Service Analysis

by

35/935 Jane: Service Levels and Travel Times 2019-2025

This article is an update from a previous review of travel times on the Jane corridor which is currently under study in the RapidTO program. Red lanes are proposed between Eglinton and Steeles both ways. The southern limit is defined both by the change in roadway cross section in the older part of the city, and by the future split in bus service at Eglinton to feed into Line 5 Crosstown.

Scheduled Service and Ridership

A common claim by the TTC and City is that service on the bus network is restored to or better than pre-pandemic levels. This is not true.

The measurement used is bus hours, but actual frequency of service is the metric riders experience. Total bus hours might be “back to normal”, but these are distributed differently now than in 2019 with some of the restoration going to longer travel and recovery times. These might contribute to service reliability, but with lower scheduled capacity (buses/hour).

Service in November 2019 compared to February 2025 (the schedule in effect in August 2025) was generally better than it is today.

Buses / Hour
L Local
X Express		2019.11
M-F		2025.08
M-F		2019.11
Sat		2025.08
Sat		2019.11
Sun		2025.08
Sun
AM Pk M-F12.9L 8.0X10.0L 5.0X
Midday MF8.6L 6.3X8.0L 4.0X
PM Pk M-F12.0L 6.2X10.0L 5.0X
Early AM
S-S		7.1L 6.0X6.0L2.0L3.0L
Late AM
S-S		6.0L 6.7X6.0L 6.0X6.0L 6.7X6.0L 6.0X
Afternoon
S-S		8.0L 6.7X8.6L 8.6X6.0L 7.1X7.5L 7.5X
Early Eve6.9L 6.7X8.0L 4.0X8.6L 6.7X7.5L8.6L7.5L
Late Eve6.7L6.0L7.1L6.0L6.3L6.0L

The tables below are taken from the November 2019 and July 2025 TTC Scheduled Service Summaries show the corresponding service designs. Within each group, the fields are:

  • Number of assigned vehicles
  • Frequency of service
  • Travel time
  • Terminal recovery time
  • Scheduled speed (km/h)

Changes in service levels are affected by scheduled speed, frequency and recovery time. Note that recovery times in 2025 are more generous than in 2019, and travel times have also increased with a corresponding drop in scheduled speeds. In some cases, the number of buses (and hence bus hours) goes up, but the level of service goes down because of slower operation.

RapidTO plans for Jane seek to shorten travel times between Steeles and Eglinton, but the benefit varies. Terminal departures are irregular, although much of that variation is permitted under the Service Standards. RapdTO’s supposed contribution to regularity is that buses will be able to stay more or less “on time”, but unless departures at terminals are better managed, service will still begin trips irregularly. On the current 6′ peak headway, the standards allow a 50% fluctuation from 3-to-9 minutes, and this can make a huge difference in wait times and vehicle crowding.

All-day ridership reported in past years is summarized below. As of Fall 2024, ridership was still well below the 2019 level.

All-day Riders201920202021202220232024
35 Jane31,08526,08220,33424,84028,80825,820
935 Jane Express13,7497,96510,64510,03411,644
Total44,83426,08228,29935,48538,84237,464
Source: TTC Planning Web Page

We do not know how much ridership growth might be constrained by service capacity and reliability, as opposed to changes in actual demand. The TTC projects large growth from improvements in travel time and reliability with RapidTO, but with no commitment to increased capacity. This claim is difficult to believe.

I asked the TTC for the methodology behind its calculation of RapidTO ridership growth on July 28, but have received no details as of August 11. (The request was for Dufferin and Bathurst corridors where the TTC makes similarly optimistic projections, but the same issue applies to Jane.)

The remainder of this article updates previously published data about travel times on Jane starting just before the pandemic in November 2019 up to July 2025.

Continue reading →
by

Travel Times on Bathurst/Dufferin Part III: 511 Bathurst

This is the third part of a series showing details of travel times in the Bathurst and Dufferin corridors.

For introductory remarks and a discussion of general issues, please refer to Part I.

The main part of this article contains the charts for the streetcar service on 511 Bathurst. Note that data for any bus extras has been omitted from these charts to ensure a presentation of streetcar-only speeds. Data from October 2024 and July 2025 are shown here to be outside of the period when the line was rerouted around construction at Fleet and Bathurst with buses operating a south-end shuttle service.

Continue reading →
by

Travel Times on Bathurst/Dufferin Part II: 29/929 Dufferin

This is the second part of a series showing details of travel times in the Bathurst and Dufferin corridor.

For introductory remarks and a discussion of general issues, please refer to Part I.

The main part of this article contains the charts for the local and express bus services on Dufferin Street in June 2025.

Although the focus of recent debates about transit priority for Dufferin was from Eglinton south, data here show that there are issues with extended running times, particularly in the afternoon, over the full route with northbound trips taking the lion’s share of the delay. Express trips are faster than local trips, but by varying amounts over the route. The least benefit is on the southern portion of the route where red lanes will be installed, and where staying in those lanes could prevent express buses from leap-frogging the locals.

There are some areas where traffic slows in advance of an intersection, but more common is a general slowing down of bus speeds over the route representing overall traffic speed and longer stop service times when the route is busy.

Data shown here are from June 2025 with both the local 29 and express 929 services plotted together for comparison. In many times and locations their speeds are comparable, while in others the express buses have higher speeds than the locals.

The main article contains all of the charts including PDFs with all day sets.

Continue reading →
by

Travel Speed and Time on Bathurst/Dufferin Part I: 7 Bathurst

In recent discussions of the Bathurst and Dufferin transit priority schemes, a major issue is the degree to which various parts of the routes contribute to slower operation by time-of-day and direction. In this article and two to follow, I will review the actual behaviour of these routes to provide both a basis for discussion of expanding the priority schemes, and as a “before” reference for comparison after they are implemented.

Reviews by time-of-day are useful not just to spot peak period issues, but also as a reference for what might be achieved. At the beginning and end of service hours on most routes, there is no traffic congestion and lighter passenger demand reduces stop service time. Bettering travel times from those periods would be challenging.

Travel times are affected by many factors including:

  • Interference from other traffic on the road, and the degree of congestion for traffic generally.
  • Absence of signal priority and “priority” signals that do not adequately reflect actual operating conditions.
  • Stop service time including both the penalty for stopping, starting and rejoining the traffic flow; and passenger boarding times which depend on the volume of riders and crowding conditions.
  • The proportion of riders with large objects such as bicycles, baby carriages, shopping carts, luggage, scooters and wheelchairs. This affects not just boarding times, but also the ability of passengers to move within vehicles, particularly buses.
  • Slow driving speeds induced by a desire to avoid running early when scheduled times exceed what is actually needed.
  • Posted speed limits.
  • Weather conditions.

Express services have fewer stops and therefore lose less time on that account, but this is only one of many possible factors.

A further consideration is that for the transit vehicle, we generally talk about point-to-point times, but for a rider, “travel” includes access time to and from stops at their origin and destination. Removing stops might speed up buses, but at the cost of longer access time. This is a balancing act depending on local geography, the location of signalized intersections and major trip generators.

Travel Times and Ridership

The relationship between travel times and demand is not exact, and depends on various factors:

  • A substantial reduction in a long trip is more noticeable than a small reduction.
  • For short trips, an improvement in scheduled service and reliability will improve wait times possibly by more than the saving for in-vehicle time. This is compounded by riders experiencing wait time as longer than in vehicle travel time.
  • Comfort is important for longer trips where standing in a packed bus is no fun. For short trips the inability to board is a disincentive to ride. Speed is only one measure of attractiveness.
  • If service is changed, or stops are removed, in parallel with the reduction in travel time, it is not clear which factor influenced ridership the most.

The origin and quantity of any new riders can vary and will depend greatly on both the latent demand and the perceived improvement for travellers. Would-be riders who now drive require a substantial inducement to change modes especially if their trip would involve multiple routes of which only one was improved. Some riders may shift from nearby routes as happened with the King Street corridor, but this is very specific to local routes and riding patterns, and it does not represent net new transit users.

Any analysis is complicated by the events of 2020-25 and a major shift in overall travel including the stronger recovery of off-peak as compared to peak period demand. If transit priority only yields its greatest benefit in the peak, a large part of the travel market sees little change.

The TTC projects substantial ridership increases on Jane, Dufferin and Bathurst through the proposed transit priority schemes, and this implies both a major improvement in perceived service quality and a latent demand for better transit. However, they do not explain how they reach this conclusion nor the methodology behind their claims, nor the amount of extra service, if any, that will be fielded in anticipation of growth.

Looking at the Whole Route

The Council debate concerned only the section of 7 Bathurst and 29/929 Dufferin south of Eglinton, and of 511 Bathurst from Bloor to Fleet. An inordinate amount of time was spent on a short section of Bathurst south of Dupont. For both corridors, much work was done by local Councillors, their communities and Transportation Services to fine tune the design. This should have occurred earlier in the process.

The larger question, however, is not just the installation of transit priority over a portion of these corridors, but the routes overall and the service they provide. The TTC loves to point to external factors like traffic congestion as their rationale for irregular service, but they do not manage the service they already have as I have shown in numerous articles. Moreover, the standard on which they base reports of “reliability” is very generous for routes that only run every 10 minutes allowing a deviation between 5 and 15 minutes in vehicle spacing.

If one were to say “make it tighter”, I expect the first response would be “oh, we cannot possibly do that” even though the same standards set a tighter deviation for more frequent routes. If it is possible to manage to a six minute window on a 6 minute service, it should be possible to manage to this on a 10 minute service. TTC Service Standards excuse poor service rather than demanding excellence.

The main part of this article presents speed profiles showing details over 7 Bathurst by hour. Within these, one can see locations where transit vehicles have slow operation over extended distances, notably on approaches to intersections. These are key sites for any focus on speeding up transit service.

As a reference, the travel times over each segment, broken down by hour, are also included to show the variation over the day, and the degree of variation (standard deviation of values).

There are many charts, but only a sampling is included inline here. PDFs with full day sets are linked for those who are interested.

I will cover 29/929 Dufferin and 511 Bathurst Streetcar in Parts II and III.

Continue reading →
by

114 Queens Quay East and Its Red Lanes

On June 4, 2025, new reserved bus lanes were installed on Queens Quay westbound from Sherbourne to Bay, and eastbound from Jarvis to Sherbourne. The TTC projected travel time savings of up to 5 minutes, and more reliable service for riders using routes on this roadway including 114 Queens Quay East, 75 Sherbourne, 65 Parliament and 202 Cherry Beach.

Now that the June 2025 tracking data are available, this article reviews the actual change, if any, in travel times and headway consistency. For historic context, the data presented here go back to May 2024 when the 114 Queens Quay East route was split off from the south end of 19 Bay.

Here is a map showing the affected routes and location of the new red lanes.

Source: TTC

Over the period before red lane implementation, the 114 Queens Quay East service suffered from schedule problems with an unrealistic high scheduled speed. This was reduced in October 2024, and then raised again recently in anticipation of red lane benefits. The current scheduled speed is not as high as the original design in May 2024. Service frequency has also been changed from time to time mainly in response to seasonal fluctuation, but in some cases to “stretch” buses over a longer running time. (Details later in the article.)

The original eastern terminus was an around-the-block loop via Logan, Lake Shore and Carlaw to Commissioners. This was changed to Lake Shore Garage (the Wheel-Trans garage on Commissioners west of Leslie) to provide a better, off-street location.

Service until the October 2024 schedule change was extremely erratic, especially in the PM peak, as buses could not maintain the original running times. Since October, there has been little change at most times of the day including in June 2025 after red lane implementation.

There is a very strong day-of-the-week effect in the PM peak for westbound travel times on Queens Quay with midweek days being the worst. In June, the worst of the peaks are down from April levels, but that month was unusually bad. There is not yet enough accumulated data to establish whether there will be a permanent “shaving” of peak travel times through the red lane area.

There is an analogy here to the King Street project where the travel times under normal circumstances changed little, but the peaks on days when there was a disruption or special event were shaved off improving overall reliability.

Any analysis of the benefits of the red lanes must be careful not to cherry pick “good” and “bad” days for comparisons.

The data here provides mainly a “before” view of service on 114 Queens Quay East. I will update these charts in the Fall when full traffic conditions have resumed.

Continue reading →
by

Does TTC Mid-Point Route Management Work? (Part II)

This article continues the analysis of service on routes where the TTC claims to be implementing mid-route headway management. The routes included here are:

  • 24/924 Victoria Park
  • 25/925 Don Mills
  • 29/929 Dufferin

See Part I for a general introduction and details of 7 Bathurst, 100 Flemingdon Park, 165 Weston Road North, 506 Carlton and 512 St. Clair.

A common factor evident in the charts for these routes is that service near the origins of routes is barely within the target range for headways, and more commonly well beyond it. AM peak service might squeeze within the target, but service falls apart from midday onward and does not recover in the evening.

Although the TTC reports performance based on “on time” departure from terminals, they actually have a headway standard, but never report on how well routes meet it. Note that the standard actually is very generous and allows a wider range of headways than the “on time” standard. For example, a bus operating every 10 minutes is allowed a 50% headway deviation either way meaning that the actual headway could be anywhere from 5 to 15 minutes, and 40% of the service can be even worse. This is a standard designed to make management look good to those who don’t peer “under the covers”.

For services that operate between 5 and 10 minutes, passengers do not rely on printed schedules, but expect vehicles to arrive at prescribed headways. Therefore, on-time performance for frequent service is measured by how well actual headways correlate to scheduled headway intervals. Trips are monitored at a location based on arrival time, without regard to whether the trip that arrived was scheduled for that time slot. The vehicle is considered on-time when the headway deviation is less than 50% of the scheduled headway. For example, a service that operates every 6 minutes is deemed on-time if the headway deviation falls between 3 minutes and 9 minutes. TTC’s goal is to have 60% of all trips operated within +-50% of the scheduled headway over the entire service day. [Service Standards at pp 15-16]

The TTC plans a review of its Service Standards in coming months. That review and much-needed reporting on service quality are long overdue.

Express routes can have very wide ranging headways making their benefit to riders dubious. The wait for an express bus can be longer than the travel time saving from skipped stops. Meanwhile riders at “local” stops cannot benefit from the express vehicles. The TTC plans a review of its Express Network later this summer, and service reliability should be a major issue. It is not enough to advertise a faster trip, but the network must actually provide it, including waiting time, reliably.

Another factor that appears in some of these charts (as well as in Part I) is that for some periods there is more service on a route than is scheduled. This is due in part to the assignment of the “run as directed” buses to supplement regular routes. However, the base schedule is not adjusted, and the RADs do not create a uniform combined headway. They can even contribute to bunching by running close to a scheduled run.

TTC still has not deigned to release detailed data from their APCs (Automatic Passenger Counters) and only coarse information (corresponding to the three levels of loading shown on their real time info) is publicly available. I have asked many times, but this request goes nowhere. Without detailed data it is impossible to know the loads on buses or to differentiate between a modest seated load and a partially standing one. Considering that the Service Standards call for at most a few standees in the off peak, this distinction is crucial to evaluating how service matches the standards.

When the use of RADs to supplement service began, the intent was to soak up spare bus operators (not to mention spare buses) without committing to a permanent service improvement. There has been no external report on whether the added service improved ridership, or the effect of its withdrawal.

Continue reading →
by

TTC’s 2026 Network Plan: Round One

The TTC “Annual Service Plan” has been rebranded as the “Network Plan” in the interest of clarity, but based on the 2026 edition’s meagre content so far, this is an infinitesimal network. In particular, it really does not deal with the transit network as a whole, but only small tweaks at the edges. Big decisions such as long range, city-wide plans, budgets, service levels and the future of transit as part of Toronto are all made elsewhere.

Issues such as strategies for improving ridership and budget reviews which bear directly on the amount of service riders see are not in this plan. Nor is any discussion of basic service quality and management, nor of the fractured nature of TTC information for and communications with its riders.

Round One of the Network Plan consultation addresses only a handful of proposed route changes. More substantial work including an Express Bus Network review and discussion of construction-related service changes won’t appear until Round Two in August.

The Network Plan presentation lists several parallel studies under development parallel to but not included in the Annual Network Plan consultations. Only those keen transit watchers know about all or most of these, and it is a hard slog keeping up. The table below is from the Round One presentation deck.

  • 2026 Annual Service Budget
    • Sets service levels for each board period in 2026
    • Includes number of vehicles, service hours and distance
  • 2026-2028 Ridership Growth Strategy (RGS)
    • Cost-benefit analysis of service, fare, infrastructure and customer experience initiatives
    • Could achieve ridership growth over the next 3 years (if funded)
  • RapidTO Transit Priority Lanes
    • Completed: Queens Quay East
    • Next: Dufferin St and Bathurst St corridors (pending July 2025 Council approval). Target: ready for 2026 FIFA World Cup
    • Feasibility and design studies are on-going for the Jane Street, Finch Avenue East, and Lawrence Avenue East roadways
  • FIFA World Cup Transit Service Plan
    • Increased service on key downtown routes
    • Additional service on match days and during Fan Festival
  • Reducing bunching and gapping
    • Efforts to reduce bunching and gapping on 10 of the most problematic routes with enhanced on-street presence as well as scheduling related changes

There are also:

This may suit the TTC’s fragmented internal structure, but it drives people outside of the TTC mad. One does not have to be a seasoned transit advocate, merely a daily rider, to rail at the frustration of “consultation” on a handful of minor route changes. Basic service issues across the system must wait for the budget (no public consultation there at all), the Ridership Growth Strategy (budget limits again) and a Board that, until recently, actually believed (or chose not to challenge) management claims about quality.

Two burning issues are service quality (with associated crowding and unpredictable waits), and the effect of construction projects on routes (not to mention abjectly poor and inaccurate communications to riders). We will have to wait until Round Two in August to address at least some of these problems.

Consultation

An online survey opens July 7-16. There are separate consultations with the Advisory Committee on Accessible Transit (ACAT) and the TTC’s Planning Advisory Group which after many years now has a formal name. (Full disclosure: I am a regular contributor to that group.)

Pop-Ups will be held from 4-6pm at the following dates and locations:

  • July 9th: University of Toronto Scarborough Campus
  • July 10th: St. George Station
  • July 15th: Sherbourne & Rosedale Stations
  • July 16th: Lawrence West Station & Sunnybrook Hospital
Continue reading →
by

Does TTC Mid-Point Route Management Work? (Part I)

In February-March 2025, the TTC added on-street supervisors on eleven routes in an attempt to reduce the incidence of gaps and bunching. This is described in the June 2025 CEO’s Report and the associated Metrics Report containing performance stats for the system.

Bunching and gapping of TTC service

Last March, the TTC expanded a pilot to improve service reliability on 11 key bus and streetcar routes. Working through the Transit Control Centre, uniformed Supervisors have been deployed mid-route to ensure our service frequency meets customer expectations and that we reduce the bunching and gapping of our buses and streetcars, which is a source of frustration for riders.

The pilot involves the following routes: 7 Bathurst, 24/924 Victoria Park, 25/925 Don Mills, 29/929 Dufferin, 100 Flemington Park, 165 Weston Rd North, 506 Carton, and 512 St Clair.

Starting in July, the CEO’s Report will include a Hot Topic that will provide news and updates on the progress – and challenges – related to this important issue. [CEO’s Report, p. 9]

Also:

TTC expanded a pilot to improve service reliability on key bus routes. Mid-route Field Supervisor presence on the nine priority bus routes was increased throughout the February and March Board Period, where the focus is on reducing bunching and gapping, in order to improve the reliability of service. Bunching and gapping is measured by “Headway Adherence”: the vehicle is considered on-time when the headway deviation is less than 50% of the scheduled headway. [Metrics Report, p. 15]

Mid-route Field Supervisor presence on the two priority streetcar routes continued throughout the February and March Board Period, to reduce bunching and gapping and improve the reliability of service. Bunching and gapping is measured by “Headway Adherence”: the vehicle is considered on-time when the headway deviation is less than 50% of the scheduled headway. [Metrics Report, p. 16]

Although there is a Service Standard for headway adherence, this is not measured and reported publicly, and results are never cited in ongoing service quality reports. For many years, the TTC clung to the concept that if routes were on time at terminals, the rest of the line would look after itself. However, the “on time” standard is sufficiently lax that badly bunched and gapped service can meet the target. That, combined with reporting only average results, hides the real character of service that riders experience day-to-day.

At the June 23 Board meeting, management gave the impression that they would not report on all routes in July and might have to farm some of the analytical work out.

This is a sad admission considering the years of articles I have written on service analysis showing what could be done with the hope that the TTC would develop internal tools to perform similar tasks. Sadly, however, I have been told by some at TTC they have what they need, and, in effect that I should run along and not bother them.

Partly to hold their feet to the fire, and to provide the type of information that should be routinely available to the Board, management and the public, this article will do the work the TTC claims they cannot. Here are headway reliability analyses for the routes involved over much or all of the period from January 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025.

In a very few cases, it is possible to see a change in service quality (measured as a smaller spread between minimum and maximum headways, or gaps between vehicles) around the beginning of March 2025. These are rare, and short-lived. February was a really bad time to try to implement any new practice as the city was digging out (or not depending on where you live) of a huge snowstorm. (The extended effect of the City’s poor snow clearing on transit routes is evident in the multi-day peaks in irregular service on some routes.)

I have presented 18 months of data to show that problems with headway reliability have existed for some time. There is more data going further back, but 18 months makes the point. Moreover, a consistent pattern is that headways might be well-behaved in the AM peak and Midday, but evening service does not fully “recover” from PM peak conditions, and erratic service is common.

Quite bluntly, service on all of these routes was poor, well beyond the TTC’s own Service Standards, for 2024 and early 2025, and showed little sign of improvement through to mid-year. It will be interesting to compare whatever stats TTC comes up with to the performance shown on charts here.

Part I of this series includes data for 7 Bathurst, 100 Flemingdon Park, 165 Weston Road North, 506 Carlton and 512 St. Clair. Part II will include 24/924 Victoria Park, 25/925 Don Mills and 29/929 Dufferin.

There are a lot of charts and this is a long read. I will put the “more” break here. Those readers interested in specific routes can soldier on. Thanks for reading!

Continue reading →
by

King-Dufferin Construction Plans

Starting after Labour Day in September, the TTC will rebuild the track at the King-Dufferin intersection. This work is expected to take about six weeks.

See: Transit Priority Measures to Support Transit Diversions During King Street West and Dufferin Street Intersection Closure

The project is left over from work on King West in 2024 when it could not be completed as planned due to supply problems. It was erroneously reported that the 2024 project finished “early” when in fact this was due to the scope change.

Transit services will be significantly changed in this area.

Source: City of Toronto Report at p. 5

Note that the diversions for King-Church construction are expected to end before King-Dufferin work begins, and transit services on the eastern part of King will be back to normal.

Route changes at King-Dufferin:

  • Routes diverting east of Roncesvalles via Queen and Shaw to King:
    • 504A King streetcars from Distillery Loop to Dundas West Station
    • 304 King night cars from Broadview Station to Dundas West Station
    • 508 Lake Shore streetcars from Long Branch to Broadview Station
    • No service on King between Mowat and Roncesvalles
  • 504B King streetcars will operate from Broadview Station diverting from King via Bathurst to Wolseley Loop (at Queen).
  • Kingston Road services:
    • 503 Kingston Road converted to bus operation and cut back from Dufferin to loop via Mowat and Fraser.
    • 303 Kingston Road night service suspended (it is not yet clear what will replace the 303 on Kingston Road)
  • Dufferin bus services:
    • 29 Dufferin buses will divert via Queen, Shaw and King looping via Mowat and Fraser.
    • 929 Dufferin Express buses will terminate at Queen looping via Queen, Gladstone and Peel.
    • No service on Dufferin south Queen nor through Exhibition Place to Princes’ Gate.

Parking and stopping provisions will change on Queen from Roncesvalles to Shaw, and on Shaw between Queen and King. Stopping will be prohibited on both sides of these streets seven days/week from 7:00 to 11:00am and 2:00 to 7:00pm.

Left turns will be banned from Shaw northbound at Queen and southbound at King. Left turns are now banned from King eastbound onto Shaw weekdays from 7:00 to 10:00am, and from 3:00 to 7:00pm. This will be extended to a ban from 7:00am to 7:00pm on all days.

Some existing parking spaces will be removed to make room for transit vehicles on Dufferin north of Queen, Peel, Mowat, Liberty, Fraser, and King. Details are in the report.

These changes will only last for the duration of the construction project.

The TTC plans to “conduct comprehensive targeted engagement to inform and educate customers, residents, local businesses, and other partners of the pending changes.” However, major changes are unlikely as this project is only two months away and temporary transit routes are already decided. The TTC does not yet have a page on its own site for this project.

This issue will be at Toronto & East York Community Council on July 8, 2025.

by

King/Church Update: June 26, 2025

Two proposals before City Council attempt to deal with congestion issues downtown brought on by the King/Church water main and track reconstruction.

MM31.17 – Speeding Up Streetcars: Traffic Amendments on Adelaide Street, King Street and York Street – by Mayor Olivia Chow, seconded by Deputy Mayor Ausma Malik

This motion proposes the relocation of parking and loading zones from Adelaide Street to nearby streets to free up capacity on Adelaide.

Currently, the Financial District Business Improvement Area and their stakeholders use loading zones on the south side of Adelaide Street West, from Yonge Street to York Street, between 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., Monday to Friday. Based on the travel time data, streetcar operations are negatively impacted when the loading operations are in effect.

In consultation with the Toronto Transit Commission, Transportation Services and the Financial District have agreed that temporary loading zones will be established on the west side of York Street, between King Street West and Wellington Street, and on the north side of King Street West, between Yonge Street and York Street.

Delivery drivers will queue in the new loading zones, where Traffic Control Persons will marshal the delivery drivers into the loading bay only when it is clear. With the temporary loading zones in place, stopping will be prohibited on Adelaide Street West from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday to Sunday.

Mayor Chow proposed an amendment to her own motion authorizing payment “to deploy additional paid duty officers at seven locations near the King and Church worksite to manage traffic flow”.

MM31.18 – Re-Opening King Street for Business: Keeping Toronto’s Downtown Core and Canada’s Financial District Moving – by Councillor Brad Bradford, seconded by Councillor Stephen Holyday

This motion proposes the reopening of through traffic on King Street where streetcars are not operating during the construction diversion.

City Council direct the General Manager, Transportation Services, to make any necessary changes to reopen the portion of King Street between Spadina Avenue and Church Street to vehicular traffic for the duration of the King Street East and Church Street intersection closure, where streetcars are not currently in service.

Mayor Chow proposed an amendment limiting the reopened area to portions where “streetcars and buses” are not operating. This effectively neuters the motion because the only portion of King with no transit service now is east of Yonge Street.

The debate was mired by a combination of political rivalries, lack of familiarity with the affected area and transit services, and disinformation either through ignorance or misrepresentation.

The Mayor’s motion MM31.17 and amendment carried on a show of hands.

The Mayor’s proposed amendment to MM31.18 carried by 16-5. The motion as amended carried on a show of hands.

The debate was hampered by the absence of basic information such as a map and detailed information on items such as existing transit services, traffic pinch points and loading zone locations.

In support of his claim that King Street could be reopened, Councillor Bradford showed a photo looking west on King from Simcoe with the street completely devoid of traffic. The photo was taken at 6:30pm on Monday.

  • Monday is a very light day for office-bound traffic due to work-from-home patterns. This is also reflected in day-of-the-week travel time differences shown later in this article.
  • The theatre district (Roy Thomson Hall, Royal Alexandra and Princess of Wales Theatres, TIFF) are dark on Mondays, and there is little tourist traffic. There was no major event at the Rogers Centre.

Although an empty road can be found at times, the photo is deeply misleading, and Bradford should know better.

Among the most striking pieces of disinformation was the claim that replacement bus service carries far fewer riders than the streetcars did along the King Street corridor. When asked, staff gave riding figures of 24,000 on the King Street replacement bus, and 60,000 per day for the streetcars. These are all day values for the entire route, not for riding on the King Street transit corridor itself. At no point was there any discussion of the frequency (and hence capacity) of service. These numbers were cited by various Councillors to claim that transit priority was not needed on King because so many fewer people were riding there.

City staff should be chastised for failing to correct this point and for giving an answer that did not properly illuminate the comparison between service levels.

For the record, the scheduled service on the central portion of King Street with streetcars and buses is shown below. Note that there is substantially less scheduled capacity with the replacement bus service. Buses on King are quite crowded, and service is bunched and erratic.

It is quite likely that there are fewer riders on the buses than on the streetcars, although a major contributing factor will be the level of service provided by the TTC. From a capacity viewpoint, a service of 18 buses/hour with 50/bus (greater than the Service Standard level) would be 900 riders per hour past a point. The streetcar service would have a capacity more than double that level.

PM Peak ServiceStreetcar Service (Apr/25)Bus Service (June/25)
504A Distillery-Dundas West10′ (6 cars/hour)
504B Broadview-Dundas West10′ (6 cars/hour)
503 Kingston Road
(EB from York)		10′ (6 cars/hour)
508 Lake Shore20′ (3 cars/hour)
504D Broadview-Bathurst5′ (12 buses/hour)
504C Distillery-Bathurst10′ (6 buses/hour)

In the course of the debate, Mayor Chow noted that work at King & Church is progressing well and should be finished by August 8. This may allow the road to reopen, but resumption of streetcar service depends on the TTC finishing their work including reconstruction of streetcar overhead at that intersection and along King Street East.

The remainder of this article updates previously-published charts about streetcar travel times on Richmond and Adelaide Streets.

Continue reading →