Transportation planning in Toronto: dead end the divide

[Asterix]

Ugh that video makes me really wish they'd go back to the drawing board with Transit City if they really want to build an LRT network on appropriate corridors (i.e. corridors without rapid transit; i.e. corridors that don't already have subway on them).

From that video, it looks like the line predominantly runs next to a freeway and adjacent to sprawling single family homes. Rather different than any of the streets currently planned for TC lines which has as one of the city planning goals, to enhance street life, something completely inapplicable to the Calgary presentation.

 

[W. K. Lis]

From that video, it looks like the line predominantly runs next to a freeway and adjacent to sprawling single family homes. Rather different than any of the streets currently planned for TC lines which has as one of the city planning goals, to enhance street life, something completely inapplicable to the Calgary presentation.

Not even the Hurontario LRT is comparable to the Calgary LRT. The Hurontario LRT is more like the Finch West LRT or Sheppard West LRT, because of the similar neighourhoods and districts it runs through.

 

[Electrify]

Maybe I shouldn't have gotten into a whole fantasy map descriptive there, but the point I was trying to make was that we need to think from a more efficient network standpoint, rather than this goes there. It does not make sense to have passengers transfer on to an intermediate transit line which runs for a short stretch when the current line can be extended. While this goes for the SRT, this can be used anywhere. Do we have people travelling on toe Yonge line transfer to a LRT at Lawrence, then transfer back on to a subway at Sheppard-Yonge? Sure, looking at it from a bureaucratic perspective this make sense since there is less density along this stretch, but from a human perspective it seems like a cheap, needless transfer for the rider.

Obviously, transfers are a part of a transit network. But it is how they are executed which is important. People don't mind transferring too much at Bloor or Sheppard because they appear as separate lines with different set destinations. People don't mind St. George too much because to get between platforms requires nothing more than a short staircase. Meanwhile with the Danforth line, it feels that Scarborough Center/McCowan should be its destination. Kennedy doesn't feel like a destination, it feels like a stop in the middle of nowhere and that they were too cheap to extend the line. Even worse, transferring between the two lines requires walking up several flights of stairs (with limited escalator access) or taking two elevators which both move at a snail's pace.

When it comes to Transit City, it feels as if suburbanites are being told by downtowners what is best for them. Downtowners insist on bus-like stop spacing of only a few hundred meters, because they don't want people to walk too far. Meanwhile not only did I thought we were trying to encourage more walking among suburbanites, but people out here accept that everything is not a 30 second walk away and tend to be more willing to walk or cycle further to their stop. They also prefer "rapid" transit services with less stops and higher travel speeds compared to slower local transit services. And no, I don't have sources to back this up. I'm speaking from personal experience as a suburban transit rider, and from observing other suburban transit riders' behaviours. So if you want us to take transit, give us what we want and stop telling us what we should want!

 

[Dan416]

FWIW I agree with you completely Electrify.

 

[GraphicMatt]

When it comes to Transit City, it feels as if suburbanites are being told by downtowners what is best for them. Downtowners insist on bus-like stop spacing of only a few hundred meters, because they don't want people to walk too far. Meanwhile not only did I thought we were trying to encourage more walking among suburbanites, but people out here accept that everything is not a 30 second walk away and tend to be more willing to walk or cycle further to their stop. They also prefer "rapid" transit services with less stops and higher travel speeds compared to slower local transit services. And no, I don't have sources to back this up. I'm speaking from personal experience as a suburban transit rider, and from observing other suburban transit riders' behaviours. So if you want us to take transit, give us what we want and stop telling us what we should want!

But this isn't even close to true. Communities consistently ask for more stops during the planning phase of transit lines. If transit planners are at fault here, it's because they listen to the community too much.

Maybe you're hitting on a more important part of the divide, though: Suburban residents do tend to look at transit from a "How fast will this get me downtown?" commuter-focused perspective and tend to pull out the whole "this won't get me out of my car" argument in opposition to certain plans (as if it matters).

 

[Paleo]

When it comes to Transit City, it feels as if suburbanites are being told by downtowners what is best for them. Downtowners insist on bus-like stop spacing of only a few hundred meters, because they don't want people to walk too far. Meanwhile not only did I thought we were trying to encourage more walking among suburbanites, but people out here accept that everything is not a 30 second walk away and tend to be more willing to walk or cycle further to their stop. They also prefer "rapid" transit services with less stops and higher travel speeds compared to slower local transit services. And no, I don't have sources to back this up. I'm speaking from personal experience as a suburban transit rider, and from observing other suburban transit riders' behaviours. So if you want us to take transit, give us what we want and stop telling us what we should want!

Hogwash. Who was it asking for more stops on express services like 190? Oh wait it was the local community!

As always, stop spacing should be dictated by demand. Closer together in areas of high demand with high density and large numbers of destinations, and further apart in lower density areas.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Hogwash. Who was it asking for more stops on express services like 190? Oh wait it was the local community!

As always, stop spacing should be dictated by demand. Closer together in areas of high demand with high density and large numbers of destinations, and further apart in lower density areas.

Except that most would want a stop close to where they live or work, and bypass everyone else.

 

[Dan416]

Except that most would want a stop close to where they live or work, and bypass everyone else.

Precisely

 

[ssiguy2]

TC was more of a social enginering exercise than an attempt of bringing mass and rapid transit to Torontonians.
All it did was raise expectations of the long suffering TTC patrons and has resulted in another lost opportunity.

 

[Asterix]

TC was more of a social enginering exercise than an attempt of bringing mass and rapid transit to Torontonians.
All it did was raise expectations of the long suffering TTC patrons and has resulted in another lost opportunity.

Say what? Just what are you basing these conclusions on?

As far as losing an opportunity, wouldn't that be more applicably applied to the province who cut funding and limited the scope of the network to be built and lengthened the timeline for that to happen?

And stopping all that and instead building a few km of subway in one corner of the city is bringing rapid transit to more Torontonians?

 

[Electrify]

But this isn't even close to true. Communities consistently ask for more stops during the planning phase of transit lines. If transit planners are at fault here, it's because they listen to the community too much.

Maybe you're hitting on a more important part of the divide, though: Suburban residents do tend to look at transit from a "How fast will this get me downtown?" commuter-focused perspective and tend to pull out the whole "this won't get me out of my car" argument in opposition to certain plans (as if it matters).

Are the people complaining actual transit users, or property owners who don't want to see that bus stop removed in fear of lowering their land values? Maybe we simply need to invest more in parallel services - one for local trips, and one for express trips. Some have argued it is a wasteful investment of transit, but even downtown there is a local bus on Yonge that operates above the subway which runs express. One size fits all is virtually impossible in an area as large and complex as Toronto.

 

[Chuck]

When it comes to Transit City, it feels as if suburbanites are being told by downtowners what is best for them. Downtowners insist on bus-like stop spacing of only a few hundred meters, because they don't want people to walk too far..

This is a stereotype. No one likes trundling along Queen Street at 5 km/hr on a streetcar, nor the ridiculous stop spacing on the Spadina streetcar. There's a reason why people pay a premium to live on subway lines but not streetcar or bus routes - speed, frequency, and accessibility, none of which the latter two offer. I live nearly downtown, and I plan my chores around maximizing time on the subway.

 

[EnviroTO]

This is a stereotype. No one likes trundling along Queen Street at 5 km/hr on a streetcar, nor the ridiculous stop spacing on the Spadina streetcar.

Bingo. Streetcars as seen downtown are basically normal surface transit; a local bus route on rails. Who likes sitting on a local bus route going slow? Nobody. The downtown streetcar still makes sense because there are local trips being made and the number of passengers per kilometre is high so the larger vehicle makes sense.

Downtowners insist on bus-like stop spacing of only a few hundred meters, because they don't want people to walk too far..

They insist on bus-like stop spacing because it is seen as a bus-like service. What has been set up downtown isn't seen as rapid transit. Just like spacing every 1km would be unacceptable on a suburban local bus route it is seen as unacceptable downtown.

 

[Still Waters]

Stop spacing is like drawing lines on a map. It can be debated endlessly and everyone will have a different idea based on their own perceived needs and wants. In the end, the only guarantee seems to be that whatever is decided won't please everyone. The TC stop spacing of about 400-500m on the surface is twice or more as wide as current bus/streetcar routes and roughly comparable to the subway stop spacing on the original section of the BD subway. The underground spacing (on Eglinton LRT) of 800-1000m will be more comparable to the average spacing on the Yonge subway north of Bloor. It balances the need to serve local areas/businesses in the corridors while still maintaining a minimum average speed.

The decision to extend a subway or not has nothing to do with downtowners telling suburbanites that they shouldn't walk too far. Similarly, it shouldn't be based on the idea that every neighbourhood in the city is somehow entitled to its own subway line. And the argument that the Sheppard Subway should be extended to STC to eliminate the transfer at Don Mills only holds true for those who happen to be going to STC. Those who want to continue east on Sheppard will still have to transfer, whether to a bus or an LRV. The relative numbers matter and that's what the decision should be based on.

As for TC being an exercise in social engineering, I'm not sure what that means. Planners don't wake up everyday wondering who to "socially engineer" today. Plans are developed based on technical grounds like ridership, development potential, urban design and costs. Whether they actually get built or not is fundamentally a political decision, not a planning decision.

For Chuck, who mentions that he plans his trips solely around the subway, despite the availability of buses and streetcars, it is only feasible to do that if there are subway stations within walking distance of where you start and end your trips. "Fast" suburban station spacing of 1-2km or more will not allow most suburbanites that luxury, even if subways were built everywhere. Then you get back into the debate about how close to put the stations and how much to slow down the service. And around and around we go...

 

[Electrify]

They insist on bus-like stop spacing because it is seen as a bus-like service. What has been set up downtown isn't seen as rapid transit. Just like spacing every 1km would be unacceptable on a suburban local bus route it is seen as unacceptable downtown.

Transit City was not about creating "bus-like" service, it was positioned as "bringing rapid transit to the suburbs." Spending a billion dollars to create a "bus-like" service may very well be the biggest waste of money Toronto has ever spent on transit infrastructure - and this city has wasted a lot of the decades!