News   Dec 20, 2024
 584     4 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 528     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 690     0 

TTC: Scarborough Busway Construction (portion of the former Scarborough RT route)

I'm looking to potentially buy a condo along the busway, formally near the RT. The condo prices have dropped along this area, probably because of the lack of rapid transit now nearby. (and interest rates etc as well)

Is the busway a permanent thing? Or will they shut it down once the subway opens. I'm ok with a busway to Kennedy, but if they shut it down the subway will be a bit of a walk from where i'm looking to buy.
Nobody really knows, I think. Probably all waiting to see just when Scarb Extension is actually completed and how demand shifts around by then.

The likelihood of a service route seems on the low side but maybe it could be kept so buses entering/leaving Kennedy out of service can sidestep on-street routes.
 
Nobody really knows, I think. Probably all waiting to see just when Scarb Extension is actually completed and how demand shifts around by then.

The likelihood of a service route seems on the low side but maybe it could be kept so buses entering/leaving Kennedy out of service can sidestep on-street routes.
Ok noted. It might just be continued to use because, hey, its there.

But service levels could shift so that its not as frequent.

If GO wants more tracks in the corridor, I could see it being a goner though.
 
I'm looking to potentially buy a condo along the busway, formally near the RT. The condo prices have dropped along this area, probably because of the lack of rapid transit now nearby. (and interest rates etc as well)

Is the busway a permanent thing? Or will they shut it down once the subway opens. I'm ok with a busway to Kennedy, but if they shut it down the subway will be a bit of a walk from where i'm looking to buy.

It will be tempting to repurpose the busway for something like Kennedy Express bus.

But, who knows. GO might need space for more tracks, or TTC might simply not want to maintain the infrastructure once its existence is not critical.
 
What's the stop time at a bus stop? 35 seconds?

That's within the realm of time lost at a single signaled intersection. In other words, not noticeable to those on the bus.

And yet, absolutely noticeable to those who will have a stop far, far closer to them.

Dan
Yes each minor stop adds about 30 seconds to the schedule in each direction (1 min round trip), which will increase operating costs by 1/3 of a bus/operator on a route with 3-minute headways. That's the number you need to take into account when balancing cost vs benefit. And in your analysis you should be weighting the importance of travel time more heavily on an express service than a local service, since the whole point of the express is to be fast. Basic transit coverage is already provided by local services, so the stop spacing does not matter. Express buses should only stop when they encounter an intersecting transit route or a major origin/destination. This is totally different than the calculation for a local bus, where you'd also be looking at service coverage.

Adding one stop, or signalled intersection doesn't noticeably degrade service to passengers on the bus, which is why the City has gotten away with adding so many stops and signals which have now decimated service speed and reliability across the network. It's a classic case of death by a thousand cuts.

If this were a permanent busway then I think there would be a decent case for a stop there. But given that there wasn't a stop there in the past and there won't be a stop there in the future, I don't see the point in having a stop there on the temporary shuttle service.
 
Last edited:
It will be tempting to repurpose the busway for something like Kennedy Express bus.

But, who knows. GO might need space for more tracks, or TTC might simply not want to maintain the infrastructure once its existence is not critical.
Currently the GO tracks have a fairly sharp s-bend at Lawrence East station that limits trains to 40 mph (64 km/h). Other than that curve, the line between Kennedy and Agincourt is pretty much dead straight, so electric trains could cruise at 120 km/h between stops they smoothed out that curve.

Screenshot of openrailwaymap.org:
Capture.PNG

It might be necessary to remove the busway to provide enough space for the wide curves, but it's hard to tell.
 
Currently the GO tracks have a fairly sharp s-bend at Lawrence East station that limits trains to 40 mph (64 km/h). Other than that curve, the line between Kennedy and Agincourt is pretty much dead straight, so electric trains could cruise at 120 km/h between stops they smoothed out that curve.

Screenshot of openrailwaymap.org:
View attachment 612732
It might be necessary to remove the busway to provide enough space for the wide curves, but it's hard to tell.
Maybe construct a third track on the busway as well as straightening the current west track, but turn the current east track into a siding for servicing the industrial spurs?

Tricky part seems to me how to get the shifted mains back over to the current alignment once past the Ellesmere spur but also negotiating the Progress grade sep and Highland Creek bridges without essentially recreating the Lawrence track kink and resulting slow order a few blocks north.
1731875578819.png
 
Maybe construct a third track on the busway as well as straightening the current west track, but turn the current east track into a siding for servicing the industrial spurs?
I'm surprised they can fit in two bus lines on the old SRT ROW - let alone a third track!
 
Ok noted. It might just be continued to use because, hey, its there.

But service levels could shift so that its not as frequent.

If GO wants more tracks in the corridor, I could see it being a goner though.

Yes each minor stop adds about 30 seconds to the schedule in each direction (1 min round trip), which will increase operating costs by 1/3 of a bus/operator on a route with 3-minute headways. That's the number you need to take into account when balancing cost vs benefit. And in your analysis you should be weighting the importance of travel time more heavily on an express service than a local service, since the whole point of the express is to be fast. Basic transit coverage is already provided by local services, so the stop spacing does not matter. Express buses should only stop when they encounter an intersecting transit route or a major origin/destination. This is totally different than the calculation for a local bus, where you'd also be looking at service coverage.

Adding one stop, or signalled intersection doesn't noticeably degrade service to passengers on the bus, which is why the City has gotten away with adding so many stops and signals which have now decimated service speed and reliability across the network. It's a classic case of death by a thousand cuts.

If this were a permanent busway then I think there would be a decent case for a stop there. But given that there wasn't a stop there in the past and there won't be a stop there in the future, I don't see the point in having a stop there on the temporary shuttle service.

Current plans are to have the busway remain after the opening of SSE.
 
Yes each minor stop adds about 30 seconds to the schedule in each direction (1 min round trip), which will increase operating costs by 1/3 of a bus/operator on a route with 3-minute headways. That's the number you need to take into account when balancing cost vs benefit. And in your analysis you should be weighting the importance of travel time more heavily on an express service than a local service, since the whole point of the express is to be fast. Basic transit coverage is already provided by local services, so the stop spacing does not matter. Express buses should only stop when they encounter an intersecting transit route or a major origin/destination. This is totally different than the calculation for a local bus, where you'd also be looking at service coverage.

Adding one stop, or signalled intersection doesn't noticeably degrade service to passengers on the bus, which is why the City has gotten away with adding so many stops and signals which have now decimated service speed and reliability across the network. It's a classic case of death by a thousand cuts.

If this were a permanent busway then I think there would be a decent case for a stop there. But given that there wasn't a stop there in the past and there won't be a stop there in the future, I don't see the point in having a stop there on the temporary shuttle service.
100% agree.

The TTC has this all across its network and it's infuriating. For example, the 984 "express" has stops of both sides of Bathurst street. The 960 Steeles West Express has insane stop density for an express service and I don't know why they brand it as an express service as it is essentially shadowing the local route.

These stops might seem like "oh just 30 seconds" but those 30 seconds can result in a missed connection to an infrequent route, someone being late to work, busses behind being delayed, etc. The impact is much larger than 30 seconds.

The Tara stop should be removed immediately.
 
Tricky part seems to me how to get the shifted mains back over to the current alignment once past the Ellesmere spur but also negotiating the Progress grade sep and Highland Creek bridges without essentially recreating the Lawrence track kink and resulting slow order a few blocks north.
If you want to fix that curve at Lawrence, perhaps you could re-align the tracks south of Lawrence a few metres to the east instead? I was thinking it might be easier to expropriate a 5-10 metre wide sliver from the yard of the apartment building south of Lawrence, east of the tracks? There's just a strip of a few trees there now. Then you could keep the busway and avoid creating that new kink you talked about.
 
100% agree.

The TTC has this all across its network and it's infuriating. For example, the 984 "express" has stops of both sides of Bathurst street. The 960 Steeles West Express has insane stop density for an express service and I don't know why they brand it as an express service as it is essentially shadowing the local route.

These stops might seem like "oh just 30 seconds" but those 30 seconds can result in a missed connection to an infrequent route, someone being late to work, busses behind being delayed, etc. The impact is much larger than 30 seconds.

The Tara stop should be removed immediately.
Something I'll never get, why so many "express buses" in that area make every single local stop!

1732046112693.png


1732046150850.png
 
Something I'll never get, why so many "express buses" in that area make every single local stop!

View attachment 613442

View attachment 613443

945: Because the 45 alone has appalling frequencies.

960: because at rush hour the 60 doesn't run west of Pioneer Village. Who cares if it's branded as the 60 or the 960? You would get the same service levels anyway, it's just what they're labelled as that's different.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top