Improving Transit Performance in Street Operations: Case Study R.M. Topp Planning Branch, Toronto Transit Commission Toronto, , Canada

The Municipality of consists of were introduced in 1912. The current streetcar system six local municipalities. It covers an area of some is shown on Figure 2 and the nine routes indicated 244 mi2 and, with a population of nearly 2.5 mil­ represent approximately 7 percent of the 134 surface lion people, is the ninth largest city in North routes in the existing system. America. In metropolitan Toronto the streetcar network has As shown in Figure 1, the Toronto Transit Commis­ an east-west downtown orientation, mainly for his­ sion (TTC) operates 35 mi of full subway integrated toric and cost reasons. Some 119 of the 129 total within an extensive surface system and in March of streetcar route miles are centrally located within this year opened a 4-mi, elevated the city of Toronto, with all but two of the 9 routes line. Last year the system carried about 428 million intersecting the Yonge-University-Spadina subway in revenue passengers, more than any other transit or near the central business district. These routes property in North America with the exception of the play a major two-way role in distributing subway New York Transit Authority. However, with a 1984 per patrons among local downtown destinations, as well capita rid~rship of about 200, it was second to none as feeding the Yonge-University-Spadina subway for in that category. the reverse movement. During the morning rush-hour period a total of With one exception at the west end of the Queen 1,630 surface vehicles are scheduled for operation. route where streetcars run in an exclusive at-grade Of that total 231, or 14 percent, are streetcars. right-of-way for approximately 1.7 mi, all these The remainder of the surface fleet is comprised of operations are conventional in nature in the sense diesel and electric trolley coaches. that the streetcars run in mixed traffic generally Streetcars go back a long way in Toi;onto' s his­ on streets with four-lane cross sections. Some 90 tory. The first electrically powered revenue vehicles percent of the streetcar stops function without

NORTH YORK SCARBOROUGH

ETOBICOKE

---·SUBWAY

•••••• SCARBOROUGH R. T .

FIGURE 1 TTC subway and rapid transit alignments in metropolitan Toronto.

227 228 TRB State-of-the-Art Report 2

METROPOLITAN TORONTO

L ONG OF\ANCH

- - QUEEN 501 ROUTE ---- REMAINING STREETCAR ==== SUBWAY FlGURE 2 TTC existing streetcar network. passenger safety islands, and in these cases follow­ available to compensate for unanticipated service ing automobile traffic is required by legislation to irregularities than there are for conventional buses; stop behind streetcar doors when patrons are a following can overtake a delayed bus and make or alighting at designated stop locations. One par­ up lost time. For this reason, on long routes such ticular route, St. Clair, is atypical because of the as the Queen streetcar, intermediate turnaround unusually wide street (six lanes in some locations) facilities, called "short-turn" facilities, are used and the preponderance of safety islands at stop to gradually eliminate or minimize excessive gaps locations, which allow following automobiles to pass between successive vehicles. by stopped streetcars in a free-flow manner. ~wo ty-pes of vehicles are pr~sently in use: t he older Presidents' Confe r e nce Commi ttee (PCC) car and Ope rational Pr oblems the newer Canadian Light Rail Vehicle (CLRV). Recently, considerable public attention has been directed to the operational problems associated with EVALUATION OF QUEEN STREETCAR OPERATIONS the Queen streetcar line. The Queen line, with a round-trip distance of Background almos t 21 mi, is the longest and most heavily trav­ eled route in the streetcar network. (A second All public transit operating in mixed traffic on streetcar route, the Downtowner, overlaps approxi­ surface routes ls subject to delay and oohedule milt&ly 40 parc1mt of the QllPPn rnnt.P 11n<'I is r:on­ irregularity due to interference from other traffic sidered an integral part of the Queen line. Hence and pedestrians. The causes of such delay are usually "the Queen line" is assumed by many to mean both obvious and include above-average stop dwell time services.) for surge passenger loading, general traffic conges­ With some 75,000 passengers carried daily, this tion at intersections, left-turning automobiles combined line has the highest ridership in the entire blocking the path of the transit veh cle, accidents, TTC surface route s y stem as well as the second and such obstruct ions as road maintenanc e or ille­ l argest complement of peak scheduled vehicles (57 at gally parked vehicles. present) . Consequently, reliable and effective route When en routa delays are cn-F-F ~ rd ant- to cause operation is e xtre~el y impor t ant~ excessive gaps in frequency of service, passenger Queen route streetcars are scheduled to operate waiting times at stops increase and vehicle over­ directly from one end of the line to the other with crowding often becomes a problem. For streetcar scheduled headways of 2 min 33 sec and 2 min 40 sec operation, where vehicie movement is restricted by in the morning and evening peak periods, respec­ the location of the track, there are fewer means tively. On that portion of the line overlapped by Improving Light Rail Transit Performance 229 the Downtowner, the combined decreases to 1 appropriateness of the short-turning strategies min 56 sec in both peak periods. currently being applied. Specific, as well as gen­ For many years, however, transit patrons using eralized, solutions to the short-turning problems the Queen otrcetcar route have complained abouL were to be identi!ied. irregular service and, in particular, unscheduled This project was initiated to provide TTC manage­ short-turning of streetcars, especially during the ment with a clearer understanding of the reasons evening peak period. When the direction of a street­ behind service irregularity problems and the need to car is reversed at a location away from the end of short-turn streetcars. This independent opinion was the line, passengers on the vehicle must alight and intended to assist TTC in pursuing the most effec­ wait for a following streetcar. Although it goes tive ways of minimizing unscheduled short-turning. without saying that this procedure is unpopular with affected passengers, it is employed to close gaps in service that, if left unchecked, would continually Principal Objectives of the Study worsen. Short-turns are generally initiated only at the The first objective of the study was to measure the judgment and instruction of a route inspector, whose quality of streetcar service currently available on decision is based on the need to restore regular and the Queen streetcar service and determine evenly spaced service over the entire route, in response to any number of possible emergency or • Major causes of the need for short-turns, delay situations. Short-turns require inconvenienc­ Magnitude of inconvenience to passengers ing a few for the general benefit of riders as a affected by short-turns, and whole but, not surprisingly, this "general benefit" ' Effectiveness of current procedures used to is seldom the subject of consumer comments. exercise short-turn options. Until the completion of a recent study, the pre­ cise reasons for the deterioration of headway regu­ The second objective was to recommend changes or larity on were not fully understood. modifications to existing procedures that might be However, it was suspected that there was no single implemented over the short term and be likely to cause but instead an interaction of factors that compounded to the point where a significant gap was • Reduce the degree of passenger inconvenience created on the line. The traditional strategy used and dissatisfaction associated with short-turns and to counter this problem has been short-turning ' Improve the effectiveness of short-turn oper­ streetcars to fill gaps. ations from the standpoint of TTC and its operating labor.

The third and final objective of the study was to Evaluation of Queen Streetcar Service address longer term options for reducing service irregularity on the Queen streetcar route. The TTC is looking into the Queen Street operational problems in considerable depth and has undertaken It was emphasized that the final project report two special studies, both of which are intended to was to present a practical picture of the situation, develop methods to improve the situation on Queen formed around a comprehensive information base. The Street and are expected to allow greater insight consultant was requested to provide a clear presen­ into similar operational problems on other routes. tation of the operating conditions on Queen Street The first, a "Transit Priority Study," is a and to present a creative yet practical approach to municipal interagency long-range project involving remedying the short-turning problem. transit and traffic engineering officials. This The consultant completed most of the work on this detailed study is concerned strictly with those study during the fall of 1984 and presented an in­ areas that are beyond the control of the TTC and terim staff report in January 1985 and the final involves the investigation of traffic signal optimi­ report (~) to the Toronto Transit Commission in zation measures and, alternatively, transit-actuated March 1985. signal priorities as ways of easing transit conges­ tion on Queen Street. The second study has been conducted by an inde­ Study Approach pendent consultant retained by TTC. In this study the emphasis is placed on investigating corrective The consultant's task centered primarily around the transit operating strategies as opposed to traffic evaluation of the trade-off between the inconveni­ engineering measures. Because this consultant study ence to passengers forced to leave a short-turning has recently been completed, it is discussed first vehicle and the improvements in service regularity and a general overview of the major findings and for downstream passengers. Also, with this trade-off recommendations is included. in mind, changes were to be formulated that would improve the effectiveness of the short-turn proce­ dures. This involved a process of observation, field EVALUATION OF QUEEN STREETCAR measurement, diagnosis of primary problem sources, OPERATIONS--CONSULTANT'S STUDY and assessment of the effectiveness of current pro­ cedures. In August 1984 TTC retained the University of The project was approached with a four-phase work Toronto/York University Joint Program in Transpor­ program: tation to serve as consultant for this project. The role of the consultant in this project, as defined Phase 1. Documentation of procedures and perfor­ in the project terms of reference (1), was to pro­ mance, diagnosis of primary problem sources: vide a fresh and independent assessment of the over­ ' Review existing data and establish addi­ all operation of the Queen streetcar line. Through tional data requirements and extensive data collection and a passenger attitudinal • Satisfy data requirements through passen­ survey the consultant was expected to evaluate the ger attitude survey, various operational field existing quality of service on Queen Street and to studies, and interviews with key operational diagnose the cause or causes of short-turning personnel (TTC management, route inspectors, and streetcars on Queen Street as well as comment on the operators), 230 TRB State-of-the-Art Report 2

Phase 2. Diagnosis of problem sources, assessment • Time running free (total time less all de­ of current performance; lays) is remarkably consistent by location, direc­ Phase 3. Formulation of alternate methods for tion, and time, as is signal plus qu.eue delay. improving performance and development of methods of • Variations by time and direction are pri­ analysis to evaluate the range of alternatives; and marily the result of inconsistencies in passenger Phase 4. Evaluation of the range of alternatives service time. identified in Phase 3.

The project was based on a firm foundation of oper­ Passenger Attitudes ating data reflecting current procedures and operat­ ing performance on the Queen line. Combined with A passenger attitude survey, conducted to gain some this was a grass-roots understanding of the "sub­ insight into the passengers' perceptions of the tleties" that affect service on Queen Stree.t, gained Queen streetcar service in general and the short­ from various interviews with TTC staff as well as turning issue in particular, was conducted from the consultant's own field observations. September 10 to September 12, 1984. Sampling was The study approach thus led to final conclusions based on passenger boarding counts by time period so aml n,commendations with respect to 1,hnrt-t.Prm as to be representative of the entire route rider­ changes to existing methods and procedures that will ship • . A total of 654 interviews were conducted and provide interim solutions until longer term, more therefore the overall survey results can be viewed extensive modifications can be implemented. as accurate within ±5 percent, or 19 times out of 20. Some specific findings were Major Study Findings • Approximately 25 percent of those surveyed The consultant concluded that "on a long route, were dissatisfied with the Queen service; 15 percent characterized by heavy passenger volumes and con­ of the respondents stated they were dissatisfied gested traffic conditions, short-turns represent the with TTC service in general. only effective means of compensating for large it­ • Twenty-eight percent of the passengers per­ regularities in streetcar service that result from ceived ·their morning wait time to be greater than 5 factors beyond the control of the TTC," and that mini 55 percent estimated their afternoon wait time "overall service on Queen Street would clearly de­ at greater than 5 min. teriorate significantly if short-turns were to be ' Of those passengers who estimated their wait time to be less than 5 min, approximately 17 percent discontinued." Some specitic results of the cu11- sultant' s investigation are summarized in the fol­ were dissatisfied with the Queen streetcar service, lowing sections. and 34 percent of those with time estimates of more than 5 min expressed dissatisfaction. • Approximately 80 percent indicated that they Current Short-Turn Characteristics checked to see if the vehicle was signed for a short-turn and 90 percent stated it would be helpful • During the period September: 1983 to September if short-turn vehicles were signed. 1984 there were approximately 2,000 reported short­ ' During the week before the survey (four-day turns per month but there was, surprisingly, no week), 32 percent of the passengers experienced at clear seasonal variation. least one short-turn, and approximately 30 percent • There was a wide variation in the number of of these passengers expressed dissatisfaction with short-turns by day of the week with a daily average the Queen service. of 63, a weekday average of 71, and a maximum of 95 • Of passengers experiencing short-turning, 28 on the average Friday. percent estimated their wait time for the next car • On weekdays the number of short-turns is at less than 2 min, and 30 percent estimated their highly concentrated in the period between 3 p.m. and wait at more than 5 min. 6 p.m. with 50 to 60 percent of daily short-turns made during that time. • Analysis of vehicle riding data shows an Development and Evaluation of Alternatives average of 7 .1 persons per vehicle are required to leave a short-turning car and the criterion of a A number of alternative improvements were developed maximum of 15 persons is exceeded about 15 to 20 that would increase the effectiveness with which percent of the time. short-turns can be accomplished while reducing the • It is estimated that approximately 300 per­ degree of inconvenience to passengers required to sons daily are unexpectedly off-loaded from short­ alight and wait or wait initially for a following turned cars in the evening peak period and about vehicle. These improvements were in the areas of 2,700 peroonc wait ;lightly longer times at the end route structure, scheduling of short-turns, use of of the line. articulated light rai vehicles (ALRVs), benefits • Approximately 5,000 persons share directly in derived from the Communications and Information substantial waiting time and vehicle load distribu­ System (CIS), and alternate forms of transit prior­ tion benefits from short-turning in the evening peak ities. period. A word about CIS is in order here. Since 1972 TTC has been developing and testing its Communications and Information System, a centralized communications, Service Delays monitoring, and control system for surface transit vehicles. CIS can automatically and continuously • Passenger service time is the largest com­ advise of all schedule deviations over an entire ponent of delay (i.e., reduction in actual running route. Also, it enables the controller supervising time) and comprises approximately 12 to 18 percent the route to observe conditions over the whole route of total time. and make service adjustments accordingly. Hence, CIS • Signal plus queue delays are also signifi­ permits a rapid and coordinated reaction to small cant, comprising about 13 to 15 percent of total disruptions in service. These reactions can keep travel time. small disruptions from growing into large gaps that Improving Light Rail Transit Performance 231

require major corrective actions such as short-turn­ route structure so that approximately one-third of ing. In addition, CIS can be used to assist in the vehicles operate only between the Sunnyside and optimizing the time at which a short-turned vehicle the Woodbine loops during the evening peak period. reenters the traffic stream. 5. ALRVs shoulcl, when c1vc1ilable, be used on the A detailed discussion of the relative merits of Queen route. each alternative is beyond the scope of this paper, 6. CIS should be expanded to encompass all oper­ but they involved a trade-off among three key ations on Queen Street. factors: 7. Opportunities for achieving higher priority for streetcars, particularly in the downtown area, 1. The number of persons off-loaded due to un­ through turn prohibitions and preemptive signals, scheduled short-turns, should be pursued aggressively by TTC. 2. The level of service provided to other pas­ sengers, and The first recommendation was implemented in late 3. Operating costs. March of this year. The change will be assessed for impact before any more scheduling or route structur­ ~here were additional considerations that influenced ing changes are made such as the scheduled short-turn the evaluation of alternatives. For example, those service proposed under Recommendation 4. schemes that fall entirely within TTC's jurisdiction The second recommendation, which concerns short­ are more easily implemented than are alternatives turn criteria, is being adopted in a more general that require assessment and approval from external manner. However, route inspectors will still be agencies. expected to make individual judgments on the basis of the conditions in specific instances. The commission's staff has been studying vehicle Major Findings and Conclusions signing for some time. These studies will continue to be actively pursued in accordance with the con­ The study's major findings and conclusions include sultant's third recommendation. Recommendations 5 and 6 are long-range matters. 1. The short-turning procedure practiced by TTC The Toronto Transit Commission has already placed an is an integral component in controlling present order for 52 ALRVs for delivery in 1986 and 1987. streetcar service on Queen Street. When service These vehicles are planned for use on the Queen irregularities have reached a certain point, short­ route. One vehicle is on the property for the pur­ turning is the only reasonable means of restoring pose of checking physical limitations such as loop service promptly. These procedures are generally turning radii, lengths of existing safety islands, well executed by supervisory staff. and subway station surface platforms. 2. The sources of irregularities in service that The deployment of CLRVs and the possible future necessitate short-turns vary widely and usually use of ALRVs will certainly be fully considered in arise from random occurrences that are beyond TTC's the future as will possible expansion of CIS to control. The largest and most variable source of cover the Queen route. delays is time required to load and unload passen­ Recommendation 7, that the TTC pursue preemption gers at stops. for transit vehicles at traffic signals, has already 3. Overall, passenger service levels on the been made the subject of extensive investigation as Queen line are good and most passengers are satis­ explained in an earlier section and as detailed in fied with the service. A significant proportion (25 the next section. percent) has expressed dissatisfaction, and the principal cause for concern is the waiting time in the evening peak period. 4. Improvements that are intended to reduce the STUDY OF TRANSIT-ACTUATED SIGNAL PRIORITY MEASURES frequency of short-turns, improve the effectiveness of procedures, and improve the information that One key recommendation of the consultant's study was passengers receive can be made in the short term. to aggressively pursue transit preemption at traffic 5. Benefits could be derived by the longer term signals. A study of preemption had already been strategies of deployment of articulated light rail initiated by TTC and, although still ongoing, is vehicles, implementation of CIS on the Queen route, described. and continuation of the pursuit of transit prior­ In response to mounting public complaints about i ties on Queen Street, which is currently the sub­ the Queen Street streetcar service, a study was ject of a second major study. launched early in 1984, before the Queen Streetcar Operations Study, involving staff from the Toronto Transit Commission, the Metropolitan Toronto De­ Major Recommendations partment of Roads and Traffic, and the Ontario Ministry of Transportation and Communications. A The consultant's principal findings led to seven key two-level steering and working committee structure recommendations: was adopted with appropriate management and technical staff sitting on the respective committees. 1. During the evening peak period, the scheduled This project was first conceived in May 1983, and round-trip time over the entire route should be the terms of reference were approved by the partici­ increased from 120 to 125 min. pating agencies in January 1984. The stated objec­ 2. The minimum gap size required to initiate a tives of the project were to improve the efficiency short-turn decision should be increased from the and the quality of transit service afforded transit present value of twice the scheduled headway to patrons and to improve the total person-movement three times the scheduled headway. function of the arterial street as a whole. It was 3. Short-turn signs should be modified to pro­ agreed that the improvements in transit performance vide consistency throughout the vehicles and among would be assessed relative to the overall passenger different types of vehicles in service. Signs should flow in the study corridor for all modes of trans­ indicate where passengers will be requested to leave . A pair of test routes was selected in order to the car as opposed to where the car will be turned. study the introduction of traffic signal priority 4. Modifications should be made to the existing measures, namely an arterial bus route and a central 232 TRB State-of-the-Art Report 2 area streetcar route. In view of the practical needs signal timings. The majority of traffic signal that TTC was facing on Queen Street, that route was changes that were implemented under Phase 2 took the the obvious choice for the latter category. form of flashing advanced green phases as well as The project has been divided into three distinct revised signal off-sets to improve progression on phases: Queen Street for the overall movement of traffic.

Phase 1. Route selection, base data collection, preliminary analysis, and preemption technology SUMMARY review; Phase 2. Optimized signal timings and follow-up An extensive study of Queen streetca r operations was analysis (if warranted); and r ece ntly conducted to address the operational prob­ Phase 3. Transit preemption technology and fol­ lems being experienced on the line and, specifically, low-up analysis. to determine whether the inconvenience caused to passengers by the resulting short-turning procedures These three separate study phases have been se­ could be reduced. lected in order to show the incremental improvements The key short-term recommendations resulting from gained over the base-case situation by applying the this study are to increase the scheduled round-trip two levels of tr.incit priority indicated in Phases 2 time from 120 to 125 min, implement scheduled short­ a nd 3. Phase 2 represents the classical transporta­ turns on the route, and increase the minimum gap tion systems management (TSM) approach whereby size required to initiate a short-turn decision from straightforward and low-cost fine tuning is applied twice the scheduled headway to three times the sched­ to maximize the efficiency of the existing system. uled headway. Phase 3 involves a more sophisticated transit-based Although it will take time to implement and test signal preemption system that requires capital ex­ these modifications, it is doubtful whether any im­ penditure. provements that may result will be "revolutionary" The specific steps in the study design are enough to significantly alter the public's percep­ tion of the operational problems inherent in mixed­ Phase 1 traffic operation. Step A--Conduct a comprehensive state-of-the-art If this does prove to be the case, it will merely technology review of transit-based signal preemption confirm the suspicion that, where sound planning systems throughout the world. principles are already being adhered to, significant Step B--Select two test routes, one arterial bus service improvement,c: can only be achieved by expe­ route and one central streetcar route. diting the implementation of state-o f - t he-art tech­ Step c--Collect pertinent data to determine the nology , such as CIC .ind transit preemption at tr,tffir. signal stopped time for both transit and private signals. The extension of CIS control throughout TTC vehicles. is an ongoing development project. TTC has already Step D--Evaluate preliminary benefit-cost relative initiated, and is currently conducting, an extensive to Phase 3, based on anticipated potential travel study of the application of transit-actuated signal time savings versus probable costs for different priority measures. available preemption systems

Phase 2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE step E--Optimize signal timings, on the bas is of the data collected in Step C. There .,,re definite frustrations that arise when the Step F--Collect follow-up data measuring the public becomes i'ncreasingl y aware of sign ifican t effects of the new signal coordi.na tion and timing operationa l p roblems s uch a s t hos e on Queen Stre e t, patterns . but i nvesti gation c o nfirm;; t hat the cause of the S tep G--Evaluate Phase 2 and decide whether to problem and its solution are gene r ally beyond the pursue a t r a nsit- based signal preemption system in control of the tra nsit agency involved. One posi tive Phase 3. result of such a problem is that the municipalities and politicians are also becoming increasingly aware Phase 3 (if warranted) that operating streetcars in mixed traffic in the Step H--Implement a transit-based preemption downtown area of a large city is in a sense "asking system on a signi f ican t stretch of the study r outes for trouble. " to reduce t raf.fic s i gnal delay to transit vehicl e s to the fullest extent possible (beyond improvements achieved in Step E). Harborfront LRT s t ep I--Col.lec t f ollow-up data to measur e the incremental improveme nts achieved over signal opti­ Recently, an LRT line operating in an exclusive mization. right-of-way was proposed as the most efficient way of servinq extensive development planned for The before-and-after data collection exercise, Toronto's waterfront. This proposal is for LRT for comparison of Phase 1 and Phase 2 and of Phase 2 operation in the center median of the roadway with a and Phase 3, is a substantial component of this high priority at traffic signals. Left-turning project. The effects of the modified signal opera­ automobiles would not be permitted to share the tions are being measured by automobile and transit right-of-way but would make the il'.: turn from the speed and de lay surveys on a corridor basis for each right side of the LRT line on a special signal p hase of t he project. Queue length a nd vehicular phas e. Even though such a facility would further delay studies are also required on the cross streets reduce the capacity of a road system, which would that are affected by any signal timing changes or experience significant congestion even if the LRT pr i o rity or preemption measures . could be removed from the roadway entirely, the To dat e , the study on Queen Street bas progressed proposal has received strong support. to s t ep E unde r Phase 2 . Step F, f o l low- up studies, The LRT line, shown in Figure 3, would have a is planned for the s pring of 1 98 5 i n o r der to deter­ subgrade connection to Union Station, the primary mine the extent of improvements to streetcar opera­ subway and interregional rail terminal facility in tions that are directly attributable to improved downtown metropolitan Toronto. Although the line Improving Light Rail Transit Performance 233

_JI....._ ____, ~lNG SI , W.

______....., LLINGION ST. W

ElJI~~f"'~o==cN'"'"1,-s""1"'" . "'w,----' lONI~ ST. W.

Qc.N. TOWER

EXP1\E$SWAY

OUEEN:5 OLIAY W.

---- LRTSUBWAY (PROPOSED) 1111111111111 POSSIBLE EXTENSION

FIGURE 3 Proposed harborfront LRT alignment.

would initially operate only as far as Spadina Ave­ transit system technology that required complete nue, the long-term plan includes a future extension grade separation. north along Spadina to connect with the Bloor­ The system uses 40-ft cars that are computer Danforth subway line. controlled with an optional manual feature and, of course, is completely free from the operational problems inherent in mixed-traffic operation. Scarborough Rapid Transit Line

As mentioned previously, in March of this year the REFERENCES Toronto Transit Commission opened a 4-mi elevated rapid transit line from the eastern terminus of the 1. An Evaluation of Queen Street Transit Opera­ subway system to the Scarborough City Centre (one of tions--Terms of Reference. Operational Planning the six municipalities within metropolitan Toronto). Department, Toronto Transit Commission, Toronto, It is interesting to note that, when construction Ontario, Canada, 1984. of the first station began in 1980, it was intended 2. University of Toronto/York University Joint as an at-grade LRT line with overhead power collec­ Program in Transportation. Queen Streetcar Oper­ tion and low-level loading. In mid-1981 the decision ations Study. Final Report. Toronto Transit was made to implement the new intermediate capacity Commission, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, March 1985.