[Northern Light]

I agree that removing some left turn movements is key to speeding up the streetcar, but Nassau is not the issue. With phase insertion (as Councillor Saxe is presumably proposing), the U-turn phase would have negligible impacts on streetcars since they'd get an inserted streetcar phase to skip ahead of it if necessary. The bigger issue is at the major intersections (King, Queen, Dundas, College) where it takes 30+ seconds for the streetcar to cross the intersection due to the track switches. Inserting a 30-second streetcar phase into a 90-second cycle would decimate the intersection's capacity and create lots of delays for east-west streetcar lines. A better solution for those intersections is to eliminate left turns entirely, with drivers redirected elsewhere.

For example, we could eliminate north-south left turns at Spadina & College, with northbound left-turning drivers instead looping around Spadina Crescent, and southbound left-turning drivers doing a U-turn at Nassau.

My intent at Nassau is not removing the U-Turn, its removing the vehicle crossing entirely.

There are comparatively few vehicle movements at the intersection, but the light cycle is frequent and often causes the streetcar to stop at the light, prior to moving forward to the stop.

I would retain the lights as pedestrian only with absolute transit priority, solid curbs all the way through. No double stops.

 

[Mihairokov]

Easiest step is removing the Sussex Ave stop. Pointless to have a stop within 100m of Harbord stop and 200m of the terminus station.

 

[reaperexpress]

My intent at Nassau is not removing the U-Turn, its removing the vehicle crossing entirely.

There are comparatively few vehicle movements at the intersection, but the light cycle is frequent and often causes the streetcar to stop at the light, prior to moving forward to the stop.

I would retain the lights as pedestrian only with absolute transit priority, solid curbs all the way through. No double stops.

Removing traffic from the intersection would make no difference to streetcar delay, since the frequency and duration of the red light is dictated by pedestrians.

 

[Northern Light]

Removing traffic from the intersection would make no difference to streetcar delay, since the frequency and duration of the red light is dictated by pedestrians.

As much as I respect your opinions, which are well informed, absent you showing modelling homework, I can't agree to this.

With the vehicle crossing gone, and no U-Turn Cycle, and no movement to/from Nassau to/from NB Spadina (it becomes RIRO) (Right in, Right out), I think there can be significantly less red time for streetcars and significantly higher priority.

Perhaps your deeper understanding (sincerely) has me missing something here, but I'm baffled as to what.

 

[reaperexpress]

Easiest step is removing the Sussex Ave stop. Pointless to have a stop within 100m of Harbord stop and 200m of the terminus station.

Without Sussex there would be a 500m gap between Bloor and Harbord, which is outside of the TTC's target of 300-400m between stops in dense urban areas.

Personally I'd be happy if that stop was removed, but it would be politically very difficult since it would be going against TTC policy. And if the City makes exceptions to the policy to enable longer spacing, then it also becomes easier for people to pressure the City to keep stops that are less than 300m apart.

We should eliminate the northbound-only stop at Richmond, since the resultant spacing from King to Queen would still be below 400m:

Eliminating the stop would enable streetcars to stay within the green wave that exists there. So on top of saving time from stopping, it would also reduce signal delay.

 

[reaperexpress]

As much as I respect your opinions, which are well informed, absent you showing modelling homework, I can't agree to this.

With the vehicle crossing gone, and no U-Turn Cycle, and no movement to/from Nassau to/from NB Spadina (it becomes RIRO) (Right in, Right out), I think there can be significantly less red time for streetcars and significantly higher priority.

Perhaps your deeper understanding (sincerely) has me missing something here, but I'm baffled as to what.

I'm happy to show you my work:

The duration of the east-west phase is dictated by the crossing time for pedestrians. Spadina is 28 metres wide, so with a walking speed of 1.2 m/s, you need 7 seconds of Walk, 23 seconds of Flashing Don't Walk, and at least 4 seconds of Solid Don't Walk clearance. That is required regardless of whether there are cars or not. Like you said, there's minimal traffic there, so in the absence of pedestrians, you'd only need a 7-second green for cars, rather than the 30-second green they provide for pedestrians.

The signals along Spadina are coordinated, so the frequency of the east-west signal phase is dictated by the whole street's cycle length, which last I checked was 90 seconds off-peak, 100 seconds during peak. Regardless of whether cars are allowed to cross or not, the light will turn red every 90 seconds off-peak or 100 second during peak.

The delay caused by the U-turn phase can be eliminated using inserted phases like I mentioned in the previous post.

Meanwhile, allowing the southbound U-turn vehicle movement at Nassau allows us to eliminate all left turns at Spadina & College (increasing green time for streetcars in all four directions) without pushing traffic onto the residential streets nearby.

 

[Mihairokov]

Without Sussex there would be a 500m gap between Bloor and Harbord, which is outside of the TTC's target of 300-400m between stops in dense urban areas.

Would it help if the Sussex and Harbord stops were merged and moved to the middle of the block? I agree with the problems of spoiling policy but it seems needless to have two stops within 100m of each other.

 

[Northern Light]

Without Sussex there would be a 500m gap between Bloor and Harbord, which is outside of the TTC's target of 300-400m between stops in dense urban areas.
View attachment 691665

Personally I'd be happy if that stop was removed, but it would be politically very difficult since it would be going against TTC policy. And if the City makes exceptions to the policy to enable longer spacing, then it also becomes easier for people to pressure the City to keep stops that are less than 300m apart.

Agree with your sentiment. I get ~470m if you measure from the middle of Spadina Stn if you place both stops on the north side of the intersection at Harbord.

That could be accommodated by removing the Left Turn lane SB to EB at the intersection.

In respect of distances....I wonder if one could argue for using Bloor at the marker at the north end.

IF one does that, its 380M from mid-intersection at Bloor to the north limit of Harbord platforms situated on the north side of the intersection.

(we shouldn't have to justify the stop removal here under existing policy but worth musing whether we could.....with a bit of creativity)

One other 'cute' idea ....where all-door loading is in effect, the distance calculated should subtract the vehicle length.

We should eliminate the northbound-only stop at Richmond, since the resultant spacing Queen and King would still be below 400m:
View attachment 691664
Eliminating the stop would enable streetcars to stay within the green wave that exists there. So on top of saving time from stopping, it would also reduce signal delay.

Agreed.

***

How do you feel about removing Sullivan?

Dundas to Queen is 477M.

I'm very open to the idea w/my only real reservation being crowding at the platforms at Queen and Dundas.

 

[Northern Light]

Would it help if the Sussex and Harbord stops were merged and moved to the middle of the block? I agree with the problems of spoiling policy but it seems needless to have two stops within 100m of each other.

You would need a traffic light for people to access the stop. Another light between Harbord and Sussex is a non-starter, so you'd have to have the access from those streets with an un-ending platform. This would mean removing all the trees.

 

[drum118]

Both of the stops should be remove regardless of TTC 300-400m between stops requirements as they are mid block stops with low ridership. They are also non major street throgh streets. Spadina is supposed to be an RT line and this is one case I support removing an RT stop like 2 on St Clair that should be remove as well.

 

[reaperexpress]

Agree with your sentiment. I get ~470m if you measure from the middle of Spadina Stn if you place both stops on the north side of the intersection at Harbord.

That could be accommodated by removing the Left Turn lane SB to EB at the intersection.

In respect of distances....I wonder if one could argue for using Bloor at the marker at the north end.

IF one does that, its 380M from mid-intersection at Bloor to the north limit of Harbord platforms situated on the north side of the intersection.

(we shouldn't have to justify the stop removal here under existing policy but worth musing whether we could.....with a bit of creativity)

I like the initiative to creatively interpret the policy but the argument doesn't quite seem solid enough yet. What is the rationale for using Bloor as the marker rather than the station?

One other 'cute' idea ....where all-door loading is in effect, the distance calculated should subtract the vehicle length.

I have proposed this before, but only if passengers can directly access both ends of the platform (e.g. where it's contiguous with the sidewalk). On Spadina this would only apply if they added a second access point at the front end of the platform, which they wouldn't do since Spadina is 2 lanes per direction.

How do you feel about removing Sullivan?

Dundas to Queen is 477M.

Similar to Sussex, I personally don't have a problem with it, but it's hard to justify. Contrary to what Drum is claiming, the Spadina streetcar is very much a local transit route, and the Sullivan stop is quite a popular access point to Chinatown.

One change I've wondered about is to move the southbound stop at Willcocks to the far side. That would slightly even out the spacing from Harbord to College, making it look a bit less silly than the current situation where the Willcocks and Harbord stops right next to each other, then nothing for 510m to College. But this would have a very small benefit so I doubt it would ever justify the construction cost.

Both of the stops should be remove regardless of TTC 300-400m betweeb stops requirements as they are mid block stops with low ridership. They are also non major street throgh streets. Spadina is supposed to be an RT line and this is one case I support removing an RT stop like 2 on St Clair that should be remove as well.

According to the TTC service summary the average speed of the Spadina streetcar ranges from 9 km/h to 11 km/h depending on the time of day. There is a lot of other work to do before >rapid transit stop spacing makes any sense.
- Removing left turn phases at major intersections
- Adding TSP with green extensions as major intersections
- Permitting TSP phase insertion at minor intersections
- Replacing track switches to eliminate speed restrictions through intersections

 

[Northern Light]

I like the initiative to creatively interpret the policy but the argument doesn't quite seem solid enough yet. What is the rationale for using Bloor as the marker rather than the station?

If you measured distance between subway stations would use door to door? Would you use major street (station namesake generally) to major street? Is that reasonable if it doesn't factor in the length of distance from station entry to your platform of choice?

It turns out we make different choices for where to draw a line all the time. Spadina Station is on the Bloor Line, the stop is nominally at Bloor/Spadina, I don't think its too large a stretch.

I have proposed this before, but contingent on you actually being able to access both ends of the platform (e.g. where it's contiguous with the sidewalk). On Spadina this would only apply if they added a second access point at the front end of the platform, which they wouldn't do since Spadina is 2 lanes per direction.

I think two-point access is one way to consider it, though, many walk in front point of entry now, or those who came after wouldn't be able to get on the platform at all.

You could, if desired, also alternate far-side and near-side to even out distances a bit. (that choice is obviously complex and interrelated questions of turn restrictions, signal phases and priority, but I digress)

Similar to Sussex, I personally don't have a problem with it, but it's hard to justify. Contrary to what Drum is claiming, the Spadina streetcar is very much a local transit route, and the Sullivan stop is quite a popular access point to Chinatown.

There is no overlapping bus service on Danforth between subway stops that are ~1km apart.

Eglinton Crosstown, on the surface in the east end has wildly varying distances between stops (from Sloane east) I found ~300M to ~900m between stops)

Let's get the average speed into double digits before we start deleting stops on the Spadina Streetcar as if it's a rapid transit line

I'm not sure I agree, I don't think removing stops should be that big an ask; and this seems akin to the old question "Can you walk and chew gum at the same time?" The answer to which ought to be 'yes'.

I think its important to have guidelines that give rationale for stop locations.

But equally, I think its important not to let the tail wag the dog. The guidelines are there to serve riders, riders generally benefit from their existence, but rarely from slavish devotion to same.

 

[reaperexpress]

If you measured distance between subway stations would use door to door? Would you use major street (station namesake generally) to major street? Is that reasonable if it doesn't factor in the length of distance from station entry to your platform of choice?

It turns out we make different choices for where to draw a line all the time. Spadina Station is on the Bloor Line, the stop is nominally at Bloor/Spadina, I don't think its too large a stretch.

I think two-point access is one way to consider it, though, many walk in front point of entry now, or those who came after wouldn't be able to get on the platform at all.

Well for rapid transit you don't need to maintain any particular stop spacing, but if we did, I'd measure from the closest station entrance of each station.

Here's a thought exercise: What is the distance between Dundas West subway station and Bloor GO station? The east end of the subway platform is only a few metres from the GO station, but there's not an entrance there (yet) so in practice people need to walk hundreds of metres to connect between them. So until the current construction is complete, I'd consider those stations to be a few hundred metres apart. Once the new connection opens, they will be about 50 metres apart even though the platforms never moved.

There is no overlapping bus service on Danforth between subway stops that are ~1km apart.

Eglinton Crosstown, on the surface in the east end has wildly varying distances between stops (from Sloane east) I found ~300M to ~900m between stops)

I'm not sure I agree, I don't think removing stops should be that big an ask; and this seems akin to the old question "Can you walk and chew gum at the same time?" The answer to which ought to be 'yes'.

I think its important to have guidelines that give rationale for stop locations.

The difference of course being that the Bloor subway averages 30 km/h, while the Spadina streetcar averages 10 km/h. So people do actually use the subway for longer trips, and it's worth walking out of your way to get to a station. If we deleted half of the stops on Spadina we'd save about 4 minutes per trip, which would bring the average speed up to 13. So it would still fail miserably as a rapid transit line, and would no longer function as well as a local transit line.

If we are undertaking a multi-million dollar transformation to fundamentally transform the streetcar into a rapid transit line, then yes let's go longer on the stop spacing. But this discussion is in response to a motion for a feasibility study for minor signal timing changes. We're not talking about rebuilding all the track switches yet.

As long as streetcars need to slow to 10 km/h at track switches, the line will never function as a rapid transit line no matter how many stops we remove, so we might as well optimize it as a faster and more reliable local transit line in the meantime. Which includes deleting closely-spaced stops by local transit standards, but not going too far over the typical local transit stop spacing.

But equally, I think its important not to let the tail wag the dog. The guidelines are there to serve riders, riders generally benefit from their existence, but rarely from slavish devotion to same.

Exactly, which is why we need to weigh the benefit of the stop removals against their costs to the riders who currently use them.

 

[Northern Light]

If we are undertaking a multi-million dollar transformation to fundamentally transform the streetcar into a rapid transit line, then yes let's go longer on the stop spacing. But this discussion is in response to a motion for a feasibility study for minor signal timing changes. We're not talking about rebuilding all the track switches yet.

What if Spadina's track were up for reconstruction?

 

[DSCToronto]

Well for rapid transit we generally don't measure stop spacing at all, but if we did, I'd measure from the closest station entrance of each station.

Here's a thought exercise: What is the distance between Dundas West subway station and Bloor GO station? The east end of the subway platform is only a few metres from the GO station, but there's not an entrance there (yet) so in practice people need to walk hundreds of metres to connect between them. So until the current construction is complete, I'd consider those stations to be a few hundred metres apart. Once the new connection opens, they will be about 50 metres apart even though the platforms never moved.



The difference of course being that the Bloor subway averages 30 km/h, while the Spadina streetcar averages 10 km/h. So people do actually use the subway for longer trips, and it's worth walking out of your way to get to a station. If we deleted half of the stops on Spadina we'd save about 4 minutes per trip, which would bring the average speed up to 13. So it would still fail miserably as a rapid transit line, and would no longer function as well as a local transit line.

If we are undertaking a multi-million dollar transformation to fundamentally transform the streetcar into a rapid transit line, then yes let's go longer on the stop spacing. But this discussion is in response to a motion for a feasibility study for minor signal timing changes. We're not talking about rebuilding all the track switches yet.

As long as streetcars need to slow to 10 km/h at track switches, the line will never function as a rapid transit line no matter how many stops we remove, so we might as well optimize it as a faster and more reliable local transit line in the meantime. Which includes deleting closely-spaced stops by local transit standards, but not going too far over the typical local transit stop spacing.



Exactly, which is why we need to weigh the benefit of the stop removals against their costs to the riders who currently use them.

Yes, some customers cannot walk long distances so stop spacing is important. You note that streetcars have to slow down at switches, I thought this was an example of TTC being ultra cautious and that IF the switch is properly maintained the streetcar does NOT need to slow down. Because so many switches are in poor condition it was, apparently, easier to just tell operators to slow at all of them!