Optimizing Some Toronto Traffic and Transit Routes

John K. Walker

88 Starwood Road, Ottawa, ON, K2G 1Z5 or

jwalker@istar.ca also see http://pages.istar.ca/~jwalker

There is some grid-lock during rush hours on the 401 and other highways in and around Toronto. Part of the solution is good transit and the other part is more and also optimized highways. This heavy and slow traffic also produces excessive GHGs and the soot from old diesel engines is carcinogenic. Transit in Toronto is extensive with rail, LRT subways, and many surface diesel bus routes. Downtown there are also a few old trolley and tram routes.  The commuting is generally slow and often more than an hour and there is a need for more green public transit.  Battery electric transit buses that can travel 70 km on a ten minute charge are now available from Proterra in the US.  New Flyer and Vossloh Kiepe both now have multi-articulated hybrid and smart buses that can go several kilometre on batteries in subways and congested regions. Such green buses are the future of transit and are ideal for Toronto’s public transit. The new $30 bn OneCity transit plan is ambitious and could be cut back significantly by using BRT service instead of the proposed expensive and slow LRT systems. This would save at least $5bn. With a few new transit ways and subways they could improve the service and relieve congestion and pollution and also save billions. Eventually all the diesel buses should be converted to the new quick charge battery (QCB) or hybrid+ buses to reduce GHGs and to save costs on fuel and maintenance.  The GHG emissions credits could be sold for at least $10 per tonne and thereby recover some of the operating costs of transit. In Norway these credits are now about $100 a tonne. A GHG tax would also help to reduce traffic, as it has in Vancouver where gas is now $1.50/l, and it also provides revenue for transit and traffic projects.

The provincial and the federal governments both have significant deficits as well as a combined trillion dollar debt that are about the same as Canada’s GDP. Hence the economic future for support for more transit for the next decade is not good but a clean environmental future requires a prompt strong greenhouse gas and gridlock abatement programs. The BRT vs LRT site and the US National BRT site list numerous disadvantages for LRT systems.  Both the capital cost and operating cost of LRT systems are about three times greater than those of BRT systems. The speed of an LRT system is typically half that of the BRT and the LRT also requires 2.5 minute headway. Consequently a BRT transit system can move about twice (~50,000ppdph) as LRT (~25,000ppdph) for about half the cost. Hence it is strongly suggested that the city and Metrolinx both investigate the less expensive and green QCB and hybrid+ BRT with Transitways and Subways for a plan B. Mayor Ford and several councillors and many taxpayers are now looking for affordable, efficient and green transit. The subways could be designed for LRT, trolleys or green multi articulated buses so that any system could be used depending on capital, operating costs and maintenance costs. Hence the RFQs for any transit system should be for both BRT and LRT so that the city gets the best deal possible. They should use the BRTs for the first few decades and then if and when they have additional resources change a few to the LRT system.

A priority for the TTC should be the conversion of the very busy 1 Yonge-University subway from the present tram system to a trolleybus system much like the Metro in Montreal. Such a trolley bus system would double its capacity to perhaps 50,000 ppdph. The trolleybuses do not need the large headway that a tram does and thereby can move many more riders. The trolleybus trains could use the present overhead catenary power system. Possibly a smart GPS control/guide and radar system could be developed. Such a system should keep the bus on a track within say 10cm and thereby free up the driver. However there should still be a driver/conductor nearby for safety considerations. Nevertheless the driver could help the disabled load and unload more quickly and hence save time at the stations. This conversion would cost about a billion for each subway but would save about 10 billion for another parallel subway system. This conversion should be done to the 1 route before it is extended to the Finch West station. It is recommended that there not be at grade LRT service on Finch west as a much less expensive hybrid QCB trolleybus service can do the job. The trolleybus trains should also have regenerative braking and wheel guides should also be used in case of failure of the auto pilot. The Bloor-Danforth and other old subways might also be converted to such a trolleybus system when they are near full capacity to save the cost of additional subways.

Bogotá opened a successful segregated four-lane BRT system in 2000, the TransMilenio. Maximum peak-load capacity on the busiest line is 45,000 passengers per direction per hour (ppdph) which is twice that of any LRT. The system uses bi-articulated buses and modular median stations that serve both directions of travel, which enable pre-paid, multiple-door, level boarding. Average dwell time is 24 seconds. Two lanes in each direction permits "Quickways" which allow local service (500- 750m apart) on the inside lane, coupled with express service (skipping 4-5 local stations at a time). The use of double-decker bi-articulated plug-in QCB buses (~30m and ~300 passengers) could increase the capacity to perhaps 55,000 ppdph which is double the 27,000 ppdph of the TTC peak rail system. Consequently these efficient BRT options should be considered for Toronto’s new Eglinton, Sheppard, Finch, Queen, Jane and other transitways/subways.

The transit service in Toronto can be improved by using exclusive (painted) transitways that can take the new QCB hybrid+ articulated buses rapidly to the downtown region and then using subways to go under congested streets.  Once downtown there is often a need to have several stops on each block of a subway to service the large number of passengers. This can be best done with a block long loading platform and 4 lanes so the long express buses can use the proven skip and stop technique to bypass loading/unloading buses in the subway.  Hence the subway should be four lanes wide in these congested regions otherwise they can be two lanes wide.  Using QCB buses in subways also saves about half the capital cost and also operating cost of expensive LRT trains and rails and they minimize transfers and travel time for the riders. The rail and/or overhead power systems are also not required nor the special costly rail garages and test tracks.  However, the grades for the roads in the subways should be less than 4% in the highly unlikely event that it would be converted to a quaint LRT system in the distant future. The new routes and subways should first be in locations that would also alleviate gridlock.

The subways will be in use for a century or more and should be made of NRC’s new durable green concrete. The subway needs to be ~8m wide and ~5.3m high for two lanes for thin routes and for double-decker buses. However, it needs to be at least 18m wide for four lanes and platforms for the stations for congested regions so that express buses can pass buses transferring passengers. It might cost about $200-400 million per kilometre for a total of about $8 - 12 billion depending on length, infrastructure and number of stations. A fleet of 200 articulated QCB or plug-in hybrid buses with about 40 chargers would cost about $200 million which is about half the cost of a comparable LRT system.  This system can be built in stages as resources become available. The first stage should be in the congested regions that impede traffic. These buses can readily use curb side ramps to and from a developing subway and the transitway which the LRT cannot manage and it would also require messy tracks on the arterial roads.

The new QCB buses and plug-in hybrid articulated buses would probably fit best in a subway under Eglinton Ave. (purple route in figure below or see Project Metrolinx Map in “Toronto Transit Projects April 25, 2012” or the OneCity map below for recent plans). This BRT transit and subway system could eventually link up Oshawa, Pickering and Ajax on the Kingston Rd. in the east with several GO stations and subway stations in the center of Toronto and the Pearson International Airport and also Mississauga in the west.  Simple and inexpensive curb or roadside ramps can be used to guide the buses to and from the subways as they are built. It is not recommended that there be any at grade LRT rail lines on Eglinton. The first stage might be to paint transit lanes, where possible, from Jane to Kennedy to speed up the present bus service. The next stage might be from the Eglinton station east to the Laird station doing a couple of kilometers a year as infrastructure is developed. The third stage might be from this Eglinton station and going west to the Eglinton West station. The fourth stage might be to the Keele St. station in the west. The fifth stage might be from Laid to Kennedy. The Don Valley could be traversed with ramps to additional transit lanes on either side of Eglinton. The sixth stage might be from Keele to Black Creek Dr. in the west which is a total distance of about 21.5 km.  This permits riders to connect with these GO trains and the old subways and also traffic on the 400. It also permits GO and LRT riders to readily access services on and near Eglinton. Similarly a new GO station on the nearby GO west rail system should be considered for a seventh stage so that the GO riders on this line can readily access services and subways all along Eglinton. An eighth stage would be a link to the airport and then up to Finch. This fast BRT subway should free up Eglinton for more road traffic.

Some of the buses could go back and forth inside the subway much like conventional subway trains. Because express buses can pass by a loading/unloading bus they could be much faster than a rail system which must stop at each station. These regular buses could be programmed with a GPS auto pilot and be driverless to save operating costs. There should also be curb or roadside ramps at both ends of the Eglinton subway so that cross town express buses from say Ajax and the Kingston Rd. in the east can use the subway to quickly get from one side of Toronto to the other side and on to Black Creek Dr. (Hwy 400), the Airport and Mississauga. These could eventually be bi-and tri-articulated green buses. An LRT system cannot readily provide this cross town option.

There should be ramps at the major intersecting streets so local buses could go into the communities north and south of Eglinton and then come back and go east or west in the subway and thereby provide nearby service for many more riders in the surrounding communities.  Some of these community routes should pass by shopping malls such as the Scarborough Center and then connect with Sheppard and Finch to form loops. There could also be special smart buses (dispatched buses) that would go to the airport and possibly to nearby colleges and universities as well as different nearby malls, hotels and industrial parks. The use of smart buses during low traffic times such as in the evening and on Sunday might also be explored.  LRT cannot do these extensions and riders would have to walk, transfer or take an expensive taxi and thereby cause further congestion on the roads and also pollution.

It is not recommended to extend Sheppard LRT eastward with at grade rail lines. It is much less expensive to initially extend Sheppard Ave with painted lanes for rapid BRT service and then gradually construct BRT subways both to the east and to the west with 4 lane BRT subways where necessary.  When these stages are completed then the short Sheppard LRT subway might be converted to a BRT subway so that riders do not have to transfer on and off the different transit systems.  There should be community QCB buses going in loops north and south of Sheppard and smart QCB buses going to and from the airport to service the Sheppard and Finch districts via the express lanes in the subways. These community, cross-town and airport buses could not go in an LRT subway system. However the new Scarborough expansion subway to Sheppard at McCowan is a good idea as riders do not have to transfer. However, the Sheppard west should not be LRT but a BRT system to save money and the hassle of transferring. The Don Mills express and expansion lines should not be LRT but rather the less expensive and faster BRT system. Similarly the proposed Jane and Waterfront LRT should be a BRT system to provide faster service and save billions on capital and maintenance.

The QCB buses could be recharged at the end of each line in a parking lot or during a layover as well as at main platforms/stations. There should probably be a charger for every five buses on Eglinton for an initial total of about 30 chargers plus several more for a nearby garage for the buses. A similar number of chargers would be needed for Sheppard. Wherever and whenever there are heavy loads then articulated and bi-and also tri-articulated QCB buses should be developed and/or double-decker articulated QCB buses should also be developed. The garage should be large enough to keep most of the buses protected and warm in winter for the batteries and to reduce the initial energy load for heating the buses at such times. The roofs of the stations, garages and any nearby suitable roofs or land should have numerous solar tracking high efficient PV modules that could provide a few hundred kilowatts of power. The QCB bus transit system would then not be such a large load on the local power distribution facility and TTC would save money on power costs.

TTC and Metrolinx staff might estimate and compare the capital, operating costs and loads of this QCB BRT subway system with that of a very similar LRT system for each route. A long-term budgeting plan should then be developed to ensure a viable process. They should also model the capacity and commute times for both systems so a better understanding of the benefits and short comings of each is known.  Because of the extra buses that go into local communities and cross town routes that link up with the subway this system might save about 400,000 tonnes of GHG a year. This is at least twice the amount of GHG savings of the LRT system.  After say half of the Eglinton subway is completed then steps might be taken to further optimize the other different bus routes and traffic in the subway. With this knowledge then a study of how best to optimizer the Sheppard, Finch, Jane and Kingston systems might be made. A copy of these studies and results should be available to other cities such as Ottawa.

The next priority is probably a subway under Queen St. to remove the trams and thereby clean up and also free up the street for regular traffic.  The subway should be under Queen St W from Roncesvalles Ave. in the west to Queen St. E and Lakeside Ave in the east.  Then they should both go north to the green subway under Bloor St.  This provides an option for those on this tram system to transfer to the harbour and southern part of the city.  Those on the yellow tram can also transfer to the eastern or western part of this region.  There should be curb ramps so local QCB buses from the east on Kingston Rd. can move onto Queen Street subway and then cross to the Queensway in the west and vies versa.  This sharing of the subway across the downtown core region reduces construction costs in half and also reduces surface congestion and thereby permits more traffic in the core region.  This subway should also be four lanes wide so that express buses can pass loading buses and thereby save commuter time.  The two lines can be extended to the Eglinton line with transit lanes, if possible, and eventually with subways when resources become available.  The following step could extend the western blue line to the Sheppard Ave. and then under Keele Street to York University and beyond.  There should be several intersections along these lines where local QCB buses can access this subway/transitway to quickly take riders downtown or to the university or to nearby malls.  This subway would also allow airport QCB buses to quickly travel to and from the downtown hotels.

The next stage is to complete the extension of Eglinton northeast to Sheppard so that it forms a large loop.  An inner loop can also be formed with Eglinton and Queen and finally a great loop can be made with Sheppard and Queen.  These routes will require another few hundred of the QCB buses and perhaps fifty or more charging stations.  Note some of the buses could be private and the vendor could pay a token fee for using these subways but not for using the regular roads as in Las Vegas.  This could save the city a few hundred million a year and give some competition to the city’s operation.  The use of these battery electric buses could eventually save a couple million tonnes of GHG a year which is very important and a significant reduction for Toronto, Ontario and for tainted Canada.

The north eastern part of Toronto might be linked up with Brampton in the west with express buses on Steeles Ave, 14^th Ave and Rutherford Rd. The north-south arterial roads in Toronto should also have express buses going into these communities so that there is a grid of express buses throughout the GTA. There should be park and ride facilities at highways and other arterial roads so that these distant commuters can readily get downtown or cross town via transit. This will help to relieve the grid-lock in some parts of the GTA. These intercity buses could be operated by Metrolinx or if possible by a commercial or co-op company.

The 407 is a good bypass for the often congested 401. However it does not have a good connection with the 401 in the east. It is suggested that it be extended eastward to the end of Road3 and then diagonally to 35 and near the 401 at Clarington. This northern route around Toronto with numerous connections to arterial roads should relieve some of the traffic on the 401. It would help if the tolls could be paid by suitable apps for smart cell phones or tablets so that one does not have to have a transponder or pay the administration fee for the toll. The Kingston Road is another good bypass around the southern part of the city. However it also needs to be gradually upgraded to a limited access multilane highway and linked to Gardiner Expressway. This new road should have sound barriers and trees on both sides when it passes through residential communities like those along the central part of the Queensway in Ottawa.

The speed limits and vehicle types on multilane highways should be segregated and staggered for the different lanes to optimize the efficiency of highways and thereby reduce commute time and also save fuel and reduce GHG emissions.  The outside lane(s) should be for trucks and slow vehicles and could initially be at 90 km/h and in a few years lowered to ~80 km/h as trucks are not streamlined and hence are inefficient at high speeds.  The middle lane(s) should be at ~100 km/h for most vehicles.  However, the inside lane should be for multi (4+) occupancy vehicles and for green (2+) vehicles and could initially be at ~110 km/h and in a few years raised to 120 km/h.  A green vehicle should initially have a highway capability of ~4 l/100 km (0.8 l/passenger/100 km) which would then qualify it for a green license plate.  The segmented sections should be marked with solid white lines most of the way except when vehicles need to cross over to exit or move to the express lane.  However, efficient Superbuses could travel at say initially 150 km/hr on special express lane(s) with flashing yellow lights or on long stretches of open transitways and express lanes.  If super green buses and green minibuses become popular then special high speed inner lanes (150 – 200 km/h) could be implemented on long routes. 

Special naturally heated Super-roads could also be made on hills, curves and where snow drifts occur on highways and transitways to melt the snow and ice for safe high speed travel during wet and icy conditions. This system of special lanes is less expensive and more versatile than special transit lanes beside highways or high speed rail.  It might be gradually implemented on the 401 in Toronto and on the Queensway in Ottawa and the new 407 highway to Carleton Place on a trial bases and could significantly reduce the commute time for suburban commuters and those travelling to/from the surrounding towns and villages

The cost of these subways and transitways with QCB buses is considerable and trying for the cities and both the provincial and federal governments who both have significant deficits as well as debts.  Fares should cover at least 60% of the operating costs of the transit system as only about a third of the citizens use it. It is suggested that a modest GHG tax option be available for just the municipalities that are in dire straits (Need clean rapid transit and subways but have limited resources).  The province should pass legislation for a carbon tax exactly like that in B.C. for the city of Vancouver (GVRD). The tax might start at say $5 per tonne of GHGs and increase at the rate of $5 per year only when necessary. It should first be for the heavy emitters then a year later for industrial users and then commercial and institutional users. This is only a few cents per litre for gasoline and it would also encourage the use of public transit in many circumstances.  It would amount to about $50 a year for a household with two vehicles and gas heating (~10 tonnes of GHGs).  Together with the industrial, commercial and transportation sources the total revenue in a few years might be several hundred million for Toronto.  However it would double when the tax doubles.  The tax could be shared with the municipality so it can fund its share of the transit and traffic systems.