I am no transit planner...but isn't the art of stop spacing at least partly about how far people will walk to take a stop rather than how far they can walk?
No, most people would prefer walking as little as possible, don't they? So how much they WANT to walk is not a good standard because otherwise, everyone along a transit line would WANT a stop less than 100 meters away from their door. It should be more about at what threshold they would give up transit and choose to drive or not going at all. 1000m is a bit too far of course, but I would think 500m is completely reasonable, isn't it?
Just think about this, how many people will think "I refuse to take the streetcar to Kensington market because Nassau stop is removed, and I have to walk all the way from College st., a whopping distance of 230M". I think the number of those people are close to zero. The same goes for many stops along 501, 504 and 505, 512. I am sure some won't be happy if some stops are removed, but in a purely selfish way (now I have to walk 1-2 minutes more, damn it), but given the still quite reasonable distance, 99% of them will still take the system, as the alternative isn't exactly appealing (driving and paying for parking DT?)
In the end everyone makes their own personal judgements about their own efficient use of time/energy. When I am downtown I never take the subway for a trip of less than 3 stops but I know people who hop on and off......the streetcar I use most often is the King Car....from my base here at King and U I never take it unless a) weather is awful or b) I am going a decent distance west of Spadina (quite often even Bathurst becomes my measure in heavier traffic) as that seems to be the efficient thing for me.
Agree. This is why the metropass should be done away with as many will take the subway/streetcar for 1 or 2 stops when walking is completely easy, and causing unnecessary burden to the system. 1500m is about the distance I am comfortable walking. More than that, I will take the streetcar (although not necessarily faster).
I always got/get the sense there is much art as science involved.......with the goal of optimizing system efficiency and ridership. Wide stop spacing might just make the vehicles move faster.....but at the cost of what ridership?
You are talking as if wider spacing will only reduce ridership because people need to walk 2 more minutes to the stop.
What about this: there could be more ridership due to wider spacing because there are fewer stops and the streetcar actually moves faster than walking now? Say if I want to go from Yonge st to Spadina along Queen, it usually walk as it takes 15 minutes or so. Taking the 501 would take probably the same time, or a couple of minutes less because there are like 2 dozen stops involved, so why bother? Or for longer distance, because the streetcars/buses now move faster, people who would otherwise driver may decide to take the transit?
It is really not a one way street.