Parliament Streetcar

[EastYorkTTCFan]

OK, but Waterfront Toronto has plans to make QQE look like QQW - at the same time as they add the streetcar - so I doubt anyone will be spending much money on fixing up the street while that major work is still planned (if not funded!). I would say that the most we can expect would be that as buildings appear on the north side of the street (and they are coming) the north sidewalks get finished to the new standards, paid by the developers. I suspect that the south sidewalk and the street itself will not be fixed up until the LRT is built or a firm decision is made NOT to build it. (Of course, we have a hard time making firm transit decisions here!)

I believe that was before Waterfront Toronto existed. Hopefully when they do get around to building the streetcar line there they will have a better way of keeping people off the tracks in place by then.

 

[DSC]

I believe that was before Waterfront Toronto existed. Hopefully when they do get around to building the streetcar line there they will have a better way of keeping people off the tracks in place by then.

QQW was designed and planned by Waterfront Toronto, maybe when it was called the Toronto Waterfront Regeneration Corporation. There clearly are problems with keeping cars off the ROW and one hopes theywillhave better ideas.

 

[drum118]

QQE was done under Waterfront Toronto (WT) and based on the International Competition design for QQW.

The 2004 Transit Master Plan was done under WT with QQE line being in an ROW with Redpath RR tracks. The plan change once Redpath decided to stop ship tank cars from the site and the removal of the tracks. Part of the bike path is where the rail corridor was.

Its time to tell EMS & Fire where to go and allow grass to be used for the extension as plan. This applies to the other plan ROW as well.

If it wasn't for TTC Dumb Loop plan and cost, the line would be in service today.

We have looked at building the ROW as BRT until the Union issue has been dealt with, that included an ROW on Bay St. Bay was shot down by the city. TTC wasn't happy with the BRT since they wanted it to be wider to handle the buses considering the current ROW can handle buses today.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

If it wasn't for TTC Dumb Loop plan and cost, the line would be in service today.

I wonder if they could build a second station at Queens Quay and bay that is only stopped at by cars going straight through that way they could have the 509 run all the way from exhibition loop say to Cherry loop and back. They could add in the 514 as a branch as well or even have new route number. They could keep the 510 spadina car servicing union and the existing queens quay stop

 

[drum118]

I wonder if they could build a second station at Queens Quay and bay that is only stopped at by cars going straight through that way they could have the 509 run all the way from exhibition loop say to Cherry loop and back. They could add in the 514 as a branch as well or even have new route number. They could keep the 510 spadina car servicing union and the existing queens quay stop

The answer is no due to the T connection as well being tunnel to Freeland.

We have looked at a number of options over the years.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

The answer is no due to the T connection as well being tunnel to Freeland.

We have looked at a number of options over the years.

I never said anything about it being a T Intersection I meant put new tracks going straight only past the current curve and only the 510 would continue to Union all others would continue East to a second Queen's Quay station

 

[drum118]

I never said anything about it being a T Intersection I meant put new tracks going straight only past the current curve and only the 510 would continue to Union all others would continue East to a second Queen's Quay station

Can't be done as you stated and was looked at years ago on day one. Stand in the middle of QQ and vision what you want and you will see the problems.

The T has been there from day one to allow routes to bypass Union as regular service for various routes, as well when work had to take place for the tunnel or loop.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

Can't be done as you stated and was looked at years ago on day one. Stand in the middle of QQ and vision what you want and you will see the problems.

The T has been there from day one to allow routes to bypass Union as regular service for various routes, as well when work had to take place for the tunnel or loop.

The only t interaction for the streetcars is at Spadina I don't really see why they can't do what they did at st. Clair west station with Queen's Quay station but only have certain routes go into Union station?

 

[dowlingm]

This seems to be becoming more about QQ than it is about Parliament, no?

 

[drum118]

The only t interaction for the streetcars is at Spadina I don't really see why they can't do what they did at st. Clair west station with Queen's Quay station but only have certain routes go into Union station?

The T was plan for on Day One as well the redevelopment of QQW.

I know what you are getting at, but as I stated, go to the intersection and stand in the middle and you will see the problems why your idea is DOA. Look both ways at QQ.

Even bring the line up to surface will be a challenge for this location.

Back to Parliament issues and future comments be either under QQ threads or Reset as it not a Parliament issue at this time.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

A lot of discussion in the Spadina Subway thread that I thought was interesting, so I quote them here.

To some extent. Though Castle Frank isn't that small with the new second exit (have they put entrance turnstiles in) closer to Parliament, and sprawling bus terminal - which always looked to me like it had been sized for a streetcar loop). I wouldn't have put it in the garbage ridership category either - it's higher than Museum, or Lawrence East that many are having conniptions about the plans to close. It's almost as high as Greenwood and High Park, that no one talks about being non-necessary. Given the significant increase in frequency of the Parliament bus in the last couple of years, I'd think that Castle Frank ridership could easily continue to rise.

Though it's a shame they didn't add a tunnel under Bloor to the south side. That always feels like such a hellish street to walk over - especially at night. Perhaps there'll be an opportunity when they add the elevators. Though if they want to get really creative, they could also put an exit from the elevators at Bayview Avenue or Rosedale Valley Road.

Can we just re-establish a Parliament streetcar and have it go down Front or Something? I see so much potential at this station.

Sounds good to me. I always figured that Castle Frank station was designed with this in mind. Which isn't surprising as the station was mostly constructed by early 1965 with the underground works completed by early 1964, and streetcar service on Parliament to Bloor continued to Viaduct loop until 1966.

The route doesn't have enough ridership to justify streetcar service, according to the TTC.

Yeah, but neither do the 503, 502 and 501 past Humber. However, tracks are there. Not much infrastructure is required to complete everything. Besides, ridership isn't the only reason to use streetcars.

Go to the Flexity thread and see how diverting half the 504 traffic up Parliament would solve a nasty loop rebuild problem at Broadview. The idea of the 504 King by Parliament car may have come again. I think your idea has much merit.

Ridership is the one and only reason to use streetcars. There are other benefits but none justify the higher operating & maintenance costs and lost flexibility (being unable to get around stalled streetcars or accidents). Streetcars make sense on routes where you can actually run them frequently and have more than the 40-50 passengers that fit on each bus. In the case of the 502 and 503, ridership is high enough to justify a streetcar during rush hour. For the 501 west of Humber, I think it exists for political reasons - people along the route don't want to lose their quaint streetcar even if the service is mediocre. They'd rather have a streetcar every 10-15 minutes than a bus every 5-10.

I really think that's a chicken and egg scenario there though. Relatively few people use the Parliament bus because a) it's too infrequent, and b) it doesn't really go anywhere. Have the streetcar route go down Parliament to King and then across King into downtown. You could even potentially have it go back up Spadina, forming a second, wider U around downtown.

The TTC doesn't like those proposals because they're a route management nightmare. A while ago they floated a proposal to have a Spadina - Dundas streetcar (turning around on Church/Richmond/Victoria) but recommended against it because it would disrupt the other two routes.

Not only is it infrequent, it's poorly ran. At least once a week I see bunching on this route and considering there's only two vehicles on the entire route thats a pretty amazing feat. Excluding these situations the only time the bus becomes standing room only is when there are events going on at the Distillery District like the Christmas Market.

Last night I was thinking about the Spadina streetcar. How not that many years ago, the Spadina streetcar was a simple bus. Then the streetcar service was introduced, and now not long after that it became the second busiest surface route in the city, with 55,000 daily users (busier than the 32 Eglinton West and as busy as Line 4!). In almost no time it went from a minor bus route, to a critical component of the TTC surface network... all it took was some track and a ROW.

With TTC streetcar ridership expected to double over the coming decades, it doesn’t seem far fetched to me that the 510 could merit being replaced with a Spadina Line Subway from Bloor down to Front. If that subway existed today, it would certainly be the third busiest subway line in the system, ahead of Sheppard and SRT. It’s even conceivable that it would best the

That "minor bus route" had a headway of something like every 90 seconds at rush hour. Ridership increased upon the opening of the streetcar line, but it was certainly wasn't like it was at risk of being cut because of a lack of ridership.

Less than 90 seconds, actually. During rush hour, the spacing between buses was 250 meters (roughly the distance from Queen to Adelaide). The Spadina streetcar was also built for a much greater purpose than increasing ridership or reducing costs - it was meant to revitalize the waterfront that had been abandoned by industrial plants. Ridership was also bad because of how painfully slow the bus service was.

Funny enough, the local community actually opposed the streetcar in part because it was marketed as "LRT" and they thought they'd be getting something like the Scarborough RT.

Spadina was pretty unique with the ROW though, because it actually had room to build one (and even then, it required narrowing the sidewalks). Parliament doesn't have that room, and without a dedicated ROW a streetcar isn't any faster than a bus.

Or build it as part of the Waterfront East LRT; have it go down to Queens Quay and go into the Union Station Loop.

When was that? TTC hasn't done a passenger count on 65 since 2012, but in the same time the 75 Sherbourne has grown from 5,200 passengers to 10,005 passengers - driven by George Brown growth. Meanwhile on the Parliament corridor we've got the Regent Park rebuild (which is surely driving up som of the 505 ridership), and potentially if they extend 65 to Queens Quay, a lot of development there.

Combined Sherbourne/Parliament ridership along that corrridor could well be approaching 20,000 soon, if it's not there already. The Bathurst streetcar is about the same length, and it's only 21,000.

Based on the various EA's for Transit on the Waterfront, within the next 20 years or so, you will see streetcars back on Parliament from QQE to Castle Frank. Can't look at it until QQE not only gets built, but built over to the New Cherry St. QQE line will have a temporarily loop around Parliament area. You have the same issue with Parliament underpass as you have with Cherry now, but its worses of the 2.

The middle building at VCC is the substation

I thought the TTC's official position was that no more mixed traffic streetcar lines would be built. I personally would love to see more, so I hope their position has changed on that front.

I think Parliament could function with only 1 lane in each direction for general traffic. Yes, people would moan and groan, but when you consider how much street parking there is now, it's pretty much a two-lane road anyway. Parliament could potentially be a good test case for putting dedicated streetcar lanes in the curb lane, and having the middle two lanes be general traffic lanes.

So it is true that there are recent developments that should warrant revisiting this topic of the Parliament Streetcar. Namely:

- Redevelopment of Regent Park and general intensification of the east end
- Waterfront East LRT plans and development along Queens Quay East
- Introduction of institutional uses (George Brown Campus) generating more ridership
- King Streetcar Pilot Project, which theoretically provides excess capacity to run more vehicles if routed along King
- Future disruptions on both Broadview and Queen streetcar routes due to DRL construction
- Cherry Streetcar and further revealing of plans for the Lower Don Lands

Is it therefore time to re-look at what can be done with Parliament and how it can fit in the greater network?

 

[gweed123]

Is it therefore time to re-look at what can be done with Parliament and how it can fit in the greater network?

Potentially as part of the discussion around the Waterfront Transit Reset, since it could be connected to the QQE LRT.

Another option of course would be to discuss it in terms of the design for the RL station at Sumach/in Corktown. There's a possibility for an underground connection there. In fact, with the East Harbour development potentially creating a new independent Broadview streetcar route, there's potential to re-route the King streetcar to take a turn northward at Parliament, and terminate at Castle Frank instead of Broadview (or have every 2nd car do that route, or something like that).

 

[wolfewood]

Potentially as part of the discussion around the Waterfront Transit Reset, since it could be connected to the QQE LRT.

Another option of course would be to discuss it in terms of the design for the RL station at Sumach/in Corktown. There's a possibility for an underground connection there. In fact, with the East Harbour development potentially creating a new independent Broadview streetcar route, there's potential to re-route the King streetcar to take a turn northward at Parliament, and terminate at Castle Frank instead of Broadview (or have every 2nd car do that route, or something like that).

I'd be partial to a 3 independent routes myself. Castle Frank to the QQE loop planned at Small St, Broadview Station to the Portlands and then a King streetcar from Roncesvalles to perhaps Sumach station on the DRL? Or maybe East Harbour or Carlaw. I feel like a simpler solution to some of the problems the DRL aims to fix (high demand on Bloor-Yonge from people transferring to go south) could be mitigated by better streetcar service south of Bloor, especially in the downtown east.

In terms of the Parliament streetcar, you could fold it into an existing project (QQE loop) and the only major additional spending would be for a few blocks of track south of King and north of Carlton, as well as a loop at Castle Frank (which some users seem to think would be relatively doable with the existing design). Seems like a relatively cheap way to dramatically improve service on Parliament. Also less buses downtown mean more buses for suburban routes. A better streetcar network downtown (which already exists and is extensively built out compared to almost any other North American city) should be utilized to reduce the need for buses downtown. Why not use the existing infrastructure and allow for better suburban services at the same time?

 

[gweed123]

I'd be partial to a 3 independent routes myself. Castle Frank to the QQE loop planned at Small St, Broadview Station to the Portlands and then a King streetcar from Roncesvalles to perhaps Sumach station on the DRL? Or maybe East Harbour or Carlaw. I feel like a simpler solution to some of the problems the DRL aims to fix (high demand on Bloor-Yonge from people transferring to go south) could be mitigated by better streetcar service south of Bloor, especially in the downtown east.

In terms of the Parliament streetcar, you could fold it into an existing project (QQE loop) and the only major additional spending would be for a few blocks of track south of King and north of Carlton, as well as a loop at Castle Frank (which some users seem to think would be relatively doable with the existing design). Seems like a relatively cheap way to dramatically improve service on Parliament. Also less buses downtown mean more buses for suburban routes. A better streetcar network downtown (which already exists and is extensively built out compared to almost any other North American city) should be utilized to reduce the need for buses downtown. Why not use the existing infrastructure and allow for better suburban services at the same time?

Normally I'd agree with having a grid system, but when you have a line that's operating so close to downtown, it makes sense to have it actually go through downtown. Forcing a transfer at Sumach to go downtown for a whole 2 stations would be annoying for many. If I'm heading southbound on Parliament, I'd much rather just stay on the streetcar I'm on and access downtown via King, even if it does end up being marginally slower. FWIW, I think Spadina suffers from the same issue. It'd be nice if there was a sub-route on Spadina that went east on either King or Queen, giving direct downtown access.

 

[DSC]

Before trying to resurrect the Parliament streetcar (and bring it to Castle Frank - where it never went, for good practical reasons) you need to look back at the QQE Transit EA and many discussions on UT.