TTC: Streetcar Network

[Johnny Au]

This is exactly what needs to happen. The TTC is unable to follow their own schedule, so it's for the best they switch over to a headway based dispatch since their route management skills are abysmal.

I'd probably go as far to say that they should go with a double-step back crew arrangement. I dont even trust they would be able to meet a step-back arrangement.

Things are so bad, commuters end up relying on transit apps.

 

[Rainforest]

It's a shame that the Ontario Line isn't being planned with streetcar integration in mind. I really think that the 501 should be split with the OL replacing the central portion. I guess you'd have the 501W which would go from Humber/Sunnyside Loop to McCaul Loop and 501E which goes from the Neville Park Loop to the future "Broadview Loop", allowing connections to the OL Queen/Spadina and Leslieville stations respectively.

I believe that will be possible, to some extent, with the planned OL route. In particular, the new 508 can run between Long Branch and the OL's Exhibition terminus, avoiding the downtown congestion and providing reliable service in the west.

The 501E (from Neville) might continue into downtown past Brodview, but at the same time, the 503 can operate just between the Kingston Rd loop and Broadview, again avoiding the downtown congestion. Plus, there could be a 501S running between Neville and Broadview during the peak hours only.

 

[DSC]

I believe that will be possible, to some extent, with the planned OL route. In particular, the new 508 can run between Long Branch and the OL's Exhibition terminus, avoiding the downtown congestion and providing reliable service in the west.

The 501E (from Neville) might continue into downtown past Brodview, but at the same time, the 503 can operate just between the Kingston Rd loop and Broadview, again avoiding the downtown congestion. Plus, there could be a 501S running between Neville and Broadview during the peak hours only.

I think you need to think about (and investigate) where passengers want to go to. Do you think many people taking the 503 are going to Queen/Broadview? I suspect not, so by turning the 503 there you make it necessary for them to get off and take anther vehicle (OL or streetcar) further west. Transit planning is not really about putting 'lines on a map' - it should actually serve the travel needs of passengers.

 

[Reecemartin]

Some lessons from the TTC on how to improve "modern" US streetcars

 

[duffo]

I think you need to think about (and investigate) where passengers want to go to. Do you think many people taking the 503 are going to Queen/Broadview? I suspect not, so by turning the 503 there you make it necessary for them to get off and take anther vehicle (OL or streetcar) further west. Transit planning is not really about putting 'lines on a map' - it should actually serve the travel needs of passengers.

of course they're heading downtown, but it would be much faster to transfer to OL to get there than stay on the 501 through rush-hour traffic. Operationally, a street-running line as long as the 501 is a mess. Having a shorter 501E line allows for more reliable service which feeds into the OL much like any suburban bus route.

 

[nfitz]

of course they're heading downtown, but it would be much faster to transfer to OL to get there than stay on the 501 through rush-hour traffic. Operationally, a street-running line as long as the 501 is a mess. Having a shorter 501E line allows for more reliable service which feeds into the OL much like any suburban bus route.

If you are already on a 501, especially in a seat, there'd have to be a heck of a time advantage to getting out of your seat at the proposed station at Riverdale (Queen/Degrassi) than stay on the streetcar a few more stops to Yonge. But there is none.

Even now, in rush hour, the travel time isn't that bad on Queen from Degrassi to Queen/Yonge. And they could be even faster if they do a King-like transit corridor on Queen from Parliament westwards.

Now, if you were going to Bathurst/King then the subway would be a no-brainer to Riverdale. But combine a 3-minute walk to the subway, and an average 2-minute wait for a train, you've already lost 5 minutes, before the train arrives, and you are up on an unheated, windy, subway platform while the warm cozy streetcar you are on is already at Queen and Sumach. Streetcar travel time in AM peak is about 13 minutes to Queen. Subway isn't going to take less than 6 minutes to go 4 stops. And the new deep platform at Queen/Yonge is going to take a couple of minutes to climb out of. That's 13 minutes right there.

If they can knock a minute or two off the current streetcar times with a transit corridor on Queen, then the streetcar would actually be faster. So unless one wants the exercise of running up many flights of stairs ...

 

[Rainforest]

I think you need to think about (and investigate) where passengers want to go to. Do you think many people taking the 503 are going to Queen/Broadview? I suspect not, so by turning the 503 there you make it necessary for them to get off and take anther vehicle (OL or streetcar) further west. Transit planning is not really about putting 'lines on a map' - it should actually serve the travel needs of passengers.

I agree that the route design must be based on the travel needs rather than just lines on the map. The question, what do the riders actually prefer?

A one-seat ride into downtown, but at the cost of a long wait (because the congested downtown section messes up the streetcar schedules and leads to bunching)? Or, a reliable trip on a short streetcar route with even headways, but at the cost of a transfer? I would prefer the latter option, but that's just me.

By the way, the routing I suggested (the 501E from Neville goes through into downtown, while the 503 terminates at Broadview) would give a choice to almost all riders from the east: take the 503 and transfer, or wait for the 501E and avoid the transfer.

Speaking of the west side, I remember seeing stats somewhere that very few riders boarding the 501/508 in Etobicoke travel all the way to Yonge or Bathurst. The majority of riders in the west use the streetcar for local trips, rather than as a way to reach downtown. If so, then it makes sense to give them a more reliable version of #508, running between Long Branch and the Exhibition. In addition, the 501W can run from the Humber loop and all the way across Yonge, hence those living east of Humber will not lose the one-seat option.

 

[nfitz]

Speaking of the west side, I remember seeing stats somewhere that very few riders boarding the 501/508 in Etobicoke travel all the way to Yonge or Bathurst.

That's true on many routes. I'd typically take 506 in the morning from Woodbine to Broadview in my commute, but invariably the person I'm sat beside may chance once or twice before than. And I don't even get to Yonge. There's a LOT of shorter commutes ... especially to schools. Coming back, occasionally I'd start from Yonge. I'd swear more than half have gotten off before Broadview. But then it can be crush-loaded again at Broadview! Less changeover then though, as the school crowd has mostly finished by the time I commute home.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Toronto should consider using streetcars with doors on both sides. Centre platforms to transfer to Ontario Line stations could be used, instead of buying real estate for off-street loops. We could add left side doors on the existing Flexity Outlook streetcars.

See link to Boston's plans...

Futuristic MBTA Green Line streetcars, coming in 2028, could be self-driving​

MBTA officials are looking into a $3.5 billion plan to overhaul the Green Line, bringing new trolleys to upgraded tracks onto the light rail system.

The tunnels of the Green Line date back to 1897, making the system the oldest in America.

The Green Line, which sees four lines converge on downtown Boston, has about 200,000 trips every weekday. It's the busiest in the country, running along Boston University up to Boston College, and in the other direction, past the Museum of Science and into Cambridge.

The proposed changes, if implemented, could increase ridership to 450,000 a day.

But a consultant's report from November 2017 about derailment issues and said many "components within the Green Line system are well beyond their normal useful lifecycles and require replacement."

 

[drum118]

Toronto should consider using streetcars with doors on both sides. Centre platforms to transfer to Ontario Line stations could be used, instead of buying real estate for off-street loops. We could add left side doors on the existing Flexity Outlook streetcars.

See link to Boston's plans...

Futuristic MBTA Green Line streetcars, coming in 2028, could be self-driving​

Been calling for duel end cars since 2005 as it deals with so many issues that happen to the system today.

Less land for turning cars as well dealing with tight turning radius that cause squealing that is a common complaint by locals.

Having crossovers along the line allows cars to be short turn or reverse if there is blockage to the line in front of the car. This allows fast service to riders going in the opposite direction who car is caught up in blockage going the other way.

Remove the need to have cars go on long detours to get service back on schedule or the need to short turn. Again remove the squealing of cars changing routes for detour or blockage.

Very few locations can support centre platforms and mostly DOA.

Con is the lost of seats where doors will have to be added and one of the biggest bitch I have heard since 2003, even for the subway trains. Doesn't seem to be a problem to other NA systems using duel ends, as well Europe. If subway trains can have doors both sides, why not streetcars or buses??

The other con is it takes time for the driver to walk from one end to the other where the loops allow next to no time to turn. The pro of this it allow the driver some exercise than sitting in a seat for most of their shift if no break can be had for a loop.

Most loops have an issues handling one of the current cars and if sections were added to make the car longer, it will be more of an issues. With stub ends, you can hold 2 cars and based on land, most likely handle longer cars.

Had hope to ride one of the new Boston cars last year, but COVID kill that idea. A lot of trackwork needs to be upgraded and a lot was done last summer with month closure of branches. The new extension will fix some issues for the old section. Main problems in the past been the manufactures of the cars and CAF are doing the new ones.

As a note, think what a duel end car would do for the QQW section once work starts on the east extension. Add a crossover at York St and riders would still use the streetcar to York St than change to buses at Spadina. Do the same at Parliament and you are setup to handle the next phase with no disruption to service or need to build a loop only to remove it at a later date with disruption to service.

 

[W. K. Lis]

If the TTC doesn't go with double-ended streetcars or the addition of left-sided doors, they should consider adding "detour" loop terminals. Streetcar loops should be added at Keele Station and Coxwell Stations to handle detours along the 504, 505, and 506 streetcar routes. That way, we could continue to use streetcars to reach Line 2 instead of shuttle buses, for most of the routes.

 

[reaperexpress]

Toronto should consider using streetcars with doors on both sides. Centre platforms to transfer to Ontario Line stations could be used, instead of buying real estate for off-street loops. We could add left side doors on the existing Flexity Outlook streetcars.

It wouldn't be worth retrofitting 200+ streetcars just to build one or two island platforms. But now that the system uses pantographs rather than trolley poles, the next generation should definitely be double-ended to enable more space-efficient terminal designs, such as below:

 

[superelevation]

Yes I understand that buying more vehicles allows for higher frequency but due to being at grade, there is a limit to how many trains can run a route without 'bunching' and hence slowing down operations. Once the lines are at their highest possible frequency while maintaining current speeds and reliability, it is good that Toronto can simply add more segments to increase capacity.

Adding segments to something like a streetcar feels incredibly unlikely, why break apart a decade old semi-permanently configured tram just to add segments which would then be brand new and out of sync with the rest of the tram. If this doesn't happen with Metro trains, it won't happen with even less integrated trams.

This is exactly what needs to happen. The TTC is unable to follow their own schedule, so it's for the best they switch over to a headway based dispatch since their route management skills are abysmal.

I'd probably go as far to say that they should go with a double-step back crew arrangement. I dont even trust they would be able to meet a step-back arrangement.

I figure the TTC could often run routes a lot less frequently if they did have better headway management. Right now its sort of a lowest common denominator situation where meeting a baseline frequency standard requires more buses than with more refined ops.

It's a shame that the Ontario Line isn't being planned with streetcar integration in mind. I really think that the 501 should be split with the OL replacing the central portion. I guess you'd have the 501W which would go from Humber/Sunnyside Loop to McCaul Loop and 501E which goes from the Neville Park Loop to the future "Broadview Loop", allowing connections to the OL Queen/Spadina and Leslieville stations respectively.

Idk why you're saying its not being planned with integration, we don't have station designs etc.

Been calling for duel end cars since 2005 as it deals with so many issues that happen to the system today.

Less land for turning cars as well dealing with tight turning radius that cause squealing that is a common complaint by locals.

Having crossovers along the line allows cars to be short turn or reverse if there is blockage to the line in front of the car. This allows fast service to riders going in the opposite direction who car is caught up in blockage going the other way.

Remove the need to have cars go on long detours to get service back on schedule or the need to short turn. Again remove the squealing of cars changing routes for detour or blockage.

Very few locations can support centre platforms and mostly DOA.

Con is the lost of seats where doors will have to be added and one of the biggest bitch I have heard since 2003, even for the subway trains. Doesn't seem to be a problem to other NA systems using duel ends, as well Europe. If subway trains can have doors both sides, why not streetcars or buses??

The other con is it takes time for the driver to walk from one end to the other where the loops allow next to no time to turn. The pro of this it allow the driver some exercise than sitting in a seat for most of their shift if no break can be had for a loop.

Most loops have an issues handling one of the current cars and if sections were added to make the car longer, it will be more of an issues. With stub ends, you can hold 2 cars and based on land, most likely handle longer cars.

Had hope to ride one of the new Boston cars last year, but COVID kill that idea. A lot of trackwork needs to be upgraded and a lot was done last summer with month closure of branches. The new extension will fix some issues for the old section. Main problems in the past been the manufactures of the cars and CAF are doing the new ones.

As a note, think what a duel end car would do for the QQW section once work starts on the east extension. Add a crossover at York St and riders would still use the streetcar to York St than change to buses at Spadina. Do the same at Parliament and you are setup to handle the next phase with no disruption to service or need to build a loop only to remove it at a later date with disruption to service.

Dual ends and dual doors both make sense, I'd do it in a future order. Even if you don't use right away (which is fine) once a substantial number of cars had the capability you could start doing a lot of rationalizations across the network.

 

[smallspy]

Adding segments to something like a streetcar feels incredibly unlikely, why break apart a decade old semi-permanently configured tram just to add segments which would then be brand new and out of sync with the rest of the tram. If this doesn't happen with Metro trains, it won't happen with even less integrated trams.

Contrary to what you may believe, this happens all the time around the world. It's a very good way to maximize the lifespan of the vehicle - when it goes in for a mid-life overhaul, add a module or two to allow it to carry more riders and thus improve its capacity versus operating costs.

It also does happen not infrequently with metros/subways. Check out New York's R188 fleet - most of them are reconfigured and repurposed from an existing fleet (the R142s).

Dan

 

[TransitBart]

The St. Clair Avenue to Dundas Street via Runnymede Road connection probably wouldn't a need EA. Using Jane Street and/or Scarlett Road would need one.

From link.

Runnymede Road subway under construction. Looking north towards St.Clair Avenue.
Large house at left sits where Lambton roundhouse would be built. March 23, 1912

Laying streetcar tracks on Runnymede Road (looking south from St.Clair) to reach the planned Britannia Division car barn north of St.Clair Avenue West, mostly east of Runnymede.

Looking north from the Runnymede bridge showing never-used TTC tracks. Note the TTC Runnymede bus and the jog to bring street into York Township since the City of Toronto would not pay for it! August 31,1957.

Looking north on Runnymede, showing TTC track curving into the loop and unconnected tracks going under subway towards St.Clair to reach a planned car barn off Britannia Avenue which was never built. These tracks were visible for decades, then paved over and finally removed during construction of the new underpass in 1982.

Walter, I love the history lessons!