TTC surface stop spacing

[doady]

I wonder if they can really eliminate that many streetcar stops. The new LRVs will mean all-door boarding, but there's still the problem of sidewalk space.

Signal priority is only useful if stops are on the far side of intersection, so if TTC is moving stops, this is a good opportunity. I suggested this before, but people here said it is not possible to put streetcar stops on the far side.

 

[ehlow]

That's excellent news! There will be complaints, but hopefully people support this. Well worth it to make surface transit more viable for medium distance trips, especially the new larger streetcars. Thank you Jarrett Walker

 

[nfitz]

I wonder if they can really eliminate that many streetcar stops. The new LRVs will mean all-door boarding, but there's still the problem of sidewalk space.

Signal priority is only useful if stops are on the far side of intersection, so if TTC is moving stops, this is a good opportunity. I suggested this before, but people here said it is not possible to put streetcar stops on the far side.

It's pretty clear from the figure attached to the report, that they aren't relocating stops on the far side of intersections.

 

[innsertnamehere]

now if they could just stick the stops on the other side of the intersection..

 

[doady]

It's pretty clear from the figure attached to the report, that they aren't relocating stops on the far side of intersections.

Umm, I never said they are.

 

[ShonTron]

The TTC is looking to implement a standard 300-400m stop spacing across the network,including getting rid of Sunday stops.

For example, on Queen between Spadina and Church, this would mean removal of stops at McCaul, York, and Victoria.

http://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Commission_reports_and_information/Commission_meetings/2014/January_28/Reports/Improving_Pedestrian.pdf

Sounds great to me! What they have always needed is a policy, rather than the current near-random spacing. Good to hear them implementing one.
.

Great. Those would have been the three that I would have removed as well. Having a proper written policy is the best thing.

On the same topic, I noticed the TTC recently removed the near-side southbound stop for the 7 Bathurst at Wilson, with a notice on the removed stop saying this was due to the new artics on the route and as part of a larger stop rationalizing program. (The far-side stop on the south side of Wilson remains.) It's a slight inconvenience for passengers looking to connect between SB 7 buses and WB 96/165, or vice versa.

 

[BMO]

now if they could just stick the stops on the other side of the intersection..

For local routes it's best to keep stops near side as opposed to far side. Taking into account the lights and loading times, local routes actually perform better with near-side stops as opposed to far side stops. For light synchronized routing the best method is alternating between near and far side. Unfortunately it's probably near impossible to perfectly sync the scheduling and lights in this city so Near side works best for most routes. Signal Priority is a different story however...

This is great news. A lot of the suburban systems already have a written policy on stop spacing, seems like the TTC is catching up.

 

[JasonParis]

Great news!

Related...

Eliminating Stops Can Actually Improve Service

 

[JasonParis]

And to nitpick, I don't get why St. Patrick would still exist for 501's heading west.

 

[salsa]

And to nitpick, I don't get why St. Patrick would still exist for 501's heading west.

From the report

a new westbound stop would be installed at the signalized Queen Street/Patrick Street intersection, which is just in advance of the McCaul Street turn-back loop. This new westbound-only stop would provide an alternative to the often- overcrowded Queen Street/University Avenue stop for passengers alighting streetcars which are turning back at McCaul Street.

 

[nfitz]

Umm, I never said they are.

The report implies the study of which stops to be dropped has already been done, and the details presented in February.

Where then is the opportunity? Surely the opportunity has passed already.

 

[W. K. Lis]

From the report:

Personally, I would have moved the nearside stops to farside stops, however since Toronto does not have true transit priority for its traffic signals, that would only result in streetcars having to wait for a green before moving to the farside stop.

 

[JasonParis]

From the report

Sorry, I missed that! I still that that it would be better to just make Uni is the last (Queen) stop on the trippers unless the passenger want to continue up to McCaul loop. 175 m between stops is quite ridiculous.

 

[ShonTron]

Sorry, I missed that! I still that that it would be better to just make Uni is the last (Queen) stop on the trippers unless the passenger want to continue up to McCaul loop. 175 m between stops is quite ridiculous.

Still, the St. Patrick westbound stop is between the eliminated Simcoe and McCaul stops.

 

[doady]

The report implies the study of which stops to be dropped has already been done, and the details presented in February.

Where then is the opportunity? Surely the opportunity has passed already.

Oh, so everything is set in stone. No point discussing this, let's close this thread, mods. This is a waste of UT's bandwidth.