News   Dec 20, 2024
 1.2K     6 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 884     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 1.8K     0 

King Street (Streetcar Transit Priority)

Honestly I think the entire steeetcar network needs a modernization to improve speed and reliability, and get it to the operational level of something like the Finch LRT.

Wider stop spacing, upgrading to double-point switches, multi-directional trams, parking removal, bike lane expansion, upgraded passenger platforms and congestion charges are all small things that could make a big impact on operations in aggregate.

Though one might argue about the value of all of these proposals, they are NOT mostly small things. replacing switches and buying bi-directional cars is certainly not cheap

I mean, cheap is relative. Streetcar network upgrades would probably have much better bang-for-buck than most of our other transit investments.

A fraction of the financial investment we've been making in GO RER and network operations would do wonders for the Toronto streetcar network. And ensuring that the core of Canada's largest city has an effective internal transport is as urgent a priority as anything.

The cost is only an obstacle if we decide to make it an obstacle.

and a congestion charge (which I certainly like) is a HUGE political problem (and must usually be accompanied by much more transit service inside the zone.)
It's a huge political problem today. I'm optimistic that won't always be the case.

Attitudes towards transport and urban design have shifted dramatically over the past 10 years or so. There now is a virtual universal consensus that we must invest more in transit citywide, and that these investments must include all modes of transport. There's also a growing consensus that we must move away from car-centric urban planning (although admittedly, there are a lot of people still reluctant to accept that truth).

Further, Toronto's transport network will be unrecognizable in 15 years, and will rival New York in its overall quality. In this environment, it's a lot easier to talk about congestion charges, as there will be credible alternatives.
 
This is the worst part of all. And waiting at a red light to slowly cross an intersection, only to stop again.
Is there a way we can actually get this addressed?
But that doesn't make it any better, does it?

This is a two-part question/answer.

What is technically/practically do-able, and then the politics.

On the former, yes, this is very solvable; and there are myriad ways to do it, even with an obstinate transportation department.

Choices:

1) Operate the system in its 'ideal' manner, meaning far-side stops, as is now the case on most of Spadina, but doing so with hard transit priority. Meaning the light can not only be triggered or held for a transit vehicle, but that it will and can change aggressively in speed wherever that does not endanger people.

This would be ideal. What it means is that transit Does Not Stop for red lights as there are none for an approaching LRT; and it stops only for passengers wishing to board or egress. This, can be hugely advantageous. But it does require a few things. First, an acceptance that cars/trucks crossing an LRT route are a secondary priority, period. But also, it requires fairly rigorous headway management, because you can't, in the real world, have the signal changing perpetually just for an LRT vehicle. The overall timing of transit and and traffic must be understood together. To be clear, this is entirely feasible with existing technology.

2) Leave the lights the way they are, as Transportation prefers...........but in that case, move to nearside stops, which should, on average, cut the stops on both sides of the light problem by 1/2.

***

The politics: Truthfully, where once local pols would have objected to true transit priority, I don't think that's the case any more. Certainly, where local councillors hold sway, at many intersections, I would envision them favouring transit if asked.

Where major roads meet, you may, sometimes, get a suburban councillor concerned with 'wars on cars'. But I think the evidence is sufficiently compelling that moving transit more quickly, benefits drivers, that most can be swayed when the argument is correctly presented.

The challenge, I see, is institutional lethargy in Transportation.

While the department is improving by leaps and bounds, there remains a core constituency among some senior staff for frankly, doing things badly.

It can be reformed. Know what to ask for; get more than one person to ask; push the politicians first and foremost, but talk to senior management in Transportation too; and raise the issue w/the media. Most reporters have public email addresses and/or twitter handles...........say 'hi'.
 
I guess you haven't ridden other systems where you will see almost the same as King with only one lane of traffic, one lane of transit in each direction, the odd ROW and some on street parking??

I do agree on stop spacing and you will find stops far apart in other places. Then those stops don't have the high density around them nor in between to what we have today, let alone what coming down the road.

yeah you're right I never rode any transit system in the 9 global cities I've lived in. Most tram systems have signal priority, bumped out platforms for pedestrian safety and far less frequent stops. Educate yourself on how inefficient the TTC streetcar system is.
 
I'm not sure what that article is getting at it clearly states in it that when the council voted in 2019 to make it permanent that there would only be changes in the street when it's rebuilt in 2023. Unfortunately, we have people who are stupid and think that it's ok to drive on it the full length because their GPS tells them to. Car GPS's are one of the biggest problems because unlike using your phone they don't get regular updates on what has changed in a road unless it's connected to the internet like in a Tesla which very few cars are.

Is it in a sad state yes, could it be improved on yes but if you look at it yourself you will see that there are more problems than just having to fix a few temporary things until the real work can be done. There are various construction sites that are along it let's also not forget about Covid plus we have the stupid annual shutdown of King street for no good reason so a film festival can make their sponsors happy, that we should charge them to build a route around their precious festival street if they want to continue to close it every year we continue with it.
 
unfortunately that's not good enough for a city/region of that size. Toronto will need another to start construction before 2040. don't be a dick.
That kind of insult is uncalled for dude, even though I know it can seem condescending and pedantic when forumers try to debate even the most straightforward posts.
You could post "the sky is blue" and someone would probably respond with "actually it's shades of indigo" or some other annoying, useless response, but you still gotta avoid personal attacks.
 
I'm not sure what that article is getting at it clearly states in it that when the council voted in 2019 to make it permanent that there would only be changes in the street when it's rebuilt in 2023. Unfortunately, we have people who are stupid and think that it's ok to drive on it the full length because their GPS tells them to. Car GPS's are one of the biggest problems because unlike using your phone they don't get regular updates on what has changed in a road unless it's connected to the internet like in a Tesla which very few cars are.

Is it in a sad state yes, could it be improved on yes but if you look at it yourself you will see that there are more problems than just having to fix a few temporary things until the real work can be done. There are various construction sites that are along it let's also not forget about Covid plus we have the stupid annual shutdown of King street for no good reason so a film festival can make their sponsors happy, that we should charge them to build a route around their precious festival street if they want to continue to close it every year we continue with it.
I see the one person interviewed for this was staff form that TTC Riders org, or whatever it's called. Smells like a "friend of the reporter" source who can be called upon to fill a column on a deadline with whatever stuff about the TTC was already known, but with emo quotes. It even has the buried lede admitting it's been like this for three years, but the rest still plays out with the "Why is nobody talking about this?" card, I guess to get a byline above the fold on the website.

"The Toronto Star: last year's news tomorrow."
 
I mean, cheap is relative. Streetcar network upgrades would probably have much better bang-for-buck than most of our other transit investments.

A fraction of the financial investment we've been making in GO RER and network operations would do wonders for the Toronto streetcar network. And ensuring that the core of Canada's largest city has an effective internal transport is as urgent a priority as anything.

The cost is only an obstacle if we decide to make it an obstacle.

I don't understand why there's such a concern over costs with projects like this, when in the suburbs people are relatively okay with unlimited budgets.

You're right - all things considered these would be very valuable upgrades.
 
yeah you're right I never rode any transit system in the 9 global cities I've lived in. Most tram systems have signal priority, bumped out platforms for pedestrian safety and far less frequent stops. Educate yourself on how inefficient the TTC streetcar system is.

Its perfectly fine to disagree with another poster; but I would note here that @drum118 is considered exceedingly knowledgeable about transit, both here and around the globe.

He's well travelled and keenly interested in the subject.

That doesn't mean his experience aligns with yours, or that debate isn't a good and healthy thing.........but it need not be so personal or corrosive.
 
Honestly I think the entire steeetcar network needs a modernization to improve speed and reliability, and get it to the operational level of something like the Finch LRT.

Wider stop spacing, upgrading to double-point switches, multi-directional trams, parking removal, bike lane expansion, upgraded passenger platforms and congestion charges are all small things that could make a big impact on operations in aggregate.

Though one might argue about the value of all of these proposals, they are NOT mostly small things. replacing switches and buying bi-directional cars is certainly not cheap and a congestion charge (which I certainly like) is a HUGE political problem (and must usually be accompanied by much more transit service inside the zone.)

I mean, cheap is relative. Streetcar network upgrades would probably have much better bang-for-buck than most of our other transit investments.

A fraction of the financial investment we've been making in GO RER and network operations would do wonders for the Toronto streetcar network. And ensuring that the core of Canada's largest city has an effective internal transport is as urgent a priority as anything.

The cost is only an obstacle if we decide to make it an obstacle.


It's a huge political problem today. I'm optimistic that won't always be the case.

Attitudes towards transport and urban design have shifted dramatically over the past 10 years or so. There now is a virtual universal consensus that we must invest more in transit citywide, and that these investments must include all modes of transport. There's also a growing consensus that we must move away from car-centric urban planning (although admittedly, there are a lot of people still reluctant to accept that truth).

Further, Toronto's transport network will be unrecognizable in 15 years, and will rival New York in its overall quality. In this environment, it's a lot easier to talk about congestion charges, as there will be credible alternatives.

This is a two-part question/answer.

What is technically/practically do-able, and then the politics.

On the former, yes, this is very solvable; and there are myriad ways to do it, even with an obstinate transportation department.

Choices:

1) Operate the system in its 'ideal' manner, meaning far-side stops, as is now the case on most of Spadina, but doing so with hard transit priority. Meaning the light can not only be triggered or held for a transit vehicle, but that it will and can change aggressively in speed wherever that does not endanger people.

This would be ideal. What it means is that transit Does Not Stop for red lights as there are none for an approaching LRT; and it stops only for passengers wishing to board or egress. This, can be hugely advantageous. But it does require a few things. First, an acceptance that cars/trucks crossing an LRT route are a secondary priority, period. But also, it requires fairly rigorous headway management, because you can't, in the real world, have the signal changing perpetually just for an LRT vehicle. The overall timing of transit and and traffic must be understood together. To be clear, this is entirely feasible with existing technology.

2) Leave the lights the way they are, as Transportation prefers...........but in that case, move to nearside stops, which should, on average, cut the stops on both sides of the light problem by 1/2.

***

The politics: Truthfully, where once local pols would have objected to true transit priority, I don't think that's the case any more. Certainly, where local councillors hold sway, at many intersections, I would envision them favouring transit if asked.

Where major roads meet, you may, sometimes, get a suburban councillor concerned with 'wars on cars'. But I think the evidence is sufficiently compelling that moving transit more quickly, benefits drivers, that most can be swayed when the argument is correctly presented.

The challenge, I see, is institutional lethargy in Transportation.

While the department is improving by leaps and bounds, there remains a core constituency among some senior staff for frankly, doing things badly.

It can be reformed. Know what to ask for; get more than one person to ask; push the politicians first and foremost, but talk to senior management in Transportation too; and raise the issue w/the media. Most reporters have public email addresses and/or twitter handles...........say 'hi'.

I made this thread dedicated RapidTO network-wide improvements for streetcar operations, so we don't have to pollute the King Street thread: https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/rapidto-citywide-streetcar-priority-city-of-toronto-ttc.34289/
 
see the one person interviewed for this was staff form that TTC Riders org, or whatever it's called. Smells like a "friend of the reporter" source who can be called upon to fill a column on a deadline with whatever stuff about the TTC was already known, but with emo quotes
I've never really liked the TTC riders group of people they think they represent all TTC riders but a lot of their ideas aren't practical and they also spread a lot of misinformation. Also, the TTC board seems to be very well aware of them and it seems like anytime they try to flood a topic open for discussion they either shorten the time or take more than one of them together because they don't really add much to the conversation.
 

Back
Top