Parliament Streetcar

[Midtown Urbanist]

Normally I'd agree with having a grid system, but when you have a line that's operating so close to downtown, it makes sense to have it actually go through downtown. Forcing a transfer at Sumach to go downtown for a whole 2 stations would be annoying for many. If I'm heading southbound on Parliament, I'd much rather just stay on the streetcar I'm on and access downtown via King, even if it does end up being marginally slower. FWIW, I think Spadina suffers from the same issue. It'd be nice if there was a sub-route on Spadina that went east on either King or Queen, giving direct downtown access.

Spadina-King-Parliament maybe?

With that alignment, it gives people in St. James Town, Cabbagetown and Regent Park an alternative means for reaching the Financial and Entertainment Districts.

 

[Avenue]

The process in which a streetcar (standard Toronto streetcar technology) to leave the Castle Frank station, head down on Bloor E, and get onto Parliament Street would be PAINFUL. And maybe take more than 10 minutes.

As stated, the Parliament bus has low ridership. Which could be due to the deficient service in the first place, or the Castle Frank station being unpleasant, or a combination of both. Not to mention the Wellesley Bus, Carlton and Dundas streetcars serve the area more than sufficiently for people to get downtown (or Yonge Line). Transferring at Castle Frank presents no clear advantages for the majority.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

The process in which a streetcar (standard Toronto streetcar technology) to leave the Castle Frank station, head down on Bloor E, and get onto Parliament Street would be PAINFUL. And maybe take more than 10 minutes.

As stated, the Parliament bus has low ridership. Which could be due to the deficient service in the first place, or the Castle Frank station being unpleasant, or a combination of both. Not to mention the Wellesley Bus, Carlton and Dundas streetcars serve the area more than sufficiently for people to get downtown (or Yonge Line). Transferring at Castle Frank presents no clear advantages for the majority.

Not having decent north south transit is part of the reason why Yonge is overcrowded. Castle Frank would be tight, but can work. After all, the streetcar crossing on Carlton and Parliament is tighter.

 

[Avenue]

Not having decent north south transit is part of the reason why Yonge is overcrowded. Castle Frank would be tight, but can work. After all, the streetcar crossing on Carlton and Parliament is tighter.

Transit between Queen and Bloor on Parliament has very very little to do with the congestion on Yonge.

 

[44 North]

So it is true that there are recent developments that should warrant revisiting this topic of the Parliament Streetcar. Namely:

- Future disruptions on both Broadview and Queen streetcar routes due to DRL construction

This might be the only reason I think it's worth pursuing. Feel like we need to have a plan to deal with RL construction, which will be pretty brutal. Bringing service up to Castle Frank for 1-2 yrs during this could help. But don't want us to lose focus of other projects, which I think your other points may result in. Before we know it we could have Metrolinx, premier, and mayor presenting some cockamamie CastleFrankTrack or StreetcaRER to delay the RL.

Not having decent north south transit is part of the reason why Yonge is overcrowded. Castle Frank would be tight, but can work. After all, the streetcar crossing on Carlton and Parliament is tighter.

Would it be decent N/S transit though? It'd largely be mixed traffic, and getting from Parliament into/out of the station seems like it might be slow.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Transit between Queen and Bloor on Parliament has very very little to do with the congestion on Yonge.

Disagree entirely. The streetcars are two of the biggest feeders to the Yonge section of the subway.

This might be the only reason I think it's worth pursuing. Feel like we need to have a plan to deal with RL construction, which will be pretty brutal. Bringing service up to Castle Frank for 1-2 yrs during this could help. But don't want us to lose focus of other projects, which I think your other points may result in. Before we know it we could have Metrolinx, premier, and mayor presenting some cockamamie CastleFrankTrack or StreetcaRER to delay the RL.



Would it be decent N/S transit though? It'd largely be mixed traffic, and getting from Parliament into/out of the station seems like it might be slow.

It would be tough to get in and out of Castle Frank, but it's not the worst loop.

 

[drum118]

Before trying to resurrect the Parliament streetcar (and bring it to Castle Frank - where it never went, for good practical reasons) you need to look back at the QQE Transit EA and many discussions on UT.

There was no reason for A Castle Frank Loop, as it used the Broadview Loop or was part of the Danforth Line before the subway was built.

Since the Waterfront EA's started in 2004, but more toward 2008, the Parliament loop has been brought up more times enough since it would do many things that currently can't be done. If this was the US, that line would be built now regardless how low the ridership is related to other TTC routes. It becomes part of a network within a network and another network like other lines. It moreso once the "FULL" QQE and the Portland Lines are built. Until those lines are built between 2020-2035 and beyond, then that is time to really look at this line. Until then, it remains a bus route.

I fully support the building of this line and am on record since 2004 calling for it.

I guess traffic lights don't count how cars get in/out of the loop as well onto Parliament???

 

[44 North]

There was no reason for A Castle Frank Loop, as it used the Broadview Loop or was part of the Danforth Line before the subway was built.

Since the Waterfront EA's started in 2004, but more toward 2008, the Parliament loop has been brought up more times enough since it would do many things that currently can't be done. If this was the US, that line would be built now regardless how low the ridership is related to other TTC routes. It becomes part of a network within a network and another network like other lines. It moreso once the "FULL" QQE and the Portland Lines are built. Until those lines are built between 2020-2035 and beyond, then that is time to really look at this line. Until then, it remains a bus route.

I fully support the building of this line and am on record since 2004 calling for it.

I guess traffic lights don't count how cars get in/out of the loop as well onto Parliament???

Feel like if TTC wanted to bring streetcars into Castle Frank's bus area they'd call for a traffic signal at the entrance. Obviously they do this today with buses just fine. But for new rail infrastructure it seems like this instance would call for it. Bloor is pretty fast there, and looking for a gap to turn against three oncoming lanes may be viewed as dangerous with a LFLRV. And would Transportation Services be okay with this new signal?

So one (maybe) traffic light out front of the station, then one at Parliament/Bloor, then south on a mixed traffic route to King, then veer NE along King, then south again along Cherry to the lake. Obviously good for network connectivity, but maybe funds would be better used elsewhere.

 

[Towered]

Feel like if TTC wanted to bring streetcars into Castle Frank's bus area they'd call for a traffic signal at the entrance. Obviously they do this today with buses just fine. But for new rail infrastructure it seems like this instance would call for it. Bloor is pretty fast there, and looking for a gap to turn against three oncoming lanes may be viewed as dangerous with a LFLRV. And would Transportation Services be okay with this new signal?

So one (maybe) traffic light out front of the station, then one at Parliament/Bloor, then south on a mixed traffic route to King, then veer NE along King, then south again along Cherry to the lake. Obviously good for network connectivity, but maybe funds would be better used elsewhere.

Why go east on King and then south on Cherry? Just take the line all the way down Parliament to Queen's Quay.

 

[gweed123]

The process in which a streetcar (standard Toronto streetcar technology) to leave the Castle Frank station, head down on Bloor E, and get onto Parliament Street would be PAINFUL. And maybe take more than 10 minutes.

You're assuming that the streetcars would operate in mixed-traffic around/on the Bloor Viaduct. With some reconfiguration and maybe some expansion, they could potentially operate in a dedicated lane. My preference would be to have them exit Castle Frank, cross the entirety of Bloor, and then run streetcar lanes on the far south side of the viaduct, turning onto the east side of Parliament, completely avoiding the Bloor-Parliament intersection. It could revert to an in-median alignment somewhere between Bloor and Wellesley.

As stated, the Parliament bus has low ridership. Which could be due to the deficient service in the first place, or the Castle Frank station being unpleasant, or a combination of both. Not to mention the Wellesley Bus, Carlton and Dundas streetcars serve the area more than sufficiently for people to get downtown (or Yonge Line). Transferring at Castle Frank presents no clear advantages for the majority.

The Parliament bus has low ridership because it doesn't really go anywhere people want to go. As for the E-W streetcars, a lot of the time they're jam packed by the time they reach Parliament (going westbound).

 

[Admiral Beez]

Feel like if TTC wanted to bring streetcars into Castle Frank's bus area they'd call for a traffic signal at the entrance. Obviously they do this today with buses just fine. But for new rail infrastructure it seems like this instance would call for it. Bloor is pretty fast there, and looking for a gap to turn against three oncoming lanes may be viewed as dangerous with a LFLRV. And would Transportation Services be okay with this new signal?

So one (maybe) traffic light out front of the station, then one at Parliament/Bloor, then south on a mixed traffic route to King, then veer NE along King, then south again along Cherry to the lake. Obviously good for network connectivity, but maybe funds would be better used elsewhere.

How about returning the Parliament-Bloor loop to its original location?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_streetcar_line

Then build a tunnel or underpass to the station. It would be nice to access Castlefrank subway from the south side of Bloor.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Streetcar on Parliament would be great, https://transit.toronto.on.ca/streetcar/4120.shtml

 

[jcam]

That Line 2 covered bridge might need some lifecycle work coming up...stack an LRT track on top of it running into the station. yes, I know that's pretty-hair-brained, but avoids issues with Bloor and partially re-uses infrastructure.

 

[gweed123]

That Line 2 covered bridge might need some lifecycle work coming up...stack an LRT track on top of it running into the station. yes, I know that's pretty-hair-brained, but avoids issues with Bloor and partially re-uses infrastructure.

Interesting. So you're suggesting have the streetcar go on top of the bridge, under the Bloor-Parliament intersection, and emerge from a portal on the south side of Bloor?

 

[jcam]

Interesting. So you're suggesting have the streetcar go on top of the bridge, under the Bloor-Parliament intersection, and emerge from a portal on the south side of Bloor?

Didn't put much thought into it...maybe above ground crossing Bloor but using the existing intersection light...red to everyone while a streetcar passes though.