Synchronized for the Bus

I didn't take notes during the session but just thought I would write up a few points after the fact.

What started out with myself and one of the Senior TTC Staff pulling up two chairs soon ballooned into over a dozen people and some very interesting discussion. I don't want to get this person in trouble so I'll just say that she really rolled up her sleeves and gave me the straight goods.

Q: A double streetcar has a crush capacity of 200 people. Why should it be possible that one person, in one vehicle (probably a big chug-a-lug SUV) can hold up 200 people?

A: Until David Miller started sinking his teeth into the city planning department, the department was more interested in getting vehicles through intersections instead of people. Giving public transit vehicles priority means de-prioritizing other vehicles. Slower moving vehicles means more gridlock. Of course, that dismisses the long term concept that if public transit cuts through traffic faster, more people will start taking transit and we will all get places faster. And let's not forget that even if we were all driving around in electric cars, we would still have the same number of cars on the road and hence, the same gridlock. You can't just keep making the roads wider. The only way to get more people to work, to school, to the mall is by putting more people in fewer vehicles. For the future, public transit isn't just the better way, it's the ONLY way.

The Issues: The TTC has a long list of intersections that it would like to prioritize for public transit. Unfortunately, when these intersection changes are made, the TTC pays for them. So basically the City of Toronto is willing to maintain roads, infrastructure, traffic signals for CARS but not for transit. This doesn't make sense to me. The TTC currently does one or two intersections per year. By doing so, they can take one bus or streetcar off each route since the trip time is reduced. The savings of that streetcar pays for the next year's intersection improvement.

The Solution: We need to make our voices heard and generate the political will for transit priority. We need to vote together as a known, vocal and cohesive advocacy group.

Q: The streetcar lane on King Street West is supposed to be only for streetcars and taxis during rush hours, but no-one follows these rules and they are not enforced. Can't they enforce that?

A: Yes, but enforcement is extremely expensive, and Toronto Police do not consider enforcement a priority. People just don't obey HOV signs. Unless transit has a right of way of its own, people will drive where they want.

Q: So what about creating separate streetcar lanes on King and Queen Sts?

A: People have talked about building a transit mall (transit only, bicycles and pedestrian traffic) for years, but there's never been the political will to do it. Another problem is the nearside/farside problem. Farside transit stops (where the bus stops after the intersection) improve transit efficiency remarkably which is why all the Spadina stops are farside-style. On Spadina, there are protected pedestrian areas that allow people to wait and board streetcars with increased safety even though they are farside stops (normally more dangerous for pedestrians). Since there's no room for these pedestrian areas on King and Queen Sts, and because streetcars can't pull over to the curb lane, it's just too dangerous to have farside stops. So the stops are all nearside and efficiency goes down the toilet. (I'm paraphrasing here)

Some Solutions? Make King and Queen Sts alternating one-way streets, with a streetcar right-of-way in both directions and bike lanes. People will complain. A lot. So WE need to complain. A LOT MORE! Another solution would be to use buses on King and Queen Sts since they can pull over to the curb lane and use farside stops. The downside: They just finished replacing the tracks; buses hold fewer people; what do we do with the surplus streetcars; there's still no right-of-way for transit vehicles.

Q: During non-rush-hour periods, why couldn't the subway trains be half as long and twice as frequent?

A: Because it would require twice the subway drivers, which are the most expensive part of the equation. However, if the trains were automated then that cost would be eliminated and might be a possibility.

Many other ideas were discussed and I'd love it if someone could add them in here. I was uncharacteristically losing focus a little towards the end of transit camp and within hours of leaving I was admitted to hospital with a combination food poisoning/stomach flu/distended stomach. I'm much better now and look forward to eating more than just toast.

Thanks to the organizers of Transit Camp. No one asked you to do it. You just went ahead and did it. We're all better for it.