[LNahid2000]

You're *looking* for reasons to avoid instituting one of the most important *PILOTS* this city has ever witnessed, and oblivious to the reason of making it work, you look for reasons to complicate it.

Typical steveintoronto attitude of attacking the person rather than the argument. I'm done.

 

[steveintoronto]

Typical steveintoronto attitude of attacking the person rather than the argument. I'm done.

I'm critiquing your method of argument. If you take that personally, so be it. You claimed that two hour transfers couldn't be done by using Presto. That's obviously not the case. It's done elsewhere with very similar algorithms, and the Province also indicates it being possible. They actually promote it.

We saw the exact same exaggerated problems with the Bloor Street bike lanes.

Not the same. A closer analogy would be St Clair. As Pink Lucy indicates, Monaris will be one of the most telling gauges for the validity of the claim of hurt business....but in politics, it's also *perception*, and this is where the City had best change gears and fast. They've got to get in front of this, and turn a possible rout into a successful engagement with those feeling aggrieved. If they over-react and it's too much of a success? Well, hey...

I'm not very interested in using money from TTC's precious operating budget to support these businesses with their overhyped problems.

Whoa...hang-on. How much is this costing...the *third busiest transit line in the City*! An absolute pittance compared to what much lesser lines have cost. I sense a degree of resentment when the City has spent next to nothing ($1.5M) to "see if this will work". They've almost single-handedly guaranteed that if it does, it's by accident, not good design, implementation and *adequate funding*.

Not all of them have "overhyped problems."

Agreed. They have *legitimate concerns*. And whether those prove baseless or not, only a fool wouldn't do what's necessary to assuage those fears for the sake of this project satisfying as many sectors of constituents as possible. Unless you're Doug Ford and a few of his cohorts on Council. But that's exactly the point. Why pretend that these concerns can't be addressed when Ford and Follicles love for them to clog the pores and fester.

Someone on Council, if not many, haven't a clue on how to sell a concept.

The empty streeet was eerie but cool.

It really is, and I'm very pro this, but concerned. The timing truly sucks. It's like trying to plant cuttings in the Winter soil and expecting them to grow, let alone bloom. A lot of damage can be done until this really has a chance to take root.

There were a lot of pedestrians despite the cold.

Like the absence of Monaris results, however, this can be very misleading. It's seasonal right now, *all* downtown streets are busy. Beware the Ides of March.

The few cars I saw mostly ignored the signs and didn’t turn off King where indicated. The streetcar moved along nicely.

Anyone who thinks non-compliance isn't going to be an issue is dreaming. As another poster has often pointed out, had compliance been enforced prior to this, then this whole project may not have been necessary. The City has to invest in state of the art signals and priority sensing...project or not, and enforce the traffic rules. Far too much expectation has been put into the dance being a success or not when the dance-floor itself is rocky. How can the play be a success when the stage is a disaster?

It would be great if the city could gain access some sort of metric that would show whether businesses have been negatively effected. Then we could see what has actually happened.

Or monitor *many aspects* of this "Pilot". Many assume it's one aspect on test. It isn't, to do so at this point in time would be to miss many valuable lessons. This is running for a year, surely a number of parameters need to be assessed serially, but this whole thing is moving so incredibly slowly that it's hard to test parameters when the stage can barely support one act.

Let's start with the almost singular guarantee of eventual failure: $1.5M. What city in its right mind would short-change an experiment of such crucial value and importance like Toronto does?

The TTC lost multiples of that alone a few Sundays back running the system for free when opening the Spadina Extension....which, btw, hasn't a hope for the foreseeable future of carrying a fraction of what the King Car does.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Like the absence of Monaris results, however, this can be very misleading. It's seasonal right now, *all* downtown streets are busy. Beware the Ides of March.

This has been the coldest week in Toronto for at least the past 35 years, with no sign of this cold snap ending. If anything, downtown streets would be unusually quiet. Speaking totally anecdotally, I've seen nightclubs practically begging patrons to visit, and many of my family/friends have disavowed going outside unless its absolutely necessary. Of course I expect the Moneris data will compare the magnitude of King's business downturn to the rest of the city, to determine whether or not the effects are localized to King.

 

[DSC]

Just to clarify, I know Council added an exemption specifically for taxis. So you’re saying that Staff have the power to overrule that specific exemption without Council approval?

Yes. This is in the Council motion of last July. Makes sense as it allows for quick fixes.

"3. City Council delegate, despite any City of Toronto By-law to the contrary, to the General Manager, Transportation Services, until December 31, 2018, for the purposes of implementing and then addressing operational and safety issues that may arise in relation to the King Street Transit Pilot project, the authority to implement changes and process and submit directly to Council any necessary bills for by-law amendments to the schedules to City of Toronto Code Chapters, as identified in Attachment 2 to the report (June 9, 2017) from the General Manager, Transportation Services and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, on the streets and within the parameters identified in Attachment 3 to the report (June 9, 2017) from the General Manager, Transportation Services and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, such regulation changes to be in effect no longer than December 31, 2018.

4. City Council authorize the appropriate City officials to submit directly to Council at the appropriate time any necessary bills to amend the appropriate City of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter, and any Schedules to the Code, to reinstate the traffic and parking regulations to what they were immediately prior to the by-law amendments made in connection with the report (June 9, 2017) from the General Manager, Transportation Services and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning."

 

[W. K. Lis]

Having a "free fare zone" would mean increasing the operating subsidies of a transit agency. With the TTC having the lowest subsidy, I can't see the auto-addicted suburban councillors even consider it. They would consider it "gravy".

 

[steveintoronto]

If anything, downtown streets would be unusually quiet.

They will be once the Holiday is finished.

Having a "free fare zone" would mean increasing the operating subsidies of a transit agency. With the TTC having the lowest subsidy, I can't see the auto-addicted suburban councillors even consider it. They would consider it "gravy".

For the record, what was asked for was "two hour transfer for King". It became a point of some claiming it couldn't be implemented without being complicated if not impossible, due to Presto and the 'corruption of stats'. Free Fare Zones show, by example, of how it can be done, albeit a Free Fare Zone is mentioned in the Province' own promotion for effective transit. The "Two Hour Transfer" option would be effective only on King Street, to travel without limit in either direction in the core, and only transferable forward onto other routes within the present transfer protocol for time. That would allow shoppers *with the current cold snap* and claims of merchants of "empty streets" for the duration of the pilot to assist merchants and shoppers, outside of peak rush hours to ensure a busy, vibrant street.

How unreasonable is that?

Further to DSC's quotes above from exactly the same source and section: (although parts were altered by Council)

[...]
King Street is the busiest surface transit route in the entire city, moving more than 65,000 riders on an average weekday, compared to only 20,000 vehicles. Only the Yonge-University and Bloor-Danforth subway lines carry more people on transit.

But King Street is not currently working well for transit. Streetcar service can be slow, unreliable, and erratic, with unpredictable travel times, especially during rush hours, but also during some late evening and weekend times. People end up having to plan for their slowest trip. Along some parts of King Street, walking is sometimes faster, especially between Bathurst Street and Jarvis Street, where we see the most traffic congestion. When streetcars do arrive, they are often overcrowded, especially in rush hours. The Toronto Transit Commission estimates that the line is currently about 20 percent overcapacity.

The King Street Transit Pilot is about moving people more efficiently on transit, improving public space, and supporting business and economic prosperity along King Street. Primarily, the transit pilot is about improving transit reliability, speed, and capacity on the busiest surface transit route in the entire city.

Subject to Council approval, the pilot project would be implemented in late fall 2017. It is proposed that the pilot be undertaken for a minimum of 12 months. [...]

https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threa...priority-measures.19816/page-188#post-1290858

Note:
"Streetcar service can be slow, unreliable, and erratic, with unpredictable travel times, especially during rush hours, but also during some late evening and weekend times."
*but also during some late evening and weekend times.*.

Council has a blind spot. They exempted taxis at those times, so they can then offer a two hour transfer courtesy for the King Pilot in the core section. If the TTC can afford to run the system free at multiples of $M lost on opening day of the Spadina Extension Money Drain, then they can 'afford' to allow shoppers time to shop on King where affected. It's only the TTC Board that can't see the value of Two Hour Transfers when other cities swear by them, and have for years.

Does the TTC need a Pilot for that? In the event, reluctantly by the Board, it's going to be system-wide in half a year or so. See the sky fall...

Addendum: Further fact checking shows this:

[...]In a letter to TTC CEO Andy Byford, Mayor John Tory, TTC Chair Josh Colle and Coun. Mary Fragedakis ask staff to report on the "costs and any other implications for the introduction of time-based transfers for Presto users on all routes in 2018" at the meeting, scheduled for Nov. 28.

The transfers would allow a rider to get on and off the TTC an unlimited number of times within a two-hour timeframe without having to pay more than their original fare.

The letter, dated Thursday, notes that Presto use is at 14 per cent among TTC riders.

"Making time-based transfers available for Presto users would have multiple benefits including making transit more affordable, increasing ridership and encouraging Presto adoption," the letter says.
[...]
Colle and Fragedakis said that time-based transfers will not only make transit more affordable, but will also help small businesses along TTC routes, as well.

"Time-based transfers would allow people on transit the flexibility to hop on and off to run errands or make stops along their way to work, school, or home," Colle said in the statement.

"This would continue the modernization of our services, and further demonstrate the TTC's ongoing commitment to improving the customer experience."
[...]
Transfer pilot cancelled with new streetcars
The 2Hour Fare4TO Coalition, a new advocacy group consisting of businesses and transit riders, spoke out earlier this week in favour of two-hour transfers.

"If Toronto is serious about growing transit ridership it has to make the service more attractive and financially accessible in 2018," John Kiru, executive director of the Toronto Association of Business Improvement Associations (TABIA), said in a statement.

"A two-hour transfer encourages foot traffic, business and tourism on streets close to TTC routes, because riders can easily leave the TTC to shop and then board again."

In September, the TTC cancelled a pilot project testing two-hour transfers on St. Clair Avenue with the introduction of the new Bombardier streetcars.

Because the operators on the new streetcars sit in a cab that's separated from the vehicle, they can't hand out paper transfers or check the expiry times, the TTC said at the time.
[...]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/time-for-two-hour-transfers-say-mayor-and-ttc-chair-1.4404846

So St Clair's two hour transfer "pilot" was not cancelled due to the inability of Presto to track usage (in fact, as stated, Presto has only made a 14% inroad on TTC anyway), it was cancelled for the inability of the driver to check them. How very odd, as that's *exactly* the case with Presto! Use fare-checkers to check for transfers or Presto for the time the fare was paid.

I do apologize to Tory and Colle, it's been mostly the TTC Board dragging broken brake pipes on this, but there appears to be every reason to pressure the Board's cylinders and sphincter valves to release the build-up of reluctance to allowing Two Hour Transfers on the King Pilot core section.

I still hold Council to account on being incredibly unrealistic in the budget pittance put towards King.

 

[ssiguy2]

As I stated earlier, it is no surprise that the businesses are bitching. The TTC and Toronto have offered the businesses all stick and no carrots. They have the inconvenience of fewer drivers and less parking but not the benefits of a better public realm and wider sidewalks. As far as businesses are concerned they have gotten the worst of both deals.

As far as transit malls are concerned, they have far better success than what's on King now. They move transit much faster but allow for much wider sidewalks to create a café culture and a better shopping experience. Vancouver's Granville Transit Mall is a huge success both in transit and for huge pedestrian traffic. cars are not allowed on at anytime but they do allow taxis which I think is a good idea.

 

[MetroMan]

allow for much wider sidewalks to create a café culture and a better shopping experience.

This really jumped out at me.

If the city were to approach businesses and commit to granting year round patio licenses to all restaurants and cafes along the pilot, it would be truly transformational for King. Some cafes are at corners where the curb lane is needed for turning, but off the top of my head, these already have patios on the side street. I’m thinking Portland Variety for example. No room for a patio on King but there’s one on their Portland sidewalk.

 

[steveintoronto]

The TTC and Toronto have offered the businesses all stick and no carrots.

If the city were to approach businesses and commit to granting year round patio licenses to all restaurants and cafes along the pilot, it would be truly transformational for King.

It can be, and *has to be* a win for all concerned, including drivers who are given the option of parking remotely, and taking transit for one fare for two hours outside of rush-hour, during which they wouldn't have been allowed to park anyway. Some posters fail to see the necessity of getting as many stakeholders on-board and moving this in the same direction. Of course there's going to be costs associated with doing that, any positive change has a price, but make that cost an investment, not a loss.

It's just really unfortunate the time of year this started was so non-conducive to the street-scene having its own inertia. Brace yourselves, because I suspect Monaris *will* show a downturn greater than the average mean and historical norm. For whatever reason that's down to, Council *has to get in front of this* and bias the reaction with "carrots". Why could anyone begrudge the lifeblood of "the scene" on that? It's done all the time for corporations.

Normally I wouldn't recommend a PR consultant for projects like this, they should develop positively by their own impetus, but this appears so bungled one really has to wonder who's at the helm steering this? Yes it's showing a few minutes improvement on travel times by streetcar through the core. For all the bluster, that's all results show so far. There's potential for a hell of a lot more, and total *effective* capacity if through-put is increased by speeding up the flow and *constancy* of flow by far better traffic measures.

And so we return to the Transit Signal aspect. @reaperexpress especially has written extensively on this, as have a few others, and a constant point of agreement is that the HTA is very limited in what is 'allowed'. Add to that the "TTC driver rules" for the signals existing use, and the apparent clash with what the HTA states, a curious question in itself as to how that's 'kosher' within the Law.

I tripped across this earlier searching on another point, and the Province itself interprets the HTA section, admittedly very limited in scope, with a fair amount greater latitude than I and others had previously thought:

Ontario Traffic Manual - July, 2001
[...]

[...]
http://www.directtraffic.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Book-121.pdf
pdf page 111, print document page 96

Note:
"Some design guidelines are as follows:" "Some" infers this isn't the full extent, or would not be interpreted as being limited to this list by the Ministry.

Note also the repetitive use of the term "may". And: "may be used on signal heads which are not directly opposite transit lanes, on transit-only left turn signal heads and so on;"

Claims that the legalities of the City pushing ahead to establish a much more sophisticated intersection signalling and flow sensing system are obstructive appears to be at least partially baseless.

There's one clear impediment and one only: Council being cheapskates...or worse.

Addendum: Combing through the pdf linked and discussed above, and another section that gives further clarity thought not possible in prior discussions here:

[...]

pdf pg 70 above link, or print page 56

The wording of the above appears to allow not only a programmed extended Red, but a *continuous Red* still allowing right turns on a Green arrow.

"The transit priority signal is generally used
at an intersection and may be operated exclusively
during a protected transit movement or concurrently
with other non-conflicting vehicular movements."

 

[blixtex]

Status report: more and more cars are ignoring the signs and driving through. The trend does not look good. Rather than improved compliance over time, it’s getting worse.

When the city made the streetcar lanes on King an exclusive ROW during rush hour, I’m sure that there was some police enforcement in the early days. Then people started ignoring the signs and soon enough, the police ignored anybody driving in the streetcar lanes during rush hour. The King Street Pilot is heading for the same fate if this trend continues.

This is an inherent problem with the natural set up of the street (all the streets intersecting it, King street being one of the MAJOR through-ways of the city), the length of it, 100+ years of habit and conditioning, cluttered signage (again, set-up not designed for all those signs) and set up of traffic lights. The fact that you can drive on any other street with Streetcars on it except King St. makes it psychology harder to change that habit. Then you got police resource issues which there are actual less officers than before.

So it's like trying to limit the speed to 40km/hr on the Bayview extension. Sure you can try to put a overly artificial limitation, but the underlying natural reaction will generally prevail, unless a real fundamental design change in set-up or design occurs.

 

[grey]

There's no enforcement after ~9:15AM this week, at least east of Yonge. I've seen several vehicles passing through the intersections at Jarvis and Church, even squeezing past streetcars to do so. Traffic is extremely light, so it's not making much difference either way.

 

[blixtex]

This has been the coldest week in Toronto for at least the past 35 years, with no sign of this cold snap ending. If anything, downtown streets would be unusually quiet. Speaking totally anecdotally, I've seen nightclubs practically begging patrons to visit, and many of my family/friends have disavowed going outside unless its absolutely necessary. Of course I expect the Moneris data will compare the magnitude of King's business downturn to the rest of the city, to determine whether or not the effects are localized to King.

This is why having commuter accessibility is even more important for these businesses during these times. The chance of parking close by, and or being able to drive around the block with impunity in this Freezing Cold vs having multiple restrictions makes it more appealing to venture out there to visit a business on King. Ain't no way I'm parking on who knows where (overflow street parking more crowded) and having to walk a guaranteed 10+ minutes in the freezing cold.

It's not just the people driving down, it's also the plans they make with people that live in the area that are either not made, or location changed because of this.

 

[SunriseChampion]

I suppose having had changed the signals at all pertinent intersections so that they display arrows instead of solid colours would have been too much to ask. Would have done wonders in affecting the psychology of drivers to nudge them towards compliance.

Mind you, actual enforcement wouldn't hurt either.
Ah, it's just the same "I'm special" dic*heads I mentioned in yon Parking Enforcement thread. If I actually knew how to be rid of them I'd have done it years ago.

 

[Megaton327]

I suppose having had changed the signals at all pertinent intersections so that they display arrows instead of solid colours would have been too much to ask. Would have done wonders in affecting the psychology of drivers to nudge them towards compliance.

Mind you, actual enforcement wouldn't hurt either.
Ah, it's just the same "I'm special" dic*heads I mentioned in yon Parking Enforcement thread. If I actually knew how to be rid of them I'd have done it years ago.

Right arrows wouldn't work as pedestrians would be unable to cross. A separate phase would be needed which would add to total time for a complete set of signal phases (personally, I am in favour of that idea). Also, separate taxi, bicycle, and transit signals would be needed, I believe with the required 2 of each signal this would result in 8 signals facing east and 8 signals facing west not including pedestrian signals. Also I'm not even sure if a separate taxi signal would be acceptable under Ontario law--transit and bicycle signals are but I don't believe taxi signals are codified.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Right arrows wouldn't work as pedestrians would be unable to cross. A separate phase would be needed which would add to total time for a complete set of signal phases (personally, I am in favour of that idea). Also, separate taxi, bicycle, and transit signals would be needed, I believe with the required 2 of each signal this would result in 8 signals facing east and 8 signals facing west not including pedestrian signals. Also I'm not even sure if a separate taxi signal would be acceptable under Ontario law--transit and bicycle signals are but I don't believe taxi signals are codified.

Unless the HTA is changed so that flashing arrows have priority, but a steady arrow means yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk.