A SURVEY OF TTC STREETCAR OPERATIONS STREETCARS FOR TORONTO COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT – DECEMBER 1984 Acknowledgements This report would not have been possible without the generous volunteer efforts of those people who spent the afternoon rush-hours of three days in May 1984 watching and recording the streetcar system. The data which they collected, some of it on rain-streaked sheets, allowed us to obtain a detailed view of the system's operation which has never before been available. We would like to thank the following surveyors for their time and for the diligence with which they recorded the data. Annie Hooks Brefni Shuttleworth David Vivash Goldie Racr Lee Bremner Ernie Arnold Olive de Valence Ian Oreastein Elsie Salichuk Judy de Sousa Ben Altchuler T. Gibbard E. Rocky Sowa Terry Bobak Susie Diamond We also wish to thank Elizabeth Last and Rob Maxwell for their part in recruiting and co- ordinating the survey team. Finally, we thank Aldermen Richard Gilbert and Dorothy Thomas for their support of this survey project, and for their assistance in preparing its preliminary report in June 1984. Preface The paper which follows is a detailed examination of the data which our survey collected. Some data here does not match exactly to the information in the June 1984 report because minor errors in the preliminary analysis have now been corrected. None of these errors affects our earlier findings on which we elaborate herein. This document is entirely the work of the Streetcars for Toronto Committee, and all opinions in it are those of the authors. The principal authors are Steve Munro and Philip Webb. Howard Levine and Ros Bobak assisted in management of the surveys and in editing of this report. SFTC Operations Survey December 1984 Page 1 Summary As a result of the long-standing dispute between the City of Toronto and the Toronto Transit Commission concerning the quality and reliability of service on the streetcar system, the Streetcars for Toronto Committee conducted a survey on three days in May 1984. This report details our findings for the four major cross-town routes : King, Queen, Dundas and Carlton. Principal Findings 1. Short-turning was much more common than the TTC claims it to be. Over a third of all cars crossing Yonge St. were short-turned. On King and Carlton during the height of the rush hour, half of the service leaving Yonge St. was short-turned. 2. Short-turning is the consequence of unrealistic schedules adopted by the TTC. Actual round-trip times typically exceed scheduled times by from 5 to 10%. 3. The TTC's usual explanation for short-turns is that unpredictable accidents and traffic congestion require them. We observed only one accident which blocked service, and traffic congestion occurred at predictable locations and times. Moreover, two of our three surveys occurred on fair-weather days when the traffic congestion associated with rain or snow could not have been present. 4. Many irregularities in service were observed before the rush hour began and these increased the need for short-turning during the early part of the peak period. Such problems cannot be attributed to rush hour congestion. 5. The effects of wide-spread short-turning included bunching and the creation of gaps. Many cars were short-turned prematurely and spent considerable amounts of time laying over at turnback locations. SFTC Operations Survey December 1984 Page 2 Recommendations 1. Scheduled running times should be based on current operating experience, and should be updated regularly. Specifically, the following one-way times should be adopted at once for peak-period operation. Route Present Required King 50 56 Queen 60 65 Dundas 48 50 Carlton 57 62 These changes need not incur a proportionate increase in operating costs. If the running times are adequate, service will be more regular than it is now, and demand can probably be handled by the same number of cars with slightly widened headways. 2. Off-peak running times should also be adjusted to allow service to remain on time during the mid-day. 3. Short turns which are required on an ongoing basis should be scheduled, and inspectors should be stationed at the short-turn points to ensure that cars re-enter service properly spaced behind through runs. 4. The switches used for common short-turn movements should be fully electrified so that delays for manual switching will be eliminated. 5. Signalled intersections at which left turns are now permitted should be studied for the potential of advanced-green phases to eliminate or reduce delays to streetcars waiting for a queue of turning automobiles. SFTC Operations Survey December 1984 Page 3 1. Introduction A long-standing source of friction between Toronto City Council and the TTC has been the adequacy and reliability of streetcar service. Council has requested improvements both by resolution and by deputation before the Commission, but the result has always been unsatisfactory to the City. A common response from the TTC is that, contrary to City claims, the service is more than adequate, and that compared with the suburbs, the City should be envied. The TTC cites statistics which purport to show that City services are reliable and not overcrowded, and these statistics are used by the TTC to justify its inaction on City complaints.1 The disparity between the TTC's claims of good (or at least adequate) service and the complaints raised by various Aldermen and their constituents is a difficult one to resolve. TTC statistics are compiled from sources such as riding counts and inspectors' reports of operations, and these cannot be dismissed out of hand without substantial countervailing evidence. Moreover, the TTC enjoys a reputation as one of the premier transit systems on the continent, if not in the world, and its judgement of such matters as service planning and operations is widely respected. In any case, there are complaints from riders. Are they legitimately dissatisfied, or are they merely so spoiled by what they have that they are unwilling to recognise its worth? In early 1984, the Streetcars for Toronto Committee approached a group of Aldermen who had been involved in deputations to the TTC regarding service on City routes. We proposed that a full survey be undertaken to determine what the actual quality of service was on typical days. This would provide a reference point against which we could measure both the constituents' and the TTC's claims. A by-product of this survey was an inventory of the vehicles in daily use on the streetcar system. This allows us to compare actual fleet usage with that reported by the TTC. Since the introduction of the new Canadian Light Rail Vehicles in 1979, the relative performance of CLRVs and the older PCCs has been the subject of some debate. A second concern of our survey was to determine whether the unavailability of serviceable CLRVs was responsible for the perceived deterioration of streetcar service. 1 TTC Report Number 15, Toronto Route Service Levels, Dec. 16, 1982; and Report Number 7, Analysis of Surface and Subway Ridership Change Since 1978, April 17, 1984. SFTC Operations Survey December 1984 Page 4 2. Survey Design The survey was carried out from approximately 3:00 to 6:00 pm. on Tuesday, May 8; Wednesday, May 16; and Thursday, May 24. These dates were chosen to avoid the lighter-than-average demand on Mondays, the early Friday rush hours and the Victoria Day weekend. Passenger volume begins to fall by mid-May as people start their holidays, but our survey was early enough in the season to avoid the worst of the summer slump. The use of three days gives us enough data to distinguish between abnormal disruptions caused by such things as accidents or special events, and the normal behaviour of the service. The data we have collected should reflect the operation of the streetcar system under average to best conditions as passenger demand was not at its annual peak and the weather on two of the three survey days was ideal. Observers were stationed at twelve locations in the City. Whenever a car crossed an intersection, they recorded its number and advertised destination on forms with preprinted times and directions. Car numbers rather than run numbers were used to identify the vehicles as the run numbers are difficult to read, particularly on the CLRVs. This design minimized the amount of writing required and thus improved accuracy and completeness during busy periods. Because the survey team's size varied from week to week, not all of the chosen intersections were surveyed on all three days. However, the coverage was sufficient to give at least a general picture of all routes and a detailed view of the four major east-west lines. TABLE 1 - Survey Locations and Dates Location May 8 May 16 May 24 King & Yonge * * * Humber Loop * * * Queen & Roncesvalles * * * Queen & Bathurst * * - Queen & Yonge * * * Queen & Coxwell * * * Dundas & Yonge * * * College/Dundas/Lansdowne - * * College & Bathurst * * * College & Yonge * * * Gerrard & Broadview * * - St. Clair & Bathurst * * * Note : "-" indicates a location for which no data was collected. Certain caveats must be raised concerning the data. The first problem is the definition of "the time a car crosses an intersection". Surveyors were instructed to record the time of departure from the intersection. However, in some cases the time of arrival was recorded because traffic and pedestrian density interfered with reliable observations of all departures. Moreover, although surveyors were asked to synchronise their watches to radio broadcasts or subway clocks, a slight variation in "local time" was observed in routine checks of the surveyors. SFTC Operations Survey December 1984 Page 5 All of this, however, affects only the absolute value of times recorded.