Jump to content

Miscellaneous TTC Discussion & Questions


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, smallspy said:

2026 is planned to be when the bulk of a new - and yet untendered - batch of 100 streetcars will be in service.

 

Whether they actually get the money to do this is unknown.

 

Dan

So they were suppose to add 60 units onto the existing fleet and then another 100 units in 2026? They would need a 4th streetcar garage for sure. IIRC, the current 3 carhouses can only accommodate up to 264 Flexities (60 of which are now not ordered)?

Using the numbers posted above using the "peak capacity with standees", 204 Flexities = 51204 people max while the 196s CLRV + 52 ALRVs = 14504 + 5616 = 20120 max.
If these numbers are believable, then once all 204 Flexities are in, there's already more than 50% capacity boost.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cityflyer said:

So they were suppose to add 60 units onto the existing fleet and then another 100 units in 2026? They would need a 4th streetcar garage for sure. IIRC, the current 3 carhouses can only accommodate up to 264 Flexities (60 of which are now not ordered)?

Using the numbers posted above using the "peak capacity with standees", 204 Flexities = 51204 people max while the 196s CLRV + 52 ALRVs = 14504 + 5616 = 20120 max.
If these numbers are believable, then once all 204 Flexities are in, there's already more than 50% capacity boost.

The idea apparently is to use Hillcrest, and reactivating it as a division for 512/509/511 was certainly a thought I've had in the past, but the rebuild costs floated around are pretty high and the 512 remains cut off if there is a disruption to power or track between Hillcrest and St Clair. One place I've wondered about is it the availability of a piece of Lambton yard reached by an extension of 512 - if CP can carve off a hunk to let someone put a car dealership on it (at Jane), maybe some more could be freed up.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, smallspy said:

2026 is planned to be when the bulk of a new - and yet untendered - batch of 100 streetcars will be in service.

Well enough of them at least. The key to 2026 is that's when the latest budget identified they'd be able to stop bus substitutions.

And being untendered and unfunded, it will likely slip a year, every year. Or more, as they were targeting 2021 for this in last years budget.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cityflyer said:

So they were suppose to add 60 units onto the existing fleet and then another 100 units in 2026? They would need a 4th streetcar garage for sure. IIRC, the current 3 carhouses can only accommodate up to 264 Flexities (60 of which are now not ordered)?

 

They never took Bombardier up on the option order of 60 cars. The 204 are all that the TTC will get - for now. Thus the new tender for 100 additional cars to be delivered up to and through 2026.

 

As for more garage space, and the future of Hillcrest - that is the subject of another TTC future report.

 

3 hours ago, Cityflyer said:

Using the numbers posted above using the "peak capacity with standees", 204 Flexities = 51204 people max while the 196s CLRV + 52 ALRVs = 14504 + 5616 = 20120 max.
If these numbers are believable, then once all 204 Flexities are in, there's already more than 50% capacity boost.

 

The actual number for the rush-hour capacity of all of the Flexities is 26,520 people (204 cars X 130 per car), giving a capacity boost of over 30%. But the problem is that by some measures, streetcar ridership is up over 40% in the past 10 years.

 

Dan

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, MK78 said:

The TTC could easily just get rid of 502/503 as streetcar routes. Saves them from maintaining track & overhead on Kingston rd. Turn those routes into a full bus service along Kingston from queen to morningside and have the odd flexity go on king from queen/Kingston loop.

 

20 hours ago, 7575 said:

Or Queen/Kennedy Stn?

 

19 hours ago, MK78 said:

No, I'd have it run from the Queen/Kingston loop to Kingston & Lawrence or Morningside, loop around and come back down.

It would finally provide all day continuous service along the vast majority of Kingston road from Queen to Morningside.

I don't know how many Flexity's would have been allocated to 502/503, but their cost would probably easily offset the cost of purchasing buses to run this route.

They could re-organize a few routes that run along there as well, such as the weekend 22A Coxwell, which runs to Bingham loop. 22 Coxwell could easily just be the same route all the time looping around eastern and back to Coxwell station, and of course they could get rid of 12D.

As far as I know, the big purpose of the 502/503 are as additional cars on Queen St. East. These bus substitution ideas don't do anything for Queen, and that's where the problem is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ed T. said:

 

 

As far as I know, the big purpose of the 502/503 are as additional cars on Queen St. East. These bus substitution ideas don't do anything for Queen, and that's where the problem is.

I see, in that case yeah, it doesn't make as much sense... But they could still just abandon the maintenance of Kingston road architecture in favour of more buses, and when the time and budget comes, just add more 501 cars. Does anyone know if Kingston road section was upgraded to panto yet? I don't remember looking up to see. If not, now's the time to forget about it.

It would be nice if they could demolish that stupid little donut shop/convenience store at the corner of Kingston & Queen, they could have a better bus loop there with proper shelters etc, that the Kingston Road buses could turn around in and would make a better transfer point to 501 Queen.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, MK78 said:

I see, in that case yeah, it doesn't make as much sense... But they could still just abandon the maintenance of Kingston road architecture in favour of more buses, and when the time and budget comes, just add more 501 cars. Does anyone know if Kingston road section was upgraded to panto yet? I don't remember looking up to see. If not, now's the time to forget about it.

It would be nice if they could demolish that stupid little donut shop/convenience store at the corner of Kingston & Queen, they could have a better bus loop there with proper shelters etc, that the Kingston Road buses could turn around in and would make a better transfer point to 501 Queen.

 

 

I rather they don't change anything. If they abandon streetcars on Kingston Rd for the next few years, they'll never bring it back. I think how the TTC is buying streetcars in big batches is just flawed. 100 more cars in 2026 might be enough for current forecasting but maybe not when we actually hit 2026. TTC should buy them like they buy buses. It's much easier to convince council to include a small number of cars every year in the budget than a big bang 1B+ figure.

Eventually Kingston Rd will be lost to buses just as Rogers Rd did. TTC doesn't have a lot of spare buses around so whatever happened on Rogers Rd will happen to Kingston Rd. Turning a 5 minute streetcar service into a 15 minute bus service. They won't add more buses to the 502/503. They'll just maintain the current headways or even widen them a little to "improve" reliability. They won't likely terminate buses at Queen, they'll just run the 22A at all times. Possibly even an express 922 to Coxwell station if buses are near capacity. Half the riders will be diverted to the subway instead of the 501. This will then solve the cpacity issue on Queen coming from the 502/503. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's too bad that the Kingston road streetcar just ends at Bingham loop. Had it gone to Vic Park station, it would be a better alternative to going downtown for a lot of people would bypass the subway especially if their destinations are on queen street.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MK78 said:

But they could still just abandon the maintenance of Kingston road architecture in favour of more buses, and when the time and budget comes, just add more 501 cars. Does anyone know if Kingston road section was upgraded to panto yet? I don't remember looking up to see. If not, now's the time to forget about it.

Most of the overhead on Kingston Rd has not been upgraded. However, the entire stretch of track from Woodbine Loop to Bingham has been completely rebuilt (using the newer and more robust construction technique, including new foundation layer, new steel ties, continuously welded rail using the thermite process etc.) in 2013 and that's where the big $ was spent. Also, the terminal at Bingham Loop was completely rebuilt, including new track, new overhead, new platform to accommodate the low-floor Flexity's etc.

Abandoning that stretch of track at this point in time would be outrageous, considering how much funding was spent there recently.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh, have you seen the rails along Leslie recently? The concrete around the tracks is all cracked and moving around, not to mention I saw a few weeks ago them doing something with the rails on south side of Lakeshore and stuff appeared to be bent.

I think the quality of construction leaves lots to be desired.

Yeah the terminal at Bingham was rebuilt, and horribly, with the roof so high that it's useless against rain or wind that they had to put these tiny tiny shelters... That place needs a full length shelter, especially if it will be served by Flexity.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

I rather they don't change anything. If they abandon streetcars on Kingston Rd for the next few years, they'll never bring it back. I think how the TTC is buying streetcars in big batches is just flawed. 100 more cars in 2026 might be enough for current forecasting but maybe not when we actually hit 2026. TTC should buy them like they buy buses. It's much easier to convince council to include a small number of cars every year in the budget than a big bang 1B+ figure.

 

And who makes streetcars that suits Toronto's needs just on spec?

 

That would be like buying 10 subway cars a year on a regular basis - it's an insane proposition, and not feasible.

 

A bus is different because EVERYONE needs buses, and they're all fairly close to the same. Streetcars (and subways) are far less common and way more highly specialized.

 

Now, when the Transit City lines and the suburban LRTs come online, that's a different story, as those all use a far more standardized design. But the legacy fleet? No way, no how.

 

14 hours ago, MK78 said:

It's too bad that the Kingston road streetcar just ends at Bingham loop. Had it gone to Vic Park station, it would be a better alternative to going downtown for a lot of people would bypass the subway especially if their destinations are on queen street.

Very few of the people on Kingston Road would benefit from the streetcar going up there as that is not where they are headed. That's why the TTC's Kingston Road BRT idea from many years ago had it go along Danforth Ave., instead.

 

Dan

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, smallspy said:

Very few of the people on Kingston Road would benefit from the streetcar going up there as that is not where they are headed. That's why the TTC's Kingston Road BRT idea from many years ago had it go along Danforth Ave., instead.

Not so sure - there's a lot of traffic on north-south routes in that area to the subway ... Coxwell, Woodbine, Main even - especially with what a disaster trying to travel east-west on Queen invariably is. I'd think anchoring the route at the subway would generate some traffic on the periphery of the route with little extra mileage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, nfitz said:

Not so sure - there's a lot of traffic on north-south routes in that area to the subway ... Coxwell, Woodbine, Main even - especially with what a disaster trying to travel east-west on Queen invariably is. I'd think anchoring the route at the subway would generate some traffic on the periphery of the route with little extra mileage.

Well the TTC studied it, and apparently felt otherwise. Maybe take it up with them?

 

Dan

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, smallspy said:

Well the TTC studied it, and apparently felt otherwise. Maybe take it up with them?

The ROW on Victoria Park is decently wide, but at the south end houses are built almost right up to the ROW. Without expropriations and demolitions, you would have sidewalks right at the front doors of the bungalows, and then four narrowish lanes. It widens a touch north of Linton Ave., but it's still pretty narrow. I would expect that would fail on that reason alone.

Trying to link it farther east to Warden or Kennedy stations runs into the same problem of narrow roads at the south end, in addition to questionable demand and huge construction costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, smallspy said:

Well the TTC studied it, and apparently felt otherwise. Maybe take it up with them?

When did TTC study it?

There was the abortive city-run Kingston Road EA back in 2007 or so, that may have been going to consider this an option (so they claimed in an undocumented public meeting) - but as it died without any paper being generated, it's hard to know what they were eventually thinking.

Is there a particular document you are thinking of? Perhaps FOIAable?

 

1 hour ago, Ed T. said:

The ROW on Victoria Park is decently wide, but at the south end houses are built almost right up to the ROW. Without expropriations and demolitions, you would have sidewalks right at the front doors of the bungalows, and then four narrowish lanes. It widens a touch north of Linton Ave., but it's still pretty narrow. I would expect that would fail on that reason alone.

It's a standard 66-foot road-right-of-way south of Gerrard by the looks of it, on the city planning website mapping. Which is the same width as most of our streets that have streetcars already. I don't see that they'd need expropriations, given the width.

Yeah, sidewalks would be very close to front doors ... but it's a major road in the city plan (north of Kingston at least). The residents have no right to, nor should expect, that the city wouldn't be using all of their right-of-way, as they do on most major roads.

Is there a particular spot that looks too narrow to you?  I could measure ...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, nfitz said:

It's a standard 66-foot road-right-of-way south of Gerrard by the looks of it, on the city planning website mapping. Which is the same width as most of our streets that have streetcars already. I don't see that they'd need expropriations, given the width.

Yeah, sidewalks would be very close to front doors ... but it's a major road in the city plan (north of Kingston at least). The residents have no right to, nor should expect, that the city wouldn't be using all of their right-of-way, as they do on most major roads.

I don't know what the city planning map is, but using record of highways, my measurements fall under 20 m in the south end. This is in fact comparable to the width of Howard Park Ave. approaching Parkside Dr. What you are neglecting is that in that ROW you also need to cram in light poles, fire hydrants, etc. Note that the houses on Howard Park are much further back from the ROW than on Vic Park. You probably don't want a light or power pole right up against a house.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, nfitz said:

When did TTC study it?

There was the abortive city-run Kingston Road EA back in 2007 or so, that may have been going to consider this an option (so they claimed in an undocumented public meeting) - but as it died without any paper being generated, it's hard to know what they were eventually thinking.

Is there a particular document you are thinking of? Perhaps FOIAable?

I thought that it had gone through the whole EA process - I did attend the one of the only series of meetings they held - but apparently it was pulled during the Terms of Reference stage.

 

https://www.ontario.ca/page/kingston-road-transit-improvements

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2007/pg/bgrd/backgroundfile-5112.pdf

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2007/pg/bgrd/backgroundfile-4980.pdf

 

I wonder if anything else still exists of it. I recall that the meeting boards were publicly available online at one point, but I can't seem to find them.

 

Dan

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NoUse4AName said:

Oh I've only seen the ones that swing open and pin against where all the computer shit is stored 

Those the older Orions, because it was added after the fact. The Nova's came with these built in so the design was factored in.

You can see operators folding it in and out at terminal stations when they change shifts, I see it often at Kennedy. Operator preference.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MK78 said:

Those the older Orions, because it was added after the fact. The Nova's came with these built in so the design was factored in.

You can see operators folding it in and out at terminal stations when they change shifts, I see it often at Kennedy. Operator preference.

Driving Novas I keep it up. Driving Orions I leave it open. If doing night bus it's always closed. Lol

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...