The Evolution of Streetcar Service from 1980 to 2016

Transit service on many of Toronto’s streetcar lines has declined over past decades and, with it, riders’ faith in and love for this mode. Unreliable, crowded service is considered the norm for streetcar routes, and this leads to calls to “improve” service with buses.

The historical context for this decline is worth repeating in the context of current debates over how Toronto should provide transit service to the growing population in its dense “old” city where most of the streetcar lines run.

When the TTC decided in late 1972, at the urging of City Council, to reverse its long-standing plans to eliminate streetcars by 1980 (when the Queen Subway would take over as the trunk route through the core), the level of service on streetcar lines was substantially better than it is on most routes today. Any comparison of streetcars versus buses faced the prospect of a very large fleet of buses on very frequent headways roaring back and forth on all major streets.

Service in 1980 (when the system was originally planned for conversion) was substantially the same as in 1972, and for the purpose of this article, that date is our starting point.

Ten years later, in 1990, little had changed, but the City’s transit demand was about to fall off a cliff thanks to a recession. During this period, TTC lost much riding on its network including the subway with annual travel dropping by 20% overall. It would take a decade to climb back from that, but various factors permanently “reset” the quality of service on streetcar routes:

  • During the recession, service was cut across the board, and this led to a reduction in the size of fleet required to serve the network.
  • In anticipation of the 510 Spadina line opening, the TTC had rebuilt a group of PCC streetcars, but these were not actually needed for the 509/510 Harbourfront/Spadina services by the time Spadina opened. “Surplus” cars thanks to the recession-era service cuts were available to operate the new routes.
  • Since 1996, any service changes have been  made within the available fleet, a situation compounded by declining reliability of the old cars and the anticipation of a new fleet “soon”.
  • By 2016, the fleet was not large enough to serve all routes, and bus substitutions became common.

Some of the decline in demand on streetcar routes came from changing demographics and shifting job locations. Old industrial areas transformed into residential clusters, and the traffic formerly attracted to them by jobs disappeared. Meanwhile, the city’s population density fell in areas where gentrification brought smaller families to the houses.

The city’s population is now growing again, although the rate is not equal for all areas. Liberty Village and the St. Lawrence neighbourhood are well known, visible growth areas, but growth is now spreading out from both the King Street corridor and moving further away from the subway lines. This creates pressure on the surface routes in what the City’s Planners call the “shoulders” of downtown.

As the population and transit demand have rebounded, the TTC has not kept pace.

The changes in service levels are summarized in the following spreadsheet:

Streetcar_Services_1980_To_2016 [pdf]

510 Bathurst: In 1980, this route had 24 cars/hour during the AM peak period, but by 2006 this had dropped by 50% to 12. In November 2016, with buses on the route, there were 20 vehicles per hour, and with the recent reintroduction of streetcars, the peak service was 10.6 ALRVs/hour, equivalent to about 16 CLRVs. Current service is about 1/3 less than it was in 1980.

506 Carlton: In 1980, this route  had 20 streetcars/hour at peak, but by 2016 this was down to 13.8.

505 Dundas: In 1980, service on this route had two branches, one of which terminated at Church after City Hall Loop was replaced by the Eaton Centre. On the western portion of the route, there were 27 cars per hour, while to the east there were 15 (services on the two branches were not at the same level). By 2016, this was down to 10.3. [Corrected]

504 King: This route, thanks to the developments along its length, has managed to retain its service over the years at the expense of other routes. In 1980, there were 25.2 cars per hour over the full route between Broadview and Dundas West Stations with a few trippers that came east only to Church Street. Despite budget cuts in 1996 that reduced service to 16.4 cars/hour at peak, the route came back to 30 cars/hour by 2006. Service is now provided by a mixture of King cars on the full route (15/hour), 514 Cherry cars between Sumach and Dufferin (7.5/hour), and some trippers between Roncesvalles and Broadview. Some 504 King runs operate with ALRVs and most 514 Cherry cars are Flexitys.

501 Queen/507 Long Branch: In 1980, the Queen and Long Branch services operated separately with 24.5 cars/hour on Queen and 8.9 cars/hour on Long Branch at peak. By 1990, the Queen service had been converted to operate with ALRVs and a peak service of 16.1 cars/hour, roughly an equivalent scheduled capacity to the CLRV service in 1980. By 1996, Queen service was down to 12 ALRVs/hour of which 6/hour ran through to Long Branch. Headways have stayed roughly at that level ever since. The Long Branch route was split off from Queen to save on ALRVs, and as of November 2016 6.3 CLRVs/hour ran on this part of the route. Bus replacement services are operating in 2017 due to many construction projects conflicting with streetcar operation.

502 Downtowner/503 Kingston Road Tripper: In 1980, these routes provided 15.6 cars/hour, but by 2016 this had declined to 10/hour.

512 St. Clair: In 1980, the St. Clair car operated with a scheduled short turn at Earlscourt Loop. East of Lansdowne, there were 33.3 cars/hour on St. Clair. By 1996 this was down to 20.6 cars/hour. The next decade saw an extended period of reconstruction for the streetcar right-of-way, and service during this period was irregular, to be generous. By 2016, the service has improved to 21.2 cars/hour, but this is still well below the level of 1980.

What is quite clear here is that the budget and service cuts of the early 1990s substantially reduced the level of service on streetcar routes, and even as the city recovered, the TTC was slow to restore service, if at all. The unknown question with current service levels is the degree to which demand was lost to demographic changes and to what extent the poor service fundamentally weakened the attractiveness of transit on these routes. The TTC has stated that some routes today are operating over capacity, but even those numbers are limited by the difference between crowding standards (which dictate design capacity) and the actual number of riders who can fit on the available service. It is much harder to count those who never board.

In a fiscal environment where any service improvement is viewed negatively because it will increase operating costs, the challenge is to turn around Council’s attitude to transit service. This is an issue across the city and many suburban bus routes suffer from capacity challenge and vehicle shortages just like the streetcar routes downtown.

The bus fleet remains constrained by actions of Mayor Ford in delaying construction of the McNicoll Garage with the result that that the TTC has no place to store and maintain a larger fleet even if they were given the money to buy and operate it. Years of making do with what we have and concentrating expansion funding on a few rapid transit projects has boxed in the TTC throughout its network.

Transit will not be “the better way” again until there are substantial investments in surface fleets and much-improved service.

10 thoughts on “The Evolution of Streetcar Service from 1980 to 2016

  1. Traffic on Toronto streets have gotten worst. One can put more buses and trams on the road and it will not make any difference. There should be a policy where whenever a road is getting repaired, it should be expanded to include bus lanes and cycle lanes. Even if this means taking a driving lane. One can put 100 buses per hour on Finch between Yonge and Bayview, but the traffic there will stop any improvements from being felt.

    There needs to be more trips per hour for transit to be competitive. This is the reason why Air Canada and WestJet have hourly departures on their YYZ-YVR, YYZ-YUL and YYZ-YOW routes. Travelers especially for business value a lot of departure times. This way, if a meeting is finished late or early, they can head back at a moment’s notice. Spadina is good in the sense that a tram is always in sight. On Queen and King, so many travelers have to check their smartphones to see when the next tram will come.

    Once people have a smartphone in hand, people will start evaluating options. If the next tram comes in 10 minutes, the Uber app is also a finger tip away. Most Uber are only 3 minutes away in downtown. For trips under 5 km, it is not that much more expensive. It is also more comfortable. Most business travelers have open tickets, they just head to the airport without checking the schedule and board the first available flight. Transit should be the same too. When people have to check smartphones for their trips, it makes Uber more attractive relative to transit.

    Like

  2. Thanks for continuing to explore both where we’re at and how we got here. If anything, council seems to be regressing in it’s attention to transit issues despite all the evidence from other jurisdictions about what works (and more importantly, what doesn’t). The current fiscal restraint in funding operating expenses coupled with a politically-biased priority list for new transit projects is ensuring Toronto will be left with inadequate transit for the coming decades. We certainly appreciate your efforts to provide the fact-based information that council is so reluctant to embrace.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. I can certainly relate to the cut in the Bathurst streetcar service. In the 1980’s, I was a reservist officer working at Fort York Armoury. My regular commute was to take the subway to Bathurst station and then the Bathurst streetcar to the Armoury. The streetcar service was excellent.

    Needless to say, cutting 50% of the service gives a result that is definitely not excellent.

    Like

  4. The city had six years of budget cuts, cuts, cuts. There is no more to cut. While we may have the nice pretty and fancy capital projects going on, the day-to-day operational budget continues to face funding shortfalls. The city needs to improve the everyday service, that means more funding. Enough is enough!

    Like

  5. Gerry said: Toronto will be left with inadequate transit for the coming decades. We certainly appreciate your efforts to provide the fact-based information that council is so reluctant to embrace.

    I concur.

    Would help if you supported my fantasy proposals for Scarborough, but just maybe, you know better. lol

    Like

  6. So….we need to buy a lot more streetcars then?

    Steve: Yes, the option for 60 at least. The TTC has already mentioned this need when talking about the fleet in general, but this does not seem to translate down to the individual route service level where running as little as they can get away with is the usual practice.

    Like

  7. I still think there are low budget solutions still on the table. If TTC can increase the average speed of streetcars then you would get more cars per hour with the same amounts of cars. Not much engineering is required, just more right of way rights, better traffic light timings and perhaps better/less streetcar stop locations. It is hard to support any institute that keeps on asking for money when obvious unchanged inefficiencies are observed daily for decades.

    But also, if they are going to start redoing tracks at Roncesvalles car barn and the intersection of King and Queen, how about making a long left turn lanes for the autos from King to Queensway and have the tracks to the right? That traffic jam has existed for at least 30 years as I’ve known it.

    Steve: There have already been attempts to improve speeds through changes in parking/turning restrictions and better signal priority, some of which I agree should go even further. The King Street pilot is an attempt in that direction, although in order to achieve political acceptability, the initial version is not as forceful in restricting competing traffic as I would have liked to see.

    At King-Queen-Ronces, shifting the streetcars into the curb lane would create an interesting intersection layout and would, of course require banning parking some distance east of the intersection. The transition to curb running would be tricky and would need to occur far enough away from Roncesvalles that it would actually clear the left turn queue most of the time. (There is a similar arrangement southbound on Bathurst at Fleet where the streetcars move awy from the left turn queue, but this does not happen very far away from the intersection.)

    Like

  8. There is a need to improve the streetcar loop underground at Union Station. Today, they announced construction of CIBC Square at 81 Bay Street.

    Included are these quotes on transit:

    “The new Union Station Bus Terminal will be integrated with our largest transit hub for a seamless commute as we continue to invest in building up our transportation network and innovative projects – like high speed rail and GO RER. CIBC Square is a visionary example of what government can achieve in partnership with the private sector – commuters can enjoy a walk in the park and take in the best views of the city for a more enjoyable, comfortable transit experience.”

    “CIBC Square, with its enviable location directly adjacent to Toronto’s Union Station, epitomizes the best of the “transit-oriented development” (TOD) approach. It not only completes the Union Station campus master plan by delivering a world-class bus terminal, but also provides direct links to all of Toronto’s transit channels, including TTC Subway, GO Train, Via Rail, PATH and the UP (Union Pearson) Express. As part of the CIBC Square Project, the Bay East Teamway will be renovated to first-class standards and will provide direct immediate access to the GO Train platforms from the project.”

    Missing is any mention of an “new” and “improved” Union Station Streetcar loop. At least, I didn’t see any. This would be a good time to include it, at the same time as building the CIBC Square next to Union Station.

    Steve: As far as Queen’s Park is concern, Union Loop is a Toronto project. We really missed the boat on expanding that loop when the service was shut down for Queens Quay’s reconstruction. Thank yous go to Rob Ford and to a TTC who dragged their feet so much on the Waterfront East LRT design that nothing ever got underway. We will not know which of many options for Union Loop might come back into favour until later this year when the “Waterfront Reset” study now in progress reports on their consideration of various options.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s