth, the TTC takes the time changes for each group of riders and multiplies by the number of riders. There are many more people who “benefit” (a TTC term) from the change; therefore even if their benefit is small in magnitude, the collective benefit outweighs the effect on fewer people who may have a greater individual change in access times. This is actually a subtle flaw in the Service Standards.

    Like

  15. Hi Steve

    Thought I would drop you a note regarding 502/503 service. When I got to Bingham Loop this morning at 630am, everything was streetcars.. no buses at all. Operators said it would remain streetcars for at least six more weeks.

    Pete

    Steve: Yes, the work at Bingham has been deferred to 2010. If 502/503 go back to buses before then, it will be because the TTC can’t keep the streetcar fleet working.

    Like

  16. I’m not seeing the huge tragedy in the 104 re-routing. Only 2 stops are lost; one of which is a block from an existing stop. The only stop where there much inconvenience is the Honiton/Overbrook … and even then it’s only a 300 metre walk from Dufferin. In either case, people can just walk to the next stop.

    I’d have thought that the increased utility of the route would more than make up for any extra walking. With both directions now leading to a subway station, one can get twice as many buses to the subway (if one is willing to cross the street if the bus is coming). And I don’t see anything but detatched housing near the stops.

    Seems bizarre though that the Councillor wouldn’t have had a public meeting though.

    Like

  17. Here is a case in point, by going North on Wilson Heights there are NOT 1 stop missed but rather all the Northbound stops along Wilmington, Codsell, Searle and Combe all lose their North Bound bus stops, as well as the stops on Overbrooke, so they actually eliminate 5 stops, not one. . I use one of these stops to get to Finch to go to work. It’s only about 300m difference, but remember the next bus route East is Bathurst, the only connecting street between Wilmington and Bathurst is Codsell, so people who live East of Wilmington and West of Bathurst have a much longer walk, there are a lot of seniors in the area, many of whom no longer drive. Why don’t they leave the 105 on Wilson Heights Northbound, then use the busway going South. Seems like changing the 104 is a fix in search of a problem…..

    Like

  18. One more thing about 104, it effectively means that the Max and Anne Tannebaum CHAT high school loses it’s Northbound bus stop, so students going from the subway to the school will either need to walk from Dufferin, ride around the top of the loop (meaning the bus will be jammed at Finch) or even more students will need to be driven by parents.

    Like

  19. Whats all this fuss about moving the 104? I went to google maps and did some geometry, and counted 206 houses that will have a longer walk due to this change. 206 houses. The longest walks will be 300m. Just for fun I decided to go and measure how far it is where I live. I live in one of the 4 Assiniboine buildings at York U. The furthest of these buildings is 200m from the stop. Each of these buildings has at least 15 floors, with at least 10 units in each, some being 1 bedroom, some 2. Some married people live here so I’m going to assume each unit has at least 2 people in it (including married couples with children) That’s at 300 people, in just this one building, 200m away. Forget about this building, down at Murray Ross they have a very large building indeed, and I’ll bet good money it has just as many people in it, if not more, than your entire 206 house neighbourhood. If not, throw in the building down on fountainhead that is, like the building above, 300m from the nearest bus stop.

    If this is not prime NIMBYism (or YIMBYism) then I don’t know what is.

    Like

  20. Wogster wrote “Northbound stops along Wilmington, Codsell, Searle and Combe all lose their North Bound bus stops”

    Am I missing something here? There will still be service both nortbound and southbound along Wilmington. There would still be northbound stops on Wilmington at Codsell, Searle, Combe and Overbrook. In addition (if there is symmetry with the existing southbound stops) there will be new northbound stops on Wilmington at Cavotti, Evanston, Purdon, and Finch.

    How is this anything more than the elimination of 2 bus stops? Wogster’s comments don’t make any sense to me, and don’t jibe with the information in the report.

    Like

  21. Wogster: One more thing about 104, it effectively means that the Max and Anne Tannebaum CHAT high school loses it’s Northbound bus stop, so students going from the subway to the school will either need to walk from Dufferin, ride around the top of the loop (meaning the bus will be jammed at Finch) or even more students will need to be driven by parents.

    That stop won’t be going anywhere. The 104 routing will be Wilson Station – Faywood – Wilmington – Finch – Dufferin – Wilson Heights – Sheppard – Downsview Station. So the CHAT students can go to/from the subway in both direction as the school is just south of Overbrook on Wilmington.

    Steve: I think that there is a fairly overwhelming opinion here about what’s happening to the 104.

    Like

  22. The route 41 is a horrible mess these days. The construction at where the busway intersects Keele, and the one lane on St. Clair have resulted in this once fairly reliable route to bunch at all hours of the day, overcrowded vehicles and many, many short turns. And this was before York U started its fall semester. It’s gotten even worse now.

    I was hoping that with the service changes, that the evening service would be bumped up (the 24-minute service on a core grid route after 10PM is inexcusable), and that the route would be shifted to Rogers and Weston (at least the 41E will do this during peak periods). I bet the Keele North station construction will be a barrel of fun once it starts as well.

    Steve: I suggested that the 41 be rerouted, but the TTC chose to do this only with the 41E. They may move the 41 later.

    Like

  23. With respect to the 67 Pharmacy bus … the PDF states that the service change is for the PM Peak period – which, if I’m not mistaken is from 3-7pm. The 10 min FS service that they restored is only from 240 to 620. What happened to the last 40 minutes of the PM peak period?

    They have actually not really made any improved changes to the service at all if they are running a 17′ headway after 620pm … when there is defintely a need to continue with a 10′ headway. Before the change, the service was at a 12′ headway from 3pm until 640pm.

    It’s somewhat frustrating when the TTC didn’t really improve anything at all.

    Like

  24. Okay, so explain to me this, right now the 104 runs from Wilson Station, along Faywood and then up Wilmington, it makes 4 stops along Wilmington NORTHBOUND, loops along Overbrook and then along Finch and down Wilmington. Running this bus along Wilson Heights means that the stops on Wilmington one way or the other will not happen. One question that isn’t answered in the TTC document, is how the bus will get from Downsview back to Wilson, unless they simply reverse it, from Downsview they go up Wilson Heights, then along Dufferin, along Finch and back down Wilmington, it does however mean that one direction there is going to be some ugly left turns (Finch to Dufferin for example).

    Like

  25. Wogster: Okay, so explain to me this, right now the 104 runs from Wilson Station, along Faywood and then up Wilmington, it makes 4 stops along Wilmington NORTHBOUND, loops along Overbrook and then along Finch and down Wilmington. Running this bus along Wilson Heights means that the stops on Wilmington one way or the other will not happen. One question that isn’t answered in the TTC document, is how the bus will get from Downsview back to Wilson, unless they simply reverse it, from Downsview they go up Wilson Heights, then along Dufferin, along Finch and back down Wilmington, it does however mean that one direction there is going to be some ugly left turns (Finch to Dufferin for example).

    Wogster, did you even look at the report?? Here is a quote:

    The 104 FAYWOOD route would be changed to operate between Wilson Station and Downsview Station. From Wilson Station, northbound buses would operate on the regular routing on Faywood Boulevard, and Wilmington Avenue. Instead of turning left onto Overbrook Place, buses would continue north on Wilmington Avenue, west on Finch Avenue, south on Dufferin Street, then east on Kennard Avenue, south on Wilson Heights Boulevard, and west on Sheppard Avenue to enter into Downsview Station. From Downsview Station, buses would operate on a reverse routing to Wilson Station.

    Reverse routing means exactly that – a reverse rouing Downsview – Sheppard – Wilson Heights – Kennard – Dufferin – Finch – Wilmington – Faywood – Wilson Station.

    All of your arguments simply show that you never bothered to read the report or other people’s comments since this exact thing was mentioned at least half a dozen times by different people.

    Like

  26. Wogster writes “Running this bus along Wilson Heights means that the stops on Wilmington one way or the other will not happen.”

    It’s a simple bus route. Service goes in both direction. The report notes that “104 FAYWOOD route to be extended to operate to Downsview Station via Wilson Heights Boulevard in both directions”. It then goes on to say “From Wilson Station, northbound buses would operate on the regular routing on Faywood Boulevard, and Wilmington Avenue. Instead of turning left onto Overbrook Place, buses would continue north on Wilmington Avenue, west on Finch Avenue, south on Dufferin Street, then east on Kennard Avenue, south on Wilson Heights Boulevard, and west on Sheppard Avenue to enter into Downsview Station. From Downsview Station, buses would operate on a reverse routing to Wilson Station.”

    So there will be both nortbound and southbound service on Wilmington.

    The answer to how the buses will get from Downsview back to Wilson is simply that after dropping their passengers, they will turn around, and run the route in the other direction.

    I’d suggest reading the page on route 104 in the report, it’s quite clear; and I’d think (if you were near the middle of the line) the ability to be able to catch a both heading in either direction to get to the subway, would be a significant benefit, even if you did have to walk an extra stop.

    Steve: I think that we have beaten the issue of the 104 completely to death, and if this must continue, I advise the participants to set up their own website for the purpose. This is the last comment in this vein that I will publish.

    Like

  27. Steve in your info on the September service changes does it show why the subway is turning back at Wilson next weekend?

    Steve: That’s a temporary change that is not included in the service change notices for Board Periods.

    Like

Comments are closed.