Updated May 26, 2014:
The TTC has released a report on the removal of streetcar stops that will be discussed at the Board meeting on May 28.
The report claims that there are two goals in the elimination and consolidation of streetcar stops:
- Improving the consistency of stop placement to provide better safety so that stops are always at signalled intersections or those with pedestrian crosswalks, and
- Reducing travel time through stop elimination where existing stops are very close to each other.
The question of safety in stop placement is laudable, although it is odd that so few locations are actually proposed for removal. Of the 550 existing streetcar stops:
- 20 will be shifted from locations nearby traffic signals to be at the signalled intersection.
- 39 regular stops that are within 200m of a nearby stop will be removed, although some of these are still under negotiation with the local Councillors.
- Most Sunday stops (about 40) will be eliminated, and a few will be converted to regular stops.
The geographic distribution of stops to be eliminated is rather strange, and has an uneven feel to it at some locations. Oddly, there is discussion of removing the stops at Queen & Victoria, although this is still under review because of St. Michael’s Hospital, and King & Victoria westbound is on the hit list. However, the stops bothways at Dundas and Victoria (a location with problems compounded by traffic signals at Yonge and Victoria that prefer to thwart rather than aid transit) are not mentioned at all. Ooops! They are.
Broadview Station could become the only place where one can board a streetcar in this neighbourhood as the stop on Erindale is to be removed, and the southbound stop at Danforth is under review. Strangely enough, the sidewalks at both stops were just rebuilt with accessibility ramps. Also, there is no mention of the northbound stop. Also, this stop is not in service during the peak period already, and how its removal would contribute to any peak time savings is a mystery.
There is no discussion of the comparable situation at Main Station, and 506 Carlton is not even included in the table of affected weekday routes.
The stops bothways at Connaught & Queen disappear, and I must assume that Russell operators are now doomed to making that “convenient” walk down the street to a consolidated stop.
It is particularly amusing to see a Sunday stop listed for Kingston Road at Malvern, a location where there is no streetcar service on Sundays.
Other anomalies can be found in the comment from “nfitz” that follows below.
This report has been three months in the making (at least), originally promised for February, finally delivered in May. It has the feeling of a report that argues the case for “faster transit” rather more forcefully than the actual number of stops involved would suggest. Sunday stops have nothing to do with weekday transit speeds, and the actual number of stops removed is trivial ib proportion to the streetcar system.
If the TTC wants to argue “safety”, fine, but don’t drum up another of these bogus claims that transit service will somehow be improved. That’s a task for the quantity and quality of service on the street, and the little matter of line management.
I cannot help remembering a report written years ago by a junior planner about the placement of all-night services that showed a hopeless lack of geographical knowledge of the city including basic obstacles like valleys, rivers and ponds to crow-fly walking distances.
If we were really talking about a major change in the philosophy of stop placement, and were looking at its effect not just on streetcars but also for buses, I might take this report seriously. Meanwhile, this is another of those “we know best” TTC reports that tries to justify a new policy with an oversold rationale.
The original article from May 9, 2014 follows the break.
In the preparation for introducing the low-floor streetcars, the TTC is modifying the sidewalks at stops to include a curb cut for easy wheelchair access to the pavement. This has a side effect in telling us where the TTC plans to eliminate stops because they are thought to be too close together, or they pose some operational problem for the longer cars, or they are Sunday Stops.
Back in February 2014, there was supposed to be a report to the TTC Board about the process for consultation on this, but the report has been delayed until the meeting at the end of May. Meanwhile, work has already begun.
Recently, the TTC began to consult with local councillors about the changes, but this has not been well-received in some quarters thanks to the “consultation” coming after the fact in a tradition unhappily common at the TTC.
Some stops are certainly dubiously close to others and their existence can often be traced to conditions that existed decades ago when the stop was established. However, removing a stop does represent a change for riders who use it and at the very least they should be asked.
Another odd thing is that the TTC has not actually taken any stops out of service yet, and they are only doing the sidewalk modifications at this time. I suspect there would be much louder objections if stops just began to disappear without notice.
What will now happen is that people will be told they have lost their stops “for the new streetcars”, yet another way to piss people off about the new cars (as if wider headways and the almost certain continuation of ineffective route management won’t be enough).
The TTC talks a good line about “customer service” and “working with communities” at the top level, but quite literally on the street, the story is quite different.
Steve Munro 
The streetcar stops removed on Lake Shore at Thirty-Ninth Street (both directions) were removed without consultation with the Councillor, let alone the public. It was a surprise to everybody. Sounds like one of those “we know what we’re going to do before we do it, and we hope you like it, because we’re going to do it regardless” projects.
The funny thing is that there are other stops on Lake Shore, such as Fifteenth Street both directions and Summerhill eastbound, which have had the nice access ramp with bathmat installed. These are the most likely stops to be removed along Lake Shore if any kind of further stop removal programme is implemented.
The Councillor’s office told me that the removed Thirty-Night Street stops, as well as the Thirty-Seventh Street stops, were “lightly used”. I have requested usage counts from the Councillor’s office as well as the TTC, and have gotten nothing. It makes me wonder if there has been anything more sophisticated than someone driving out to Long Branch, eyeballing the stops, and saying, “heck, I don’t see anyone–must be unused”. The Thirty-Seventh Street stop is the one to get to No Frills and Rexall, and soon the LCBO and Dollarama. Thirty-Seventh is definitely well-used at present, and will get more used in the future.
As far as Thirty-Ninth goes, both streetcars and the current shuttle buses will usually stop westbound when I pull the cord at the “Next stop Thirty-Ninth Street” announcement. Usually one or two other people get off with me. It’s closer for many people (though you have to jaywalk across Lake Shore) and it avoids the streetcar offloading “platform” at Long Branch loop, which is basically mud with a bit of ashphalt between open tracks, just at the entrance to the loop.
LikeLike
What sorts of stops are being removed? Are we talking stops like Bond Street (Sunday stop for the 505) or Victoria Street (normal stop for the 501)?
Also.. given you’re the local streetcar historian and an octogenarian maybe you have insight into something. Any idea why Neville Loop doesn’t have its own stop instead picking up on the opposite side of the street?
Steve: I am only a sexagenarian.
Stops that are being removed fall generally into three classes: Sunday stops, closely-spaced stops where there is a minor stop between major ones, and stops where the larger cars might create operational problems.
On Broadview, the ones so far are the pair both ways at Mount Stephen Street, the pair at Simpson (NB is a Sunday stop, SB was a regular stop that served the now-demolished Don Jail), and oddly enough the stop northbound north of Queen which was added for the Don Mills Night Bus, but is used by the daytime service too and is a handy connection point for west-to-north transfers.
As for Neville Loop, the original loop was much tighter, and it did not have a loading area. The first westbound stop has always been on the north side of Queen opposite the loop.
LikeLike
I think there are some stops that should be removed and there need not be extensive consultation before hand if reasonable standards and justification can be pointed to to justify their removal. I think the stop spacing as proposed for Queen Street was quite reasonable, even though some people will complain about the removal of stops at Victoria Street, a mere 90 metres from Yonge.
I certainly do agree the TTC should provide some advance notice and public justification instead of surprising its customers, as any customer service-oriented organization should be doing.
LikeLike
I still don’t really understand the elimination of Sunday stops. Then again, maybe it’s just a bit of the “Well it’s tradition” attitude that I sometimes have.
Ed already beat me to it, but the stops at Thirty-Ninth Street (the eastbound and westbound stops) in Long Branch have been eliminated.
I was actually not surprised when they eliminated the stops. They are close to both Long Branch Loop and Thirty-Seventh St. I normally did not see many (if any) use either stop. I think this may have been more of a safety issue as there are no lights for crossing the street. And more people always seemed to get on/off at Long Branch Loop or Thirty-Ninth St. in my experience anyway.
But I do concur that the current operation for unloading passengers at Long Branch is a disgrace. This never used to be the case and I never understood why the TTC does this.
Steve: This is related to a truly uncivil attitude among (some) TTC drivers that they “deserve” a private break over in the back corner of the loop without having to pull around onto the platform. What is even more disgraceful is that the TTC has done nothing about the condition of that unofficial “stop” nor of a similar situation with an ad hoc stop at Humber Loop, even though they have been told about it. We hear about “safety” all the time, but they are strangely blind to it on occasion, not to mention the basic issue of “customer convenience”.
LikeLike
Also the last EB stop at Neville used to always be right at the entrance to the loop, however many years ago a resident with ‘connections” living on Neville Park (South) complained he was blocked from coming out to Queen by streetcars waiting to enter the loop, so the stop was moved west back to Neville South. (Ironically this guy moved the next year but TTC kept the stop where it is). Until a few years ago there was a stop (pole) right in the loop for 143 buses only. This went away after someone got hit by either streetcar or bus so the stop was removed and No Trespassing signs put up for the entire loop. As Steve pointed out, the WB stop has always been in front of the convenience store, north side of Queen opposite the loop.
LikeLike
Most of these stops ought to be removed because the streetcar system is slow enough as it is, the Victoria/Queen stop might be an exception because of the hospital but that is the only exception we should be making. I assume that disabled people who are incapable of walking to a stop a few hundred meters away are incapable of taking transit at all. Why does the political process always seem to favor too many stops? This is especially bad on the Eglinton LRT with Chaplin and Oakwood, given the very high cost of building underground stations. These will be like Rosedale, Summerhill, Chester, Old Mill, Bessarion, Ellesmere – underused stops which waste money to build and only slow the trains down.
Steve: I would have a tad more faith with your argument if the TTC would also go after closely spaced stops on bus routes claiming that the service would be faster without them. The argument seems to be tailored to the specific situation of streetcars, not the general one of transit stop spacing. As for Chaplin and Oakwood, the former exists because, originally, this was to be an extraction shaft for the TBMs, and the latter because the Minister said it would be so, although a development is proposed for this location that specifically arose because of the station. Meanwhile, east of Yonge where there is a lot of demand at the local bus stops (a bus leaving Eglinton Station can be half-empty by the time it reaches Bayview), there is only a stop at Mt. Pleasant, and some folks would deny us even that one. The people who do this tend to be a bit short on local knowledge, good at counting beans, not people.
LikeLike
Neville Loop’s main concern is the track greaser causing slip/trip/falls. This will be moot with the new cars and the removal of the greaser. Thirty-Ninth was an issue with the width of the new island and the lane for Brown’s Line. It’s possible that the Broadview/Queen N/B being removed is for preparation of the new loop, as well as traffic back up into intersection but just a guess. Most Sunday stops are no longer used for their original purpose (church) and as Steve said are usually very close to regular stops.
I still find it ironic that they are going to have larger headways with the new streetcars yet they hold a crushed load less than an ALRV according to TTC numbers. The LFLRV is still a beautiful streetcar to both look at and ride in.
Steve: The important number is the service design number. The LFLRV standard is 130, the ALRV standard is 108 and the CLRV standard is 74. This presumes that the TTC has enough cars to actually field this good a service and that headway management is good enough that we don’t have one full car followed by an empty one.
LikeLike
The TTC really needs to publish a formal list of stops along each route, and then note the ones retained and the ones being deleted, along with posting something highly visible at each stop that will be deleted at least a couple of months before service is stopped.
The notion of having special Sunday stops makes sense as long as they are serving a known load (a church for instance on Sunday), however, other than that it is hard to see why more stops would be supported. Stops for breaks make little sense, and if required should be taken at a point where passengers can load and unload or after they have unloaded. Either discipline the issue, or have separate load and unload platforms and a spot to stop between. This might help with headway management, if drivers were told when they needed to leave it.
LikeLike
The distance from Long Branch loop to 37th St. (500m, according to google maps) is the same as the distance from Burlington St. to Legion Rd. But they took the stop at 39th St. out and rebuilt the stop at Louisa St. And the “no lights to cross the street” is a complete red-herring, since Louisa St. doesn’t have them either.
Empirically speaking, until they took the stop out there was almost always someone waiting there in the morning as I walked by to the GO station, so it certainly wasn’t disused.
And is 500m stop spacing really acceptable for local transit? That’s further apart than the subway stations are downtown. Plus, Yonge to University is 600m along Queen and that has 3 stops. We obviously need to take out York St. (and maybe Bay)!
(Eastbound 31st St. to 27th St. is 450m, but the TTC rebuilt the stop at 28th St. anyway, despite no light, and likewise rebuilt 29th St. westbound between 26th and 30th.)
LikeLike
It would be good to have ridership numbers, but I bet there’s nothing.
Also, Long Branch loop requires crossing Lake Shore and then the slip ramp from Brown’s Line and then back fifty metres or so to the loop. It’s a very inconvenient stop if heading eastbound. Lake Shore has stops every second or third street (First, Third, Fifth, Seventh, Tenth, Thirteenth, Fifteenth, Kipling, ….) so that anyone walking to Lake Shore from the residential streets needs to go at most one block along Lake Shore to get to the stop. I now have to either walk three blocks east from Fortieth (since the entrance to the Thirty-Seventh Street stop is at the very east end of the platform, and the rest of the length of the platform is fenced off), or I can walk a short block east, then wait for the light to cross Lake Shore, then make my way across the ramp for Brown’s line to westbound Lake Shore, then walk along the bus stop. Hopefully the streetcar has not left by this time.
No, there would be plenty of road space even after a widened platform. They did take away the bicycle lanes westbound at the Thirty-Seventh stop. If we’re talking issues with platform width, how about westbound at Louisa? There’s one fairly narrow lane outside the stop. It was always tight riding a bicycle along there; now you have to take the lane because there’s simply no room for a bicycle and a car. Also, they cut back the curb eastbound at Park Lawn to keep two lanes of traffic on the outside of the island.
LikeLike
Sunday stops need to go! Many of them are literally 50m or closer to other stops and in some cases the church ostensibly being serviced by the stop has long packed up and gone!
I note that many operators already ignore the Sunday stops and pretend they don’t exist anyway.
Steve: The stops on Roncesvalles were removed as part of the street’s reconstruction, but in that case every stop included a sidewalk extension out to the car tracks. That’s an “all or nothing” design and the Sunday stops really were not required.
LikeLike
Actually, the TTC made a half-hearted attempt to put in some asphalt down around where the streetcars stop. I don’t mind employees taking breaks, but it is overdone at Long Branch in my opinion.
Steve: I was thinking also of the eastbound 501 stop at Humber used by the temporarily cut-back service.
No it does not. There is a set of lights right there. I know I use the Loop when I take the TTC. You don’t need to cross the slip ramp at Brown’s Line.
Like I said, in my experience I don’t see the loss of at stop at Thirty-Ninth Street as being a big deal. Then again I never used the either of the stops at Thirty-Ninth. If you get the numbers from the TTC I hope you let us know – I am interested in just how many people actually used the stop. Maybe the TTC should have kept it.
As I stated above, that’s why I am interested in the numbers for the stop. My experience was that it was lightly used (although perhaps higher in the rush hour), but if most people in the area used 37th St. or Long Branch Loop then it is a case of demand.
And it’s really not a 500m difference, but a 250m difference. If you stand exactly halfway between both stops then you would only be 250m away from either stop, not 500m. I am guessing that’s how the TTC looks at it. And I find some of the streetcar stops are widely separated – more say than for some bus routes. I do wonder how the TTC decides to put stops, as sometimes they can seem quite a distance apart, while other times (as in the example of 37th St. vs. 39th St. they seem close together.)
LikeLike
I think it’s perfectly reasonable for the TTC to start modifying the certain-to-survive stops now and hold off until a decision has been made (after consultation) on the uncertain stops. Just because a stop isn’t being modified now doesn’t mean it will be deleted for sure.
Steve: Except that the TTC has a long history of acting first and asking later. Why make the work needlessly more expensive as a one-of job rather than integrating it with overall pavement renewal? Nothing prevented the TTC from talking to the Councillors before this started.
LikeLike
Steve, is global warming real?
I am a global warming skeptic. However, I do support mass transit because it reduces gridlock on roads and is more efficient in transporting people.
Steve: Although 2014 is an unusual year because we had a particularly bad winter, everyone is used to the now-typical spring with the trees in leaf by late April. I have lots of photographs taken a few decades back when the greenery routinely arrived in mid-to-late May. It’s real.
LikeLike
The good thing about removing some streetcar stops is that it can reduce operating costs. This means higher cost recovery fare ratio.
Steve: Unless enough stops are removed to save the equivalent of one headway, there will be no saving in operating costs. This is a red herring.
It’s amusing that we are willing to take out stops and make people walk further to transit, but setting up real transit priority signalling is a non-starter because it might hurt the motorists.
LikeLike
This past Tuesday I was on the College streetcar eastbound. The car stopped at a red light where there was a Sunday stop, and two passengers were waiting. It was east of Ossington, in Little Italy, if I am not mistaken. The driver pointed this out, but accepted them on. Because of the conversation, I would have not noticed anything particular.
Perhaps this Sunday stop should be upgraded to a regular stop? It is at a stoplight intersection in a pedestrian-dense area, after all.
I am personally unhappy to hear of wholesale stop eliminations. My concern is better customer/passenger/public service. If a particular stop is lightly used, so what? The streetcar or bus will likely just pass by without stopping.
I realise that there may be implications, such as disabled accessibility and so on, but I believe that common sense should prevail.
LikeLike
I’ve got a classic cartoon about “consulting the public” – an industrial size ear cleaner in use with an older guy, going right through and well out the other ear. And it does often smell that way, including with the Gardiner Excessway repairs, which loomed out of nowhere to be a Great Crisis, and so no consideration of transit instead, or demolition, or tolls, just a status quo gifting to the often-out-of-town cars, and it was clear that in other areas/modes, public safety isn’t important, eg. the decades of crash pattern on the east-west core roads, with no response for safety.
But sometimes, there is too much parochialism, one eg. being a transit stop at the base of Major St. near the top of Augusta, which was moved c. 20 years ago for the sake of a hospital expansion which didn’t occur. So move the stop to Augusta, and trim out the stop at Borden St., though Richard Gilbert will object.
Steve: Richard Gilbert prefers rapid transit to streetcars, and so he should have little objection even if that’s his local stop on the 506. [For the benefit of readers, Gilbert is a former member of City Council and a consultant on transport and planning matters.]
LikeLike
I think the key question, as a rider, is:
How does this benefit riders?
I can think of some possible benefits:
1. Reduced running time.
2. More frequent service (due to 1)
3. Lower fares if not 1 or 2.
For 1., the “increased speed” has to be obvious and on the schedule. I would suggest that a saving of 1 to 2 minutes of running time per kilometre of route would be the minimum to offset the added walking distance and time the unlucky users of the removed stops will experience. This means that running times, say from Yonge to Roncesvalles, would drop by 5 to 10 minutes. Will we see this?
The “stops should be further apart” theory is strongly pushed by Jarrett Walker (humantransit.org). However, he makes it clear that, in return for more widely-separated stops, we should have both faster and more frequent operations. This ties into my point 2. Again, will we see this with the TTC’s proposal?
My suggestion number 3 is facetious, of course. However, I don’t think it’s any less realistic than 1 or 2. Which means that I don’t want stops taken away (even the ones I am unlikely to ever use). Because if stops are taken away, riders have, on average, less convenient access to service that hasn’t improved.
In the time it takes me to walk from home to my “still nearby” stop at Thirty Seventh Street (some street signs don’t have a dash), I can get in my car, and be on the 427 by Dundas Street. By the time the streetcar comes, I can have driven any number of local useful places. Taking away “unused” or “too close” stops is not the way to encourage more transit ridership.
As Steve mentions above, look at the number of stops on bus routes. For example, the south end of Islington 37 stops at pretty much every second minor street, traffic light or not. Is the TTC seriously thinking about removing half of all suburban bus route stops? Because that’s what it’s going to amount to.
LikeLike
Is it possible to be a conservative and support LRTs in Toronto?
Steve: That depends on whether by “conservative” you mean someone who thoughtfully looks at stewardship of the public purse in providing needed services effectively, or simply of spending as little as possible while making populist claims to support “the taxpayer” and “the middle class”.
LikeLike
Not only that, but they extended the eastbound death-trap at Legion Road and located the Park Lawn stop at an awkward place. I was twice almost killed this winter at Legion Road, once by a fishtailing TTC shuttle bus. I have an ongoing correspondence with the local Councillor’s office and the TTC on this situation. Both the Legion Road and Louisa St. stops are on curves: the eastbound Legion Road one is on the outside of the curved tracks, so that skidding vehicles can easily slide onto the platform. It’s an accident waiting to happen, which I recognised very soon after moving here. I’m not sure what the solution is, perhaps convert three stops into one, but it’s bound to be unpopular.
At all three stops, there is no room for bike lanes. And at Louisa, the narrow uneven north sidewalk, on the outside of the curve, is right at the curb, so pedestrians are thoroughly splashed on wet days, thanks to the generous potholes and speeding cars. One icy day I saw an elderly woman holding up the traffic as she tried to slowly make way on the roadway (the slanting sidewalk was covered in ice, no doubt thanks to the splashing effect).
As for stops and their spacing, I note that in Europe they seem to be further apart than in Toronto.
LikeLike
Steve said: Why make the work needlessly more expensive as a one-of job rather than integrating it with overall pavement renewal?
My response: Why wait? Are you sure that there are planned resurfacing projects scheduled to occur before the new streetcars start on each route? Maybe the TTC wants to minimise the likelihood of having to operate new streetcars with unmodified stops, so they get as much work out of the way as soon as possible.
If we are witnessing that the TTC has been removing stops, then I agree with you that this is unacceptable. But from what I’ve read from your blog post (and I’ve read it multiple times), this is not what’s happening.
Steve: There is a related issue here. A report on the consultation process was supposed to come to the TTC Board in February, but for some reason was delayed until May. However, with work underway, this raises the spectre of past situations where the TTC fails to consult on changes, and then has to be forced to live up to its claims of sensitivity to communities. What can possibly prevented publication of the report and launch of consultations before this work began?
LikeLike
Hi Steve,
Do you think any of the stop eliminations will have a noticeable impact on run times?
Steve: A small amount (Sunday stops contribute nothing for weekday operations), not enough to allow reduction in headways or change in assigned vehicles per route.
LikeLike
You mean the crossing by the bus exit for the loop? That’s a much further walk and means doubling back if coming from the east. I’m coming from Fortieth Street, and the nearest and most reasonable crossing to get to both the buses and streetcars is at the Brown’s Line ramp. In that case, I do indeed have to cross the south-to-west slip ramp to access the loop.
The other pedestrian crossing, related to the bus exits, is well west of both the bus and streetcar stops in the loop. (There’s no pedestrian crossing at the eastbound bus exits. I guess I could make a dash and hope for the best if a bus is exiting … but that surely is more dangerous than, say, accessing a streetcar safety island even if there isn’t a traffic signal there.)
LikeLike
I would note that the LRTs in Alberta (Calgary and Edmonton) were supported by PC governments and have received on-going support. I would say that a good PC, who was actually thinking in terms of governance as opposed to electioneering, would be pro LRT and BRT.
In my view (and I am conservative, in the Joe Clark tradition) good parties should propose the best solution, and run on it, and try to convince the voter to do the push for the best solution. A good conservative should be trying to build what is really required, not some dream about what might be if only we just did this, or solving a problem not likely to emerge for decades. To me that would mean a Don Mills subway, building it from the CNE to Eglinton. Do not build the west side as long as Spadina has reasonable capacity. LRT in Scarborough, and for the Yonge extension, except as required to increase the ability to turn trains at the terminus. For a good conservative transit platform you could add improvements to GO including an increase to say 8 trains per hour at peak on Lakeshore, completing the Finch West and Cross-Town LRTs.
Reducing the ambition, and focusing on what is really required, and making it into a deliverable plan is the type of thing that a good conservative government should be about. However Mr. Hudak seems to be focused on what the voters “want”.
LikeLike
It seems to me that the TTC is proposing this “stop rationalization” because it aligns with some corporate objectives and goals. This could be fine where the corporate objectives align with the interests of riders. Where they don’t align, riders are gives some semi-plausible explanation of the benefits they will see, and the Commission hopes that no awkward questions will be asked.
Remember a Canada Post executive telling us how glad seniors will be for the chance to get some fresh air and exercise and social interactions by going to a community mailbox after their home delivery is stopped? I guess we can get the same thing from the TTC and from armchair internet transit planners for stop rationalization.
“Suck it up buttercup, you can walk another block.” Why, yes, I certainly can. I have sometimes walked as far as Kipling or Islington or Royal York, by choice. But why should I always have to walk another block or two to get to a transit stop, and not by choice either? Will it build my character? Will I get the benefit of exercise? No: I want to know why you are proposing to inconvenience me, with no obvious benefit to me (or even to other riders whose stops are not being removed).
“It’s for the greater good of all riders.” Yeah, if running times are actually reduced. Which needs to be demonstrated, rather than speculated upon. I will believe it when new schedules come out and the service summary shows reduced running times on routes with removed stops. I don’t care if Andy B. himself promises that running times will be dropped. I want to see it actually happen. (And I am willing to bet that it won’t happen, despite predictions that it
willwellmightdefinitely maybe could, if the stars align, oops we need more layover time, so sorry, no.Both the “suck it up” and the “greater good” arguments, of course, can apply to being thrown off a short-turned bus or streetcar and watching the next two vehicles short-turn as well; or standing at the stop and watching streetcars or buses or subways come in jammed so full you can’t get on. You should suck it up, because it’s for the greater good. (I am being sarcastic here.)
LikeLike
Is the only unfunded capital maintenance for streetcars the modification of platform heights for St. Clair?
Steve: The platforms on St. Clair are being revised as part of the overall preparation for the new fleet. When they were built, the height needed to mate with the accessibility ramp was not known.
The unfunded projects are listed in the 2014 Capital Budget on the last page in Appendix D. The streetcar related projects are:
60 additional LFLRVs
Surface track
Traction power (some of this relates to the subway)
I have been advised by the TTC that projects will prioritized so that any critical work now in the unfunded list is swapped out to ensure that the work gets done. Some of this year’s major track repairs are an example.
LikeLike
Wheelchairs and strollers accessing the streetcars would be a disaster as drivers often fail to stop and passengers often fail to wait for all vehicles to stop (and a lot even fail to check) as they assume that they have the right of way when the streetcar doors are open which they do. At least if you are on your feet, you can get out of the way but wheelchairs and babies in strollers will not get out of the way and sooner or later some tragedies will happen. To prevent the same, streetcar rights of ways are a must. Even one baby killed is one too many. Do the right thing – take off the patios, vendors, and outdoor markets on streetcar roads (patios, etc on small side roads are okay) and wherever possible make the right of way (especially around stops).
Steve: This sort of hyperbole is irresponsible. Most streetcar routes in Toronto operate on streets with only a 66 foot right-of-way and there is no space to be reclaimed from patios, vendors, etc., for an extra lane.
LikeLike
I don’t believe that the Eglinton Crosstown underground stop spacing is comparable to streetcar stop spacing.
I believe even the closest stops on Eglinton are 600m apart, whereas some streetcar stops are <100m apart. The later seems unreasonably close to me, whereas Eglinton seems perfectly reasonable.
Steve: People are using specific cases of closely-spaced stops such as the Victoria/Yonge pair on King and Queen, but there are other locations that are not quite so close together. In the case of Queen & Victoria, I would love to see a transit priority signal that was ALWAYS green for the streetcars so that they would not have to stop and would actually benefit if the carstops here are removed. Otherwise, they might as well open their doors anyhow.
Mt. Pleasant should definitely stay. It will be a very well used station (and already is on the current bus line), it is surrounded by high density apartment buildings, some offices and retail. It's 600m from Yonge and 1.1km from Bayview, which is very reasonable.
Steve: Not to mention two schools that generate significant transit traffic, especially Northern Secondary. Of course, these trips are not “regional” and so are of little interest to Metrolinx.
I'm personally hoping that the north/south Mt Pleasant buses are unified with the Mt Pleasant-Jarvis express bus which would connect to the Crosstown station.
LikeLike
Moaz: Personally I think that “the right thing” in a pedestrian-dominated downtown area is to build-out curb bulbs and bring the curb out to the streetcars wherever possible.
In Roncesvalles they have done it by blending the bulbs with the platforms and bike lenses. They built out the corners on Kingston Road and built wider and more prominent platforms on Bathurst. Perhaps in wider roads (like Bathurst) the bulbs can be blended with speed tables, allowing cars to move past (e.g. to make right turns) but making it clear that this is a space for motorists to slow down and watch for non-motorists, and for non motorists to move carefully.
Cheers, Moaz
LikeLike
Malcolm N, after listing opinions on what transit projects ought to be in our best interest sounding like something I would have said, went on to say:
Exactly. I tend to be fiscally conservative, but see none of this in Hudak, so I could never support him.
Sadly, Bob Patrick is not alone in wondering if a conservative-minded person can support LRT. Back when the council debates on affirming the Transit City lines was on, while waiting to enter after the lunch break, I got into a discussion relating the political spectrum and LRT support. On individual was very surprised that someone like myself (see this page on 1997) could be pro-LRT. Steve said it best:
LikeLike
The sad thing is that conservatives should by and large be in support of LRT where BRT will not serve well, and have to be shown that subway cannot be reasonably be avoided, there being no reasonable viable alternative (dragged kicking and screaming). Lougheed was crucial in Alberta, and he was a real solid smart conservative.
I hope that a majority government (whoever) will govern based looking for the least investment and operating expense for the biggest impact. Build what you really need, allow for what you will likely need. Ontario needs fiscal conservatism, not pandering (regardless of party).
LikeLike
One has to remember that the new “CONSERVATIVE” party has been taken over by right wing fanatics who whorship money above all else. The party was once the “Progressive Conservative” with the emphasis on Progressive. Ever since the former reform part took over the PC they are no longer progressive. They are the Reform-a-Tories.
LikeLike
Here Robert I must say I differ. If they worshiped money above all else they would resist subway to the point of insanity. There would be no support for a Scarborough, or Yonge subway, or the west side of the DRL etc.
The question here is the same amongst the parties with regards to transit. What do I need to say in order to win the election. What plan will hold my base, and attract enough marginal voters to put me over the top. The difference is who the marginal voter might be for them.
Rob Ford had the formula “Subway, subway, subway”. This seemed to attract the most voters who do not want to consider the underlying issues. Of course electrified GO service, High Speed Rail, Scarborough subway demonstrate essentially the same thing with the current government.
The plans the parties with regards to transit at this juncture are in essence not considered plans with regards to what will provide the best service, but what will get members elected.
Toronto really needs to have government that will take the issue on in a real manner, detail oriented, travel pattern driven manner. City candidates should be focused on management of existing services, and how to incrementally improve them. The province needs to focused on doable projects, and hold the line when a plan is agreed.
LikeLike
<blockquote>Malcolm N says:
“Here Robert I must say I differ. If they worshiped money above all else they would resist subway to the point of insanity. There would be no support for a Scarborough, or Yonge subway, or the west side of the DRL etc.”
I should have said money and power. They have no problem spending other people’s money to make money for them selves and have no problem taking away someone’s good paying job to make more money for the friends.
LikeLike
Steve, “there is no space to be reclaimed from patios, vendors, etc., for an extra lane.”
Are you kidding me? You have never seen scores and scores of patios taking up precious space on King St? It is difficult to walk on King St West on Friday nights and Saturday nights because it is so crowded and so even if this space is not to used build safer stops and/or right of way for streetcars, it is necessary to be reclaimed for pedestrians. Often I have to walk on the actual road when I am walking there late at night because the patios leave little room for walking and it’s not safe to walk on the road. This is also a problem on parts of Queen St between John and Spadina and this space must be reclaimed for pedestrians if not streetcars / streetcar stops. So, Steve I assume that you have never seen these patios because I trust you to be an honest person.
Steve: Queen east of Spadina is unusually wide. What you propose must be applicable to the lion’s share of the route, not just in a few cherry-picked locations. Try Queen and Yonge, northeast corner, for starters. Yes, the patios take up a lot of space on parts of King, but there is not enough room for an extra lane, even leaving aside the weaving needed to handle stops in each direction.
Draw me a nice diagram showing how you would fit in your design, and then I will take you seriously.
LikeLike
Stop consolidation is a common practice among North American transit agencies, and it is well overdue on the TTC system.
The TTC has set out a series of steps they will take when looking at which stops to remove, and I do not think this warrants a community meeting for each stop.
Of course people are going to say they don’t want a stop removed, and sometimes the planners have to make decisions for the benefit of the riders as a whole.
If I were the TTC, I would use this stop consolidation chance as a way to remove some stops on the Spadina streetcar, and really make it a faster north-south travel option.
And hopefully we will see the removal of pointless stops like the one at Broadview after the streetcars pull out of the station.
Steve: Actually the TTC has NOT set out a series of steps for stop removal. The report on this issue was supposed to come to the Board in February, but it’s now allegedly planned for May.
As for stops on Spadina, there were huge fights to get stops added to what the TTC originally pitched as an express line from Bloor to proposed developments at the railways lands. And the stop at Broadview Station does double duty as an off-hours stop when the subway is closed, and as a hoped-for attraction to discourage people from just walking into the subway station.
Everyone seems to have the pet stops they want removed, usually because they are seen as harming “my” trip with no relationship to trips taken by “others”.
LikeLike
If the PCs get in, more than a few streetcar stops will disappear.
The Scarborough subway will get built. All other projects will be stopped or vastly downgraded. Remember what Mike Harris did? There would have been an Eglinton subway line running for years by now if not for him. The Eglinton LRT has a chance this time since it is well underway but all other bets are off.
LikeLike
I am not convinced that subway was the right answer in Harris’ day, so that did not bother me, and Ontario clearly had money problems, much like today. I am not convinced that Streetcar stops would disappear, as 1-this is a local issue, 2-I am not convinced that Hudak has a transit policy.
Governments have a strange habit of altering their heading a little once elected, and actually confronting the situation and being accosted by constituents and the media about real problems. Harris had a plan & a mission, I am not convinced Hudak does.
Steve: The absence of a plan never stopped politicians from “taking bold actions” even if their path led off of a cliff.
LikeLike
Did the original Spadina Streetcar (earlier in the century) have the same stop locations as today?
Steve: Considering that this line closed in the year I was born (1948), that’s not easy for me to answer personally. However, I can definitely say that there were a stops between Dundas and Harbord (which had streetcar service until 1966 provided by the Harbord car) at locations other than the arterials including safety islands at or near Baldwin. Stops on the Spadina bus were almost certainly at the same locations as the streetcar stops, and that bus had many stops that advocates of “express” operation here would tear out.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t be so sure. Something about the way that Hudak is describing the “east-west express subway” is making me wonder if the real goal is to target the Queen streetcar rather than to target the lack of north-south subway capacity in Toronto.
Steve: For a leader whose “million jobs” plan starts with firing 100k in the public sector, I wouldn’t give him credit for thinking at such a fine-grained level as the Queen car.
LikeLike