News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5K     0 

I think Unimaginative's point that we shouldn't use Spadina and St. Clair as models for Transit City is what I agree with.

I'd be in favour of eliminating two stops immediately - Adelaide/Richmond and Sussex, but for now maintain Sullivan, Wilcocks and Baldwin. Spadina stop spacing is better than many bus routes or even the Queen or Dundas cars. If you look at the Bay bus, there's more stops - 2 stops between Queen and Dundas versus 1 on Spadina, 2 stops between Wellesley and the subway versus 1, 2 stops between Dundas and College versus 1 on Spadina. Measures to help would include turning on the damned transit priority and POP - and I do wish these would be done now. POP will come with the new LRVs (which the larger capacity with fewer cars will speed service on this line at least when there's the insanely high frequencies, otherwise I do not support reduced service with larger cars where service is currently every 5-6 minutes or less).

Ridership shot up big time on this route since the streetcars arrived, and I'd hate to see it with buses.

I really want to see at the least a 2 for 1 stop reduction on the Transit City lines - they did a 3 for 1 on Bloor, it didn't kill that street.
 
I completely agree, SeanTrans. I think that the transit priority and route management is just as important as speed. All of these routes should have a complete GPS or similar monitoring system and the vehicles should operate on a strict schedule and headway. If they can do it on much busier routes in Europe and Asia, there is absolutely no reason it couldn't be done here. They should rip out that damned CIS which was invented before personal computers.
 
Spadina and St. Clair should not be models for other routes, but if they are, the fact that no one seems interested in running them to their full potential is very troubling - Transit City's routes are much longer, which will magnify any operational problems.
 
as someone who actually lives on Spadina and uses it as my local route, I can tell you that it bothers me very much that I have to budget at least 30 minutes to travel three kilometres up to Bloor. It bothers me, it bothers my friends who live near me or visit me, and it bothers my neighbours.

Of course. I invite anyone reading to provide an example of a single person who *isn't* bothered by the lack of speed on this route, or on any other. This is part of what I meant when I posted earlier that those who are cooking up this plan, and those who support it, seem to exist in an alternate reality to mine. I know of no one who doesn't believe that speed is THE most important element of transit, with schedule reliability a close runner-up. Saying that Spadina 'works' simply because it eventually gets one from point A to B is frankly ridiculous - that standard for 'success' is so debased as to be virtually negligible. A mule could serve that same purpose. Or my feet. Noting that people ride Spadina in large numbers is certainly not necessarily a comment on the quality or 'success' of the service, either - what other transit choice is there? Also completely disagree with the anything-is-better-than-nothing rationale - all we'll end up with in that case is a vast system so painfully tedious and inefficient that many will get back in their cars. There is simply *no way* that a streetcar/LRT system that runs mixed with vehicle traffic is ever going to be fast enough to cover the distances being pitched under this plan in satisfactory times. The answer is to cut-n'-cover, or to use other routes (hydro corridors, etc.) - in other words, a proper subway/LRT, which is what should be built in the first place rather than this giant streetcar thing. Why build this streetcar network at all if the plan is to 'eventually' (like when? many decades from now?) speed it up, bury it, whatever? Just do it right to start with, instead - if that requires a bit more painful waiting time to become a reality, so be it. Better that than a system few really want to use.

Spadina is a very, very poor urban service considering it runs on an expensive right-of-way and it would take a hard-core transit geek to say otherwise.

Totally agree.

Can someone - anyone - explain *why* the dominant thinking amongst those planning and pushing this system is that speed is only a minor element in the equation? I've never met a single person outside of this board and the TTC who agrees. What's the deal?
 
Alvin, come on. If it's so easy, why has it been almost two decades that Spadina has been built and it still runs as slow or slower than the bus? Even now, in this midst of all this streetcar talk, nobody is seriously proposing doing anything to make Spadina run properly.
It's only been one decade, and the only reason the Spadina car got slower is because ridership shot up so much. More riders paying their fare at each stop means a slower ride. That's also why fare recovery has gone down - the service is literally a victim of its own success.

POP alone would make a world of difference in the speed of the Spadina car. I wish they'd implement that now and not wait for the new LRVs.

Also completely disagree with the anything-is-better-than-nothing rationale - all we'll end up with in that case is a vast system so painfully tedious and inefficient that many will get back in their cars. There is simply *no way* that a streetcar/LRT system that runs mixed with vehicle traffic is ever going to be fast enough to cover the distances being pitched under this plan in satisfactory times. The answer is to cut-n'-cover, or to use other routes (hydro corridors, etc.) - in other words, a proper subway/LRT, which is what should be built in the first place rather than this giant streetcar thing.
The evidence suggests that people aren't "getting back in their cars". Ridership is higher on the Spadina streetcar than the bus, and that's one thing slowing it down. The operation simply isn't designed to handle the demand. I disagree that streetcars on streets can't cover the distances in satisfactory times. All that's needed is POP and, even without signal priority, you'd get decent times. Most of the wasted time on Spadina is spent loading and unloading passengers.

Has the TTC ever given a reason that their streetcar rights of way don't operate on a POP system?
 
The "getting back in their cars" line was very clearly referring to the potential situation in places like Rexdale and Malvern, where travel times are the number one concern of transit riders. We're endlessly debating streetcars downtown but the whole purpose of Transit City is to bring them *everywhere* in the city. It's painfully obvious that politics, not good transit policy, will give us a Morningside LRT, replacing a bus route used only 17,000 times a day, that (along with a Sheppard line and an extended RT) will manage to avoid the heart of Malvern. 2/3 of a billion dollars will be spent on it and it will still not carry more people than the Dufferin bus, or the Jane bus, or Finch East, or...
 
It's only been one decade, and the only reason the Spadina car got slower is because ridership shot up so much. More riders paying their fare at each stop means a slower ride. That's also why fare recovery has gone down - the service is literally a victim of its own success.

POP alone would make a world of difference in the speed of the Spadina car. I wish they'd implement that now and not wait for the new LRVs.

I don't see how fare recovery can go down with the same number of vehicles operating and more people paying fares. I'd also note that the sub-50% recovery doesn't include the hundreds of millions in capital costs. This does not mean that I think Spadina was a bad idea. I'm very happy that they built it, right-of-way and all, and it's a great spot for light rail. I just think that the TTC has done a rather poor job of operating a more-than-decent physical plant.

I completely agree about POP. I just wonder why the TTC has not chosen to implement it after all this time. I can't tell you how many times I've waited and waited for at times as many as three light cycles while people slowly climb aboard at Dundas, each one shifting around their shopping bags and rummaging through their handbags or pockets for change.

I believe the excuse for opposing POP is that legions of people would climb on the streetcar at the last stop and then get into the fare-paid area at Spadina station. Of course, one would think that the TTC could have figured out how to solve this problem. There are lots of options, like Curitiba-style fare-paid tube stops, or checking tickets upon arrival at Spadina like they do during the Ex at Union.
 
It's been a while since I rode the Spadina streetcar/LRT whatever and it definitely has WAY too many stops. And it is very slow. And the cars bunch. You wait like 15 minutes for a streetcar, and then two or three come at the same time. Streetcars main problem is that they can't get around each other. I remember once deciding to take the Spadina streetcar to Union instead of going to the subway. Took me a lot longer than I'd anticipated.

If the city can do Transit City right, then it'll be great. But I have deep doubts that whatever they plan is going to work. Let's see what the planned stop spacing is, whether they can do POP, and whether they can get signal priority turned on.

Oh and speed is definitely the main priority for transit riders. What's the fastest way to get there? The streetcar is rarely the answer.
 
unimaginative:

Where did you get the sub-50 number from? Having gone through the service reports, 510 is hovering around mid 50s to 60s range for the past 5 years. In addition, there is currently none, nor as never been any bus or streetcar routes that achieved anywhere near cost recovery, let alone being profitable for between 2000 and 2005.

AoD
 
You're right. It was actually just over 50%. The Spadina Bus, just before it was replaced, was making a profit and was the only route in the system to do so.
 
It includes the Harbourfront portion...most surface routes are profitable for part of the way, but that doesn't mean anything of consequence.

edit - how far did the "profitable" bus go?
 
'fraid not. I read the original report, but I can't find it. Here's an article from the Globe.

Rapid transit? Not on Spadina
A close look at the popular streetcar suggests it's not the success many believe it to be. STEPHEN WICKENS reports
STEPHEN WICKENS

Special to The Globe and Mail

May 7, 2005

Arja Chopra has given up on the Spadina streetcar, just as the Toronto Transit Commission appears set to fully embrace similar dedicated-lane routes across the city.

"Bathurst is faster, and it's much more pleasant than Spadina," says Ms. Chopra, who operates Sugar & Spice, a health-food store in Kensington Market, halfway between the two streetcar lines. "I tried [Bathurst] because I didn't like the crowds at Spadina station. Then I found it saved me a few minutes each morning.

"He didn't believe me," she says, smiling and pointing to husband and business partner Dave Chopra.

"It's true," says Mr. Chopra, who adds that he always urged his wife to take Spadina, figuring that the street's dedicated transit lanes had to make the trip faster. Now he's convinced they don't, but he's puzzled by one thing: "How can there be such a secret? Everybody still thinks Spadina is better."

Maybe not everybody, but rare are the people who question whether the 510 Spadina route has really been the better way since it replaced the No. 77 bus almost eight years ago, at a cost of $140-million. As Toronto considers constructing Spadina-like rights of way as part of a $600-million citywide "surface rapid transit" network that could see dedicated lanes along Eglinton and Lawrence Avenues and on Don Mills and Kingston Roads, the question is critical. And the answer might surprise.

In January, shortly after the Toronto Transit Commission released a report calling for transit rights of way on these arterial roads, The Globe and Mail tried to assess the effectiveness of the Spadina line. Shown the results, opponents of the proposed right of way on St. Clair Avenue West say they now wish they'd asked more questions about the Spadina route during debates about the St. Clair plan. And a transit expert thinks the findings could place the $65-million St. Clair project in jeopardy.

We found that:

Instead of living up to pre-construction reports that streetcars on dedicated lanes would cut travel time from Bloor Street to Queen's Quay by 5½ minutes -- the environmental assessment boasted of up to 10 minutes in savings -- the 510 appears to take longer than the buses that plied the route from 1948 to 1997. A TTC document obtained last month says the trip takes one minute longer in the afternoon rush hour than in 1990. Data on historical and current transfers indicate a 17-minute bus trip in 1993 now takes 19 minutes by streetcar.

The 510 may be the slowest of all routes between the Bloor-Danforth and Queen Street. Travel times on TTC transfers put Bloor-to-Queen trips at 12 minutes on Spadina, 8 minutes on Bathurst and 10 minutes on other routes.

The TTC says ridership on Spadina is up 30 per cent since 1997, the year the line opened. But when compared with 1992, the last year before construction tore up the street and cut into ridership, Spadina appears to be down 1.5 per cent, while overall TTC ridership is up about 3.4 per cent.

TTC cost-to-revenue ratio lists show the Spadina and Harbourfront lines (now considered one for accounting purposes) have plunged to 35th-best among the TTC's 132 surface routes. In 1997, they were No. 1 and No. 9, respectively, with the Spadina bus one of only seven routes turning a profit.

The only finding that Mitch Stambler, the TTC's manager of service planning, strongly disputes is the question of whether the streetcars are slower than the old buses, although the numbers we've used came from the TTC.

But he says that speed isn't the primary goal of the new dedicated lanes. "We have emphasized over and over again that on Spadina or St. Clair or any other route where we're looking to establish a right of way, it's not an issue of speed," he says.
"Service reliability and regularity matter first and foremost."

Still, he says, the TTC is working to speed up service through gradual changes that include increasing capacity by coupling streetcars and acquiring new cars that accommodate more passengers, as well as providing more locations where operators can manipulate traffic lights.

Ridership on all routes is subject to "many, many macroeconomic factors," he says, arguing that "apples-to-apples" comparisons aren't always possible. And besides, he adds, the streetcar lines have benefits that extend beyond passenger numbers. "We've never argued that streetcars don't cost more to operate than buses," he says, pointing out that they're still a bargain compared with subways, which cost about 10 times as much to build. "But all the benefits they bring -- a smooth, quiet ride; zero emissions; economic development -- are well known."

While Mr. Stambler doesn't sound worried about our findings, people from both sides of the St. Clair debate had a stronger reaction. "Good God! This is unbelievable," said Ed Levy, an internationally respected transportation planner and engineer who made a deputation to City Council in favour of the St. Clair plan last year.

"I supported light rail then, and I still do," Mr. Levy of BA Group says. "But you have to do it properly."

One concern he cites is the built-in delays caused by the positioning of passenger platforms, which should be placed before traffic lights, he says, but instead were put in after them to accommodate left-turn lanes for cars. "We're forcing [streetcars] to wait at lights before they can pick up and drop off passengers on the far side of the intersections. It's a mistake, and it looks like they plan to do the same thing on St. Clair.

"All this other stuff [Spadina travel times, ridership and economics] should have been part of the debate," Mr. Levy says. Now, he says he fears the provincial Ministry of the Environment will call for a full environmental assessment rather than continue to fast-track the process. "They want to start construction this summer, and a full EA will probably kill [the plan] altogether."

Of course, if the city and TTC's ideas for St. Clair die, it would please Save Our St. Clair leader Margaret Smith, who says "the so-called Spadina experience and all its wonderful successes were used to sell the project every step of the way."

She and her group believe advocates oversold potential time savings on St. Clair and ridership-growth figures on Spadina, and says she's upset that the TTC and the city didn't mention the streetcar line's drawbacks in more than 50 public meetings about St. Clair.

"It doesn't surprise me, but the fact this information is only coming out now is just further proof that the whole process stunk," she says. Mr. Stambler defends the TTC's push for dedicated lanes, however, saying that the round-trip time from Spadina station has actually improved. "That's a fact I'll do a bit of digging on," he says."The fact that [Spadina] revenue over cost looks worse is: A, no secret; B, we've never hid it; C, we're not embarrassed; and D, it represents an investment in the health of the city and the whole TTC, and that's a decision council made."

Mr. Stambler points out as well that the Spadina route became more costly because it went from bus to streetcar, but that this won't be a factor on St. Clair.

Two others who had roles on opposite sides of the St. Clair debate didn't sound at all surprised that Spadina doesn't appear to have lived up to its hype. Richard Gilbert, research director for the Centre for Sustainable Transportation and a former city councillor, opposed St. Clair partly because he feels we haven't learned from mistakes on Spadina.

"They may have built dedicated lanes for streetcars, but the intersections were designed for cars," he says. "The St. Clair plan will do much the same thing, and it will only add to the litany of misapplied capital spending the TTC has given us in the past 30 years."

Greg Gormick, who wrote a report called The Streetcar Renaissance for the TTC and the St. Clair EA process, says if we want any of these lines to really work, we have to make hard decisions.

"We have to decide whether we're doing light rapid transit or streetcars. Both are good concepts, but Spadina is neither fish nor fowl -- too many stops, too many concessions to cars. It's the worst of both worlds and . . . unless we give transit real priority, we'll repeat the mistakes, starting with St. Clair."

And back at the health-food store in Kensington Market, Arja Chopra has a decision to make, too.

"They're going to tear up the tracks on Bathurst this summer. I'll probably use the replacement bus. We'll see how it goes."
 
unimaginative:

I think that article in the Globe is also got the stats seriously wrong, for example:

The TTC says ridership on Spadina is up 30 per cent since 1997, the year the line opened. But when compared with 1992, the last year before construction tore up the street and cut into ridership, Spadina appears to be down 1.5 per cent, while overall TTC ridership is up about 3.4 per cent.

Looking at the TTC Ridership Growth Strategy report, the ridership in 1992 is about 410-420M, while it's 370-80M range in 1997; the numbers they quoted can't be right.

AoD
 
I think one of the biggest problems on the spadina line is the turn around on king st. I don't understand why the streetcars just don't continue to the very end of spadina at queen quay and turn around there. There are so many delays of streetcars taking forever to make the turn at king st or adelaide.
 

Back
Top