TTC surface stop spacing

[SgtBullmoose]

The streetcar stop spacing is especially ridiculous. Why would you have a stop on Bloor St west and Bathurst when the station is within eyeshot? This situation is replicated over and over again throughout the city. This is the real reason why Ford can gain such momentum by saying that "streetcars suck".

 

[Paleo]

The streetcar stop spacing is especially ridiculous. Why would you have a stop on Bloor St west and Bathurst when the station is within eyeshot? This situation is replicated over and over again throughout the city. This is the real reason why Ford can gain such momentum by saying that "streetcars suck".

He gets that support because either a) people are stupid or b) just looking for something to reinforce entrenched beliefs. Take your example. Have you looked at bus stop placing? There are bus stops outside every subway station too.

 

[nfitz]

I'm fine with the amount of stops on Bloor-Danforth. I don't think there's any stops in particular I'd eliminate.

I'd be tempted to merge Greenwood/Donlands. If you put a station half-way between that exits to Caithness from one end, and Greenwood the other end, it would make more sense - though it would have complicated the access to the Greenwood yard. After that the only one that really jumps out is Chester; but if you didn't have a station half-way between then you'd have a very long 1.2 km from Pape to Broadview.

That's why I supported the Eglinton Crosstown. For the tunneled portion the stop spacing was very close to BD.

Hang on ... on Eglinton inbetween Jane and Warden there would be 18 stations. On BD inbetween Warden and Jane, there are 24 stations. That's 33% more stations on the BD line. That's not very close!

I think any at-grade LRT should follow the same kind of stop spacing.

100% agree.

 

[Hipster Duck]

There's no magic distance for stop spacing, and that should be decided on a route by route basis. Most of the disagreement about stop spacing has to do with the stop spacing on Transit City lines (which are meant to be rapid transit), and not the stop spacing on surface routes.

That said, I think that the TTC could have really cut the number of stops on its LRT-lite projects (Spadina, St. Clair). These routes are not meant to be rapid transit, but they are meant to increase capacity and reliability on surface routes, and redundant stop spacing interferes with that. Here are a list of strops that could be axed:

- 510: Sussex, Southbound (I don't know why anyone would wait to board a streetcar at Spadina subway station if they're only traveling 100 meters).
- 512: Yonge, Westbound (just walk to the station, already).
- 512: Dunvegan, both directions (Russel Hill is 150m - i.e. 5 new LRV lengths - away).
- 512: Tweedsmuir (again, walking to St. Clair West station is actually easier for most of the people who use this stop)
- 512: Vaughan Rd., Westbound (is about 100 meters west of Bathurst)
- 512: Northcliffe (too close to either Glebeholme or Dufferin).
- 512: Laughton (too close to Hounslow Heath)

 

[nfitz]

The streetcar stop spacing is especially ridiculous. Why would you have a stop on Bloor St west and Bathurst when the station is within eyeshot?

One reason is that otherwise, streetcars heading down Bathurst from St. Clair would have no stop between Barton and Harbord - a distance of 750 metres - neither of them convenient for someone going to the subway. And ignoring that relatively rare situation ... that particular stop isn't right at Bloor - it's half way to Lennox Street, south of Honest Ed's. There are far worse examples, such as the two stops at Broadview Station, heading south (one at Erindale, and the second at Danforth). There is certainly room for some serious stop rationalization. In some of the longer stretches when there is no stop, and the driver doesn't have to slow to see if someone is standing there, the streetcar moves noticeably faster. The stretch of Gerrard between Broadview and De Grassi comes to mind.

 

[typezed]

Past Victoria Park, north-south arterials in Scarborough seem to be laid out at regular intervals, probably based on the standard size of farm fields. I don't know if that's 600 metres or a kilometre, but whatever the distance is that's what the interval should be. Beyond that, if there are a couple other in-between spots that would be beneficial to development or ridership then I don't see why those should be rejected because it messes up someone's spreadsheet for determining if the route can be labeled 'rapid' transit. That's an advantage of surface transit - stops can be added without the big investment in station construction. For some on this site, stop spacing is one more fascination like iconic design or additional height, a metric used by fantasy engineers to determine if any project is world-class enough for their standards. Walking twenty minutes along Eglinton East is a very different experience than walking twenty minutes along Bloor. You're not passing stores and restaurants, you're walking at the edges of parking lots, and cars are travelling beside at faster speeds with no parked vehicles to serve as a buffer. Some who are antagonistic towards the suburbs express a desire to penalize the residents there for living amongst such low density - serves them right if they have to walk further than the distance between Spadina and Bathurst. But if vehicles travel a little slower at the extreme ends of the route, it's really only affecting those who travel at the ends. Those travelling between Leslie and Dufferin won't be slowed because the average time is lowered by a couple courtesy stops in Scarborough.

 

[car4041]

- 510: Sussex, Southbound (I don't know why anyone would wait to board a streetcar at Spadina subway station if they're only traveling 100 meters).

I use that stop all the time! (And the distance from the station is 350m, not 100!) The thing is, if there's a car ready to leave Spadina station -- and there usually is -- it's much faster to take it than to walk. So why not take it?

Rather than getting rid of the stop, why not activate transit priority for the traffic lights at Sussex and Spadina, which delay the streetcars much more than the stop does. There's almost no traffic on Sussex at all, so I don't see any reason for the streetcars not to get full priority at this intersection.

 

[nfitz]

I use that stop all the time! (And the distance from the station is 350m, not 100!) The thing is, if there's a car ready to leave Spadina station -- and there usually is -- it's much faster to take it than to walk. So why not take it?

Rather than getting rid of the stop, why not activate transit priority for the traffic lights at Sussex and Spadina, which delay the streetcars much more than the stop does. There's almost no traffic on Sussex at all, so I don't see any reason for the streetcars not to get full priority at this intersection.

Why not both eliminate the stop and walk 2 extra minutes to Harbord. And give streetcars full priority on the light.

 

[car4041]

Why not both eliminate the stop and walk 2 extra minutes to Harbord. And give streetcars full priority on the light.

Sure, I wouldn't cry if it were eliminated -- just meant to say that those of us who use it are not as crazy as the earlier poster implied.

 

[RichA]

Don Mills Rd and York Mills. Going south on Don Mills. One stop on the north side of the intersection, one on the south.

 

[SgtBullmoose]

One reason is that otherwise, streetcars heading down Bathurst from St. Clair would have no stop between Barton and Harbord - a distance of 750 metres - neither of them convenient for someone going to the subway. And ignoring that relatively rare situation ... that particular stop isn't right at Bloor - it's half way to Lennox Street, south of Honest Ed's. There are far worse examples, such as the two stops at Broadview Station, heading south (one at Erindale, and the second at Danforth). There is certainly room for some serious stop rationalization. In some of the longer stretches when there is no stop, and the driver doesn't have to slow to see if someone is standing there, the streetcar moves noticeably faster. The stretch of Gerrard between Broadview and De Grassi comes to mind.

I'm talking about the stop going North at Bloor and Bathurst just before going into the station. I still think the southbound stop should be eliminated as well, but the north bound version is even stupider. And, of course, yes, the streetcars so rarely go to/from St. Clair West anyway.

@Paleo:

Of course buses have the same stop pattern. But there should be some differential between streetcars and buses otherwise the public just sees streetcars as buses on rails. In every city I've ever been to, bus stops are closer together than tram stops. Trams, however, stop at every stop like subways and buses do not necessarily.

 

[car4041]

I'm talking about the stop going North at Bloor and Bathurst just before going into the station. I still think the southbound stop should be eliminated as well, but the north bound version is even stupider. And, of course, yes, the streetcars so rarely go to/from St. Clair West anyway.

I imagine the thinking is that the car has to stop there at a red light half of the time anyway, so might as well let people get off if they want. (But then again, there's no similar stop northbound at Bloor & Ossington.) I'm not saying the stop has to be there, just that you can't really dismiss it as "stupid".

 

[dunkalunk]

I honestly think the downtown stop spacing discussion is one that needs to happen at the TTC. Last summer, Waterloo Region eliminated a number of stops from it's mainline route (route 7) which were a holdover from the original King Street Strreetcar. Some stops were as close as 80m. As such, travel along this corridor has become both quicker, more reliable, and less expensive to run.

The problem that most cities in North America have with eliminating stops is the conflict between transit as a social service and transit as a legitimate means of getting somewhere. You can't have one route that can do both effectively.

 

[nfitz]

I honestly think the downtown stop spacing discussion is one that needs to happen at the TTC.

I agree. Hopefully this is looked at closely as part as rolling out the new streetcars. Given they have to expand the no parking restrictions and do curb-cuts at all the stops, perhaps they'll think carefully of whether we need as many.

It's not just a downtown problem though. As mentioned above, the two southbound 25 stops at Don Mills/York Mills is just bizarre - I can see it might be convenient for people changing from the westbound York Mills bus ... but therei sn't the same consideration at Eglinton for those changing from the eastbound Eglinton bus? There's some other really close stops ... it's just less than 100 metres from the eastbound stop at Thorncliffe Mall to the one at Thorncliffe Park Drive - that's just silly. It's only 190 metres to the previous stop. If you remove the one in the middle, it's still only 290 metres between the stops.

 

[Paleo]

I agree. Hopefully this is looked at closely as part as rolling out the new streetcars. Given they have to expand the no parking restrictions and do curb-cuts at all the stops, perhaps they'll think carefully of whether we need as many.

Curb cuts at all the stops? That's not going to happen.