Linked from
http://www.ttc.ca/TTC_Surveys/index.jsp (odd, I didn't see the link at the bottom of the image on my mobile.
Also odd that the 75 doesn't seem to extend to Queens Quay ... bad graphics? Presumably, they just modified the first map in the survey.
My comments:
This plan fails to connect Distillery District (Parliament/Mill) to the St. Lawrence Market.
It also fails to provide east/west transit along Front East to connect Union with the new developments there (Globe and Mail, Coca Cola, etc.) forcing the neighbourhood to deal with more double-parking private shuttle buses that they can't even ride on.
I can't fathom how the 172 as proposed would have enough frequency to provide service on Queens Quay, without providing way too much capacity on Commisioners and Carlaw/Pape. I also don't understand how it can provide a reliable frequent service along Queens Quay if it's going to get stuck on Carlaw/Pape.
Why not reinstate the 72, much as it was historically (call it the 72/172 if you must). And instead the 65 down Parliament and Queens Quay to Bay/Yonge. The 65 is a 10-minute network bus, and part of the overnight network - this fits Queens Quay better.
Meanwhile run the 121 along Front East instead of Esplanade, providing a more direct service to Union. Instead of looping it around Princess/Berkeley, keep it going down Front all the way to Bayview, and loop it around at River/Bayview. This would provide service into the Canary District - rather than the proposed 514 service, which fails to enter the new neighbourhood. (though why that 121 route isn't a streetcar I don't know ...)