[car4041]

12. If the Sheppard transit vehicle had its own lane separated from other vehicles, received all green lights and fare payment was done prior to boarding to allow for speeds similar to a subway, BUT stopped only at cross-streets, how would this affect your transit usage? Please select the most appropriate option.
1. I would take transit much more often than I do now, the extra vehicle speed would make it more appealing
2. I would take transit about as often as I do now, and would appreciate the extra vehicle speed over the extended walk
3. I would take transit about as often as I do now, and have no opinion whatsoever on this new arrangement
4. I would take transit about as often as I do now, but would prefer having the local stop over walking out to the next major road, even if the ride is faster
5. I would take transit much less than I do now or stop using it altogether, as this local stop is an important factor for choosing transit

So basically you gave them two alternatives: (a) their current bus commute, or (b) a transit vehicle with its own lane, all green lights, off-board fare collection, subway-type speeds, and stopping only at cross-streets.

Given all the positive stuff in alternative (b), I don't think it's surprising that people gave positive answers. But it doesn't really say much about their attitudes towards stop spacing in particular, because stop spacing is not isolated as a factor.

(It's also not clear how to interpret "only at cross-streets" -- what exactly is a cross-street? Bay Mills/Aragon crosses Sheppard, so isn't it a cross-street? Who knows how people interpreted this. "Main roads" or "arterial roads" would probably be clearer -- or just show them a line diagram to avoid the language issue entirely.)

I think a more targeted question would be more informative. What if you asked them to choose between two possible route diagrams, one with more stops and a longer travel time, and one with fewer stops and a shorter travel time. This would control for the other factors such as dedicated lanes and signal priority, giving us a better idea about where people stand on the speed-vs-accessibility issue in particular, rather than lumping it together with universally positive things such as signal priority.

 

[Electrify]

So basically you gave them two alternatives: (a) their current bus commute, or (b) a transit vehicle with its own lane, all green lights, off-board fare collection, subway-type speeds, and stopping only at cross-streets.

Given all the positive stuff in alternative (b), I don't think it's surprising that people gave positive answers. But it doesn't really say much about their attitudes towards stop spacing in particular, because stop spacing is not isolated as a factor.

(It's also not clear how to interpret "only at cross-streets" -- what exactly is a cross-street? Bay Mills/Aragon crosses Sheppard, so isn't it a cross-street? Who knows how people interpreted this. "Main roads" or "arterial roads" would probably be clearer -- or just show them a line diagram to avoid the language issue entirely.)

I think a more targeted question would be more informative. What if you asked them to choose between two possible route diagrams, one with more stops and a longer travel time, and one with fewer stops and a shorter travel time. This would control for the other factors such as dedicated lanes and signal priority, giving us a better idea about where people stand on the speed-vs-accessibility issue in particular, rather than lumping it together with universally positive things such as signal priority.

The point of the survey was to see if removing the stop, thus requiring extra walking time, would affect their transit usage/views towards transit. We keep hearing people on here claiming that these mid-block stops are necessary because people won't walk to the next major street to access to transit, and I wanted to see how accurate these claims actually were. Likewise we see people lobbying to keep these mid-block stops, but is this what people want or simply a vocal minority? And is said vocal minority aware of the speed and mobility increases which accompany fewer stops?

Side topic, but a few people here are suggesting that the Bloor-Danforth line is a good stop spacing for subways and rapid transit, but I beg to differ - at least outside of downtown. For another project last year I found myself going from Yorkville to Summerhill, which has a similar stopping pattern. When you factored in the time it took to get to the train, go up a couple of stops, and make my way back to the surface, the time savings were non-existent - if not at a loss. It would have been better for me to simply catch a local bus up instead.

In terms of LRT, yes the stop access time is minimized since the stop is on the surface, but the car also tends to move faster through this setting as well, thus making tighter stop spacing less competitive.

Personally, I think (with exception) arterial transit routes should stop every 400-500m, while corridors which have enough usage and importance to warrant higher order services should see their rapid/limited stop routes stop every 800-1000m accompanied by a less frequent local run with stops every 200-250m.

 

[car4041]

The point of the survey was to see if removing the stop, thus requiring extra walking time, would affect their transit usage/views towards transit. We keep hearing people on here claiming that these mid-block stops are necessary because people won't walk to the next major street to access to transit, and I wanted to see how accurate these claims actually were. Likewise we see people lobbying to keep these mid-block stops, but is this what people want or simply a vocal minority? And is said vocal minority aware of the speed and mobility increases which accompany fewer stops?

I agree that this is an important question to address; I just think that the way you asked the question in your survey doesn't really address it, unfortunately -- we can't tell what the respondents' views on stop spacing are because the question asks them to consider a whole bunch of factors, only one of which is stop spacing.

(I still think it's very cool that you went out and did this!)

 

[Electrify]

Thanks. I don't think that I missed the mark though. These lines are going to be built, it is almost a certainty now. However, there is a slim chance that the stop spacing could be modified to provide a faster and more efficient line. Some things to keep in mind, which I wrote in my paper, is that when along Sheppard I saw people walking towards Warden as they looked down and saw no bus coming in the distance, and on my last day out on Eglinton I wrote down on the surveys "Birchmont Rd" and "Kennedy Station" to try and clarify the question, as I had some concerns about how people understood it.

Some things I didn't get a chance to get into with more detail included some of the comments people wrote for the very last question, as well as other informal communications regarding transit service. Arguably the number one thing people said to me was the need for more frequent and reliable service. My first day out on Sheppard, I was appalled with how poorly the line was managed! Two or three buses would come at a time, and using my smartphone I could see that the next one wasn't arriving for ~10 minutes! Fortunately, my other days out the service did seem to operate more reliably, but the complaint still arose. On Eglinton, service seemed to be managed far better, but I did hear people complain about frequency, despite the arrivals rarely being much more than 5 minutes apart.

And of course, I also had people mention that they wanted a subway. One gentleman said it would mean little to no impact on the roads, and unfortunately I didn't think to tell him to check out Keele and Steeles near York University...

Finally, I REALLY wish I thought about creating a map and having people select between the options, with people selecting their options! That would have been a fantastic thing to do for this project!

 

[W. K. Lis]

At least with surface stops, the LRT platforms can be removed, added, or moved. Sometimes with difficultly, but unlike the underground stations, a lot less expensively.

 

[sixrings]

At least with surface stops, the LRT platforms can be removed, added, or moved. Sometimes with difficultly, but unlike the underground stations, a lot less expensively.

I don't believe anything is easily removed... There are too many bus stops and none of them are moved. And there are a few subway stations which are rarely used. It sounds easy to remove but it will rarely if ever happen.

 

[nfitz]

There are too many bus stops and none of them are moved.

I've seen many bus stops moved. Why say otherwise?

 

[sixrings]

I've seen many bus stops moved. Why say otherwise?

Sorry Nfitz my experience has been different. I will say I rarely take the bus anymore now that I live on a subway line. However I grew up at Midland and Finch area. And every time a development happened on either street a bus stop was added. I don't remember ever a bus stop being removed. I wouldn't say that unless it was my own experience.

What I do remember is with more and more people moving out to scarborough at that time, a bus ride which once took only 30 mins took almost a hour with all the extra people and all the new stops. What I do remember is that when we first moved there I would get a seat by don mills. By the time we left it wasn't rare that Id still be standing up on the finch bus by the time we got to midland.

 

[nfitz]

Sorry Nfitz my experience has been different. I will say I rarely take the bus anymore now that I live on a subway line. However I grew up at Midland and Finch area. And every time a development happened on either street a bus stop was added. I don't remember ever a bus stop being removed. I wouldn't say that unless it was my own experience.

Ah ... you said moved, not removed. Stops certainly move ... for example, the 22 Coxwell south stop moved from the NW corner to the SW corner at Lower Gerrard a few months ago.

I'd think complete removals would be rare, except when changing land use. Though didn't one of the Queen stops at Victoria get removed recently? And a couple St. Clair stops were removed when the ROW was built recently.

Still, it happens more often than a subway station either gets moved or removed!

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

At least with surface stops, the LRT platforms can be removed, added, or moved. Sometimes with difficultly, but unlike the underground stations, a lot less expensively.

I thought one of the benefits of LRT is that it is rather permanent. Difficult to remove stops and routes.

 

[leopetr]

Side topic, but a few people here are suggesting that the Bloor-Danforth line is a good stop spacing for subways and rapid transit, but I beg to differ - at least outside of downtown. For another project last year I found myself going from Yorkville to Summerhill, which has a similar stopping pattern. When you factored in the time it took to get to the train, go up a couple of stops, and make my way back to the surface, the time savings were non-existent - if not at a loss. It would have been better for me to simply catch a local bus up instead.

I don't understand why you're using Yorkville -> Summerhill as an example. Both the origin and destination stations are mid-block minor stations. They would have been eliminated in a stop rationalization of the sort you're advocating, so that there'd be no stops on Bloor between Spadina and Yonge, and at most one stop on Yonge between Bloor and St. Clair.

So, yes, you'd have been catching the local 97 Yonge bus in this scenario.

 

[JayBeeGooner]

I don't understand why you're using Yorkville -> Summerhill as an example. Both the origin and destination stations are mid-block minor stations. They would have been eliminated in a stop rationalization of the sort you're advocating, so that there'd be no stops on Bloor between Spadina and Yonge, and at most one stop on Yonge between Bloor and St. Clair.

So, yes, you'd have been catching the local 97 Yonge bus in this scenario.

And the local 97 bus runs every half hour south of St. Clair.

 

[Johnny Au]

There is also Lower Bay station, the only abandoned subway station in Toronto.

 

[nfitz]

There is also Lower Bay station, the only abandoned subway station in Toronto.

The station isn't abandoned, only the lower platforms. The track is still used frequently, as are the upper platforms. It's not like anyone moved the station.

 

[Electrify]

I don't understand why you're using Yorkville -> Summerhill as an example. Both the origin and destination stations are mid-block minor stations. They would have been eliminated in a stop rationalization of the sort you're advocating, so that there'd be no stops on Bloor between Spadina and Yonge, and at most one stop on Yonge between Bloor and St. Clair.

So, yes, you'd have been catching the local 97 Yonge bus in this scenario.

Sorry I didn't make it clearer, but I was going between Bloor and Summerhill.

Here is another example, perhaps a little better. A few years back my brother was living at Pape and Danforth. Halloween night I went partying with him, and slept on his couch. The next morning (which was a Saturday) I decided to walk to the McDonald's at Broadview, and opted to take the subway back. However, factoring in going underground, the wait for the train, and the stop at Chester (a seldom used station), the return trip took about the same amount of time - if not longer!

Meanwhile about a week ago I went to see a presentation about fluoride at North York City Centre. Going down, I decided to walk from Finch station down, and took the subway back up. Even with the wait during the evening, it was significantly faster than walking.

This is why I'm saying it is better for rapid transit, especially grade separated, to stop at major and collector streets (ie: Broadview, Pape, etc) while having a local bus pick up people in between, like near Chester. This way local residents have their needs served, while through transit isn't held up.

One last example I want to share: There are a number of commercial establishments between Crosby Ave and Elgin Mills Rd in Richmond Hill. However, the Viva bus only stops at the said roads, it doesn't stop at these midblock locations. Generally to get to these places, it is not a tedious walk from either stop, but I am located one stop north at Bernard Ave. Therefore it feels a little silly to take the bus one stop, then walk the rest of the way. Likewise, walking the entire distance does become tedious. In this scenario, when the weather is not bike friendly, catching a local bus could fit my transportation needs, while allowing through transit the ability to continue without the stop inconvenience.